etadd_46(4) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 1 Participant Characteristics Participant Gender Age Ethnicity Diagnosis CARS Jacob Male 5 African American PDD-NOS 33 (mild to moderate autism) Geoffrey Male 6 Asian American Autism 30.5 (mild to moderate autism) Donovan Male 6 African American Autism, speech impairment iors. Table 1 provides participant descriptions with respect to gender, age, ethnicity, diagnosis, and diagnostic assessment results. Jacob was a 5-year-old African-American male diagnosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (PDD- NOS). Jacob attended a self-contained classroom in a private school for children with disabilities. Jacob scored 33 on the CARS, which placed him in the mild to moderate range on the autism spectrum. His overall adaptive age equivalency on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales was 2 years 9 months. Jacob communicated spontaneously using 5 to 6 word phrases. A preferred toy for Jacob was a toy microphone. When left alone with the microphone, Jacob would repeatedly sing the same song, “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star.” If Jacob was unable to access the microphone he would engage in challenging behavior including (a) elopement: moving at least 2 feet away from the instructional area without the teacher’s permission, (b) aggression: striking others with hand or object, and (c) protesting: loud vocalizations including “no,” “stop,” “go away,” or crying. Geoffrey was a 6-year-old Asian-American male diagnosed with autism. Geoffrey attended an inclusive kindergarten class in a small private school. He received a score of 30.5 on the CARS, which placed him in the mild to moderate range of autism and had an overall age equivalency of 1 year 8 months on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. Geoffrey communicated using two to three word utterances and manual signs. Geoffrey at- 49 (severe autism) Vineland adaptive age equivalent 2 years 9 months Vineland adaptive behavior composite standard score tended an inclusion classroom for part of his day. In this classroom, Geoffrey often played with a plastic ball slide. Geoffrey would watch the balls roll down the slide and count each ball. When access to the ball slide was prevented, Geoffrey’s challenging behavior included (a) hand mouthing: placement of fingers past the plane of the lips in order to suck or bite, and (b) elopement: pushing his body away from table or teacher in an attempt to leave the instructional area. Donovan was a 6-year-old African-American male diagnosed with autism and speech impairment. Donovan attended a self-contained classroom for students with autism in a public school. Donovan obtained a score of 49 on the CARS, which placed him in the severe range of autism. His overall adaptive age equivalency was 1 year on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. Donovan communicated requests by leading adults by the hand to items or activities in the room. Following verbal prompts, Donovan could request items using vocal approximations. Donovan’s preferred toy in the classroom was a Magna Doodle®. Donovan would write the capital and lower case form of letters on the Magna Doodle®. When he could not access the Magna Doodle®, Donovan would engage in challenging behaviors including (a) elopement: rising from his chair in an attempt to leave the instructional area, (b) aggression: biting or attempting to bite others, and/or hitting others with his hands, and (c) jumping up and down on his toes repetitively. 64 1 year 8 months 40 1 year 0 months 37 Effects of Presession Satiation / 609
Assessments Preference assessment. Classroom teachers and parents were asked to provide a list of eight toys that they believed the participant preferred while at school. The participant’s preference for these items was then assessed using a paired choice preference assessment (Fisher et al., 1992). Specifically, participants were presented with two toys at a time and the toy that the participant selected was recorded. Each of the eight items was paired with each of the other items in a randomized sequence with the location of each item alternated between the left and right side of the table to control for potential position biases. Trials continued until each toy had been paired with all other toys in each possible position. The percentage of opportunities in which each toy was selected was calculated to establish a rank order of toys from most to least preferred. Each participant’s most preferred toy was used in the tangible condition of the functional analysis and in the presession satiation conditions. Functional analysis. Eligibility for participation in this study required evidence that each child’s challenging behavior was maintained by positive reinforcement in the form of access to preferred toys. Analogue functional analyses were conducted with each participant to determine the maintaining consequence(s) for his challenging behavior using individual multielement experimental designs (Barlow, Nock, & Hersen, 2009). The functional analysis consisted of four 5-min conditions: (a) attention, (b) tangible, (c) escape, and (d) play. The sequence of these conditions was held constant across each participant. Procedures were similar to those described by Iwata et al. (1994), however, an alone condition was not conducted because of school policy (children were not allowed to go unsupervised). Analogue functional analyses were conducted in a conference room or an empty classroom within each participant’s school. These rooms contained a table and at least three chairs and were void of extraneous instructional or play materials. During the functional analysis materials related to the assessment conditions were present. These included papers for the researcher to “read” during the attention condition of the functional analysis, the most preferred item identified via a paired choice preference assessment (Fisher et al., 1992) for the tangible phase, and instructional materials related to the participant’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals. Instructional materials consisted of items such as shapes, letters, lacing cards, picture cards of animals, and colored blocks. Results of the analogue functional analyses demonstrated that each participant’s challenging behavior was maintained, at least in part, by access to their most preferred toy. (Functional analysis session by session data are available from the corresponding author upon request). Jacob engaged in challenging behavior in the tangible (M 77%; range 50% to 100%) and attention conditions (M 19%; range 3% to 33%) of the analogue functional analysis. Geoffrey’s challenging behavior occurred primarily in the tangible condition (M 22%; range 3% to 43%) with lower levels of challenging behavior in the demand (M 4%; range 3% to 17%), and attention conditions (M 3%; range 3% to 13%). Donovan’s challenging behavior occurred primarily in the tangible condition (M 43%; range 20% to 70%) with lower levels of challenging behavior in the attention (M 3%; range 0% to 10%), and play conditions (M 5%; range 0% to 27%). Donovan also showed an increasing trend in challenging behavior during the demand condition (M 32%; range 3% to 77% of intervals) of the functional analysis. Communication of rejection. Following the analogue functional analysis, behavioral indicators of satiation were assessed according to the methodology described by O’Reilly et al (2009). Teachers and parents were asked to identify how each participant communicated they no longer wanted to play with a toy or engage in an activity. To verify that participants used these behaviors to communicate rejection, each participant was exposed to two conditions: (a) access to a highly preferred item and (b) access to a non-preferred item. Each condition lasted 10 min and was conducted five times with each participant using an alternating treatments experimental design (Barlow et al., 2009). In the highly preferred item condition, the participant was presented with a highly pre- 610 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Autism an
Page 3 and 4:
March 2012 Manuscripts Accepted for
Page 5 and 6:
new line of research, the review ho
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Overview of H
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Overview of H
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 1. MP3 Player (Model: SM-320
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 3. Sony-Ericsson K800. Retri
Page 15 and 16:
computer with three middle school s
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 6. Video iPod. Apple, Inc. h
Page 19 and 20:
example, in contrast to previous st
Page 21 and 22:
using public transportation. Device
Page 23 and 24:
accessible software to increase ind
Page 25 and 26:
(14.3%), a unique curriculum (13.8%
Page 27 and 28:
TABLE 1 Student Characteristics Stu
Page 29 and 30:
eos” was highlighted. Students th
Page 31 and 32:
ment was 100% for baseline and main
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 3. Percentage of independent
Page 35 and 36:
how to program and operate the equi
Page 37 and 38:
Individuals with Disabilities Educa
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
TABLE 1 Video Prompting Studies Con
Page 43 and 44:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Video Prompti
Page 45 and 46:
Length of video clips. Researchers
Page 47 and 48:
to learn three cooking tasks. Resul
Page 49 and 50:
Van Laarhoven and Van Laarhoven-Mye
Page 51 and 52:
Dogoe, M., & Banda, D. R. (2009). R
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
TABLE 1 Summary of Demographic and
Page 57 and 58:
TABLE 2 Summary of Outcome Variable
Page 59 and 60:
with students in preschool (Akmanog
Page 61 and 62:
with MoID acquiring some of their p
Page 63 and 64:
Vocational task. To date one study
Page 65 and 66:
ed; thereby adding to the amount of
Page 67 and 68:
Retardation and Developmental Disab
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
TABLE 1 Student Demographic Informa
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 1. Example of the mini-poste
Page 75 and 76:
Experimental Design This study empl
Page 77 and 78:
intervention sessions was 75.55% de
Page 79 and 80:
help continue maximum skill profici
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84: at the same time, or did not respon
Page 85 and 86: Figure 1. Correct responses for Joe
Page 87 and 88: sponses for each skill. No trends w
Page 89 and 90: then be used as a template for quic
Page 91 and 92: 2007). Choice making initiates the
Page 93 and 94: making choices is clearly not in th
Page 95 and 96: epeated until stable choice pattern
Page 97 and 98: transportation, commitment) to prov
Page 99 and 100: can be made. Last, because consumer
Page 101 and 102: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 103 and 104: TABLE 1 Studies Listed According to
Page 105 and 106: TABLE 1—(Continued) Studies Liste
Page 111 and 112: (i.e., MSW) and duration-based (i.e
Page 113 and 114: 2008), and increasing adaptive beha
Page 115 and 116: port difficulty implementing the in
Page 117 and 118: of a preferred item while continuin
Page 119 and 120: Kreiner, J., & Flexer, R. (2009). A
Page 121 and 122: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 123 and 124: autism on the CARS. Regarding socia
Page 125 and 126: other effect size measures and with
Page 127 and 128: quests during baseline sessions. Du
Page 129 and 130: ulation was generally clear and he
Page 131 and 132: communication training as a treatme
Page 133: encing allergy symptoms (one partic
Page 137 and 138: Interobserver agreement. A second o
Page 139 and 140: challenging behavior in the presess
Page 141 and 142: tion of the preferred item signaled
Page 143 and 144: ior: An analysis of the literature.
Page 145 and 146: moderate intellectual disabilities
Page 147 and 148: Effects of the STAR intervention pr
Page 149 and 150: Copeland, S. R. (2002). See citatio
Page 151 and 152: 126. Ezell, D., & Klein, C. (2003).
Page 153 and 154: computer-based instruction program.
Page 155 and 156: sight words to students with mental
Page 157 and 158: Mastropieri, M. A. (2009). See cita
Page 159 and 160: 262. Noyes, D. A., & Sax, C. L. (20
Page 161 and 162: Rispoli, M. (2009). See citation #1
Page 163 and 164: Sparks, S. (2010). See citation #87
Page 165 and 166: Vlaskamp, C. (2008). See citation #
Page 167 and 168: INDEX—VOLUME 46,
Page 169 and 170: Runes, Sandra. See Hausmann-Stabile
Page 171 and 172: Review of video prompting studies w
Page 173 and 174: Look! I'm in College! DVD Look, I
Page 175 and 176: 13th International Conference on Au
show all

etadd_46(4) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?