Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

definitions were selected by <strong>the</strong> authors from Pierce and Schreibman (1995) to teach <strong>the</strong> peers to implement: 1. Paying attention. Ensure that <strong>the</strong> target child is attending before delivering a prompt (i.e., “Wilson, look at me.”). 2. Child’s choice. Offer an option of different activities to <strong>the</strong> child in order to maintain his interest (i.e., “Would you like to play with <strong>the</strong> airplane or <strong>the</strong> dinosaur?”). 3. Reinforce attempts. Verbally reinforce <strong>the</strong> child after attempts at play or social interaction (i.e., “I like <strong>the</strong> way you’re playing with that car”). 4. Extend conversation. Ask questions or talk about topics related to play (i.e., “Do you have Legos ® at home?”). 5. Turn taking. Model appropriate play and <strong>the</strong>n offer <strong>the</strong> child a turn (i.e., “This is how you play with <strong>the</strong> car. Now, it’s your turn.”). 6. Narrative play. Provide descriptions of play actions (i.e., “I’m flying this airplane to <strong>the</strong> airport.”). The observer(s) held a picture prompt in front of <strong>the</strong> peers demonstrating each action prior to modeling <strong>the</strong> behavior. After <strong>the</strong> peers observed <strong>the</strong> prompt and <strong>the</strong> behavior, <strong>the</strong>y practiced. Feedback was provided by <strong>the</strong> observers until students demonstrated <strong>the</strong> behavior correctly. They role-played with each o<strong>the</strong>r and took turns playing <strong>the</strong> peer who was to initiate an interaction with <strong>the</strong> child with autism. During each training session, strategies were reviewed until <strong>the</strong> peers could look at <strong>the</strong> prompt and explain what he was supposed to do. Training lasted for eight 20minute sessions. One peer moved to a different school and was replaced with ano<strong>the</strong>r peer in Group A. Thus, Peer 1 of Group A received twice <strong>the</strong> training that Peer 2 and <strong>the</strong> peers in Group B received. Implementation Peers <strong>the</strong>n began to generalize strategies to a play setting for treatment implementation. As in baseline, <strong>the</strong> group was told to play toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong> same toys. Observers prompted peers with <strong>the</strong> picture prompts from training when needed. Ten prompts were delivered during <strong>the</strong> first session. Then prompts were gradually faded until peers could implement strategies independently by <strong>the</strong> final treatment sessions. Contingent upon each occurrence in which a peer engaged in an interaction and/or delivered a prompt to a child with autism, he received a sticker on a chart. At <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> session peers received a prize for earning ten stickers, which is an average of one interaction per minute. Treatment steps were identical for group two, except <strong>the</strong>re were three peers in Group B instead of two. As in baseline, <strong>the</strong> sessions were ten minutes in length and were videotaped. Results 40 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-March 2008 Results of <strong>the</strong> study indicate improved social interaction for target students and peers. Positive changes were noted for number of opportunities for interactions, responses to peer prompts, and initiations of conversation and play. Results of <strong>the</strong> number of peer prompts, or interaction opportunities, presented to Wilson and Colin during baseline and treatment with Groups 1 and 2 are presented in Figure 1. For Wilson, opportunities to interact occurred an average of less than one time per session during baseline with Group A. During treatment, peers offered prompts for social interactions an average of 16 times per session. Group B offered an average of less than one opportunity for interaction per session during baseline, even though baseline was extended for Group B. During treatment, <strong>the</strong> group increased prompts to approximately four per session. Opportunities to interact, or peer prompts, were exhibited to Colin an average of two to three times per session in baseline and 18 times during treatment with Group A. Group B offered approximately two prompts per session in baseline, and increased prompts to over three per session during treatment. Results of Wilson’s and Colin’s responses to peer prompts are exhibited in Figure 2. With Group A, Wilson responded to peers only once during baseline. During treatment, Wilson responded an average of 13 times per session. Colin responded to prompts from Group A less than once per session during baseline and over 13 times per session during treatment. He responded to prompts from
Group B between one and two times per session during baseline, and two to three times during treatment. Figure 1. Total number of prompts. Wilson’s and Colin’s rates of responses to prompts appear in Figure 3. Wilson responded to peers an average of 20% of <strong>the</strong> Pivotal Response Training in Special Education / 41
Page 1 and 2: Education and Training in Developme
Page 7 and 8: Guardianship: Its Role in t
Page 9 and 10: guardians who are knowledgeable abo
Page 11 and 12: in budgeting and spending; (b) a sp
Page 13 and 14: and effective are essential to self
Page 15 and 16: involved in the gu
Page 17 and 18: sonal rights removed through guardi
Page 19 and 20: who are not trustworthy, and when o
Page 21 and 22: Discussion and Recommendations Lake
Page 23 and 24: DC: OSERS. (ERIC Document Reproduct
Page 25 and 26: people who do not have disabilities
Page 27 and 28: TABLE 1 School Demographics Demogra
Page 29 and 30: TABLE 2 Methods for Including Stude
Page 31 and 32: participate in service learning pro
Page 33 and 34: who are “more experienced” in s
Page 35 and 36: cern that they wer
Page 37 and 38: service learning activity for stude
Page 39 and 40: supports school personnel need to h
Page 41 and 42: Using Pivotal Response Training wit
Page 43: the trained peers
Page 47 and 48: ing play sessions with Group B, Col
Page 49 and 50: learned to interact with ot
Page 51 and 52: Affirmative sentences emphasize a v
Page 53 and 54: identifying several important behav
Page 55 and 56: Kenji. For Kenji, all observation s
Page 57 and 58: Figure 2. Percentage of 10-s interv
Page 59 and 60: gaging in complicated verbal commun
Page 61 and 62: Results The results of the<
Page 63 and 64: when the person wa
Page 65 and 66: Effectiveness of the</stron
Page 67 and 68: is still encountering only one symb
Page 69 and 70: TABLE 1 Characteristic of Participa
Page 71 and 72: TABLE 2 Characteristics of
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 3 Major Findings Study Commun
Page 75 and 76: TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 77 and 78: TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 79 and 80: nosed as having ASD. Therefore, PEC
Page 81 and 82: Preschool Teacher Perceptions of As
Page 83 and 84: TABLE 1 Teacher Demographics 1 Teac
Page 85 and 86: TABLE 3 Assistive Technology Self-A
Page 87 and 88: Integration or supplemental perspec
Page 89 and 90: I don’t know if the</stro
Page 91 and 92: sessions, and the
Page 93 and 94: that would be difficult to develop
Page 95 and 96:
Riemer-Reiss, M. L., & Wacker, R. R
Page 97 and 98:
TABLE 1 Characteristics of Campers
Page 99 and 100:
appropriate answers were provided.
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 2. Effects of STAR intervent
Page 103 and 104:
garding how to effectively interact
Page 105 and 106:
Shafer K. (1992). Peer-mediating in
Page 107 and 108:
proach, features are built into <st
Page 109 and 110:
independent transitions were totale
Page 111 and 112:
Figure 1. Number of independent tas
Page 113 and 114:
type of skills (e.g., domestic, lei
Page 115 and 116:
Peer-Implemented Time Delay Procedu
Page 117 and 118:
show that peer tutors can reliably
Page 119 and 120:
General Procedures The dependent va
Page 121 and 122:
Skill training. The teacher and one
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 2. Percent of correct respon
Page 125 and 126:
heterogeneous group of students is
Page 127 and 128:
States’ Eligibility Guidelines fo
Page 129 and 130:
Method Procedure The first author d
Page 131 and 132:
TABLE 1—(Continued) IQ part score
Page 133 and 134:
eligibility to exhibit an IQ two or
Page 135:
ility guidelines for MR from state
show all

Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?