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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1. Percentage of 10-s intervals with inappropriate verbal behaviors during baseline (A), Social Story without perspective sentences (B), Social Story with perspective sentences (C), and withdrawal (A) for Taro. mary investigator asked <strong>the</strong>m to initiate <strong>the</strong> first session. In <strong>the</strong> first of <strong>the</strong> four sessions in Intervention, Taro’s teacher read <strong>the</strong> SS without PS for him. Taro, <strong>the</strong>n, took a turn to read <strong>the</strong> Social Story out loud. His teacher provided controlling prompt (i.e., modeling) when he read <strong>the</strong> story incorrectly. The teacher for Kenji read <strong>the</strong> SS without PS with giving examples and explaining <strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> each sentence. Starting with <strong>the</strong> second session, both students read <strong>the</strong> SS without PS out independently. A formal reading time for SS without PS was provided once each day, just prior to initiating observation of <strong>the</strong> target behavior. During <strong>the</strong> rest of <strong>the</strong> day, <strong>the</strong> Social Story book was placed on a shelf to be accessible to <strong>the</strong> student. Intervention 2. This condition was identical to Intervention 1 with <strong>the</strong> exception that perspective sentences were added to a story used in Intervention 1. The teachers provided students an SS with PS and asked <strong>the</strong>m to read <strong>the</strong> story. Because <strong>the</strong> content of <strong>the</strong> SS with PS was identical to that of <strong>the</strong> SS without PS, with <strong>the</strong> exception of a perspective sentence, Taro read <strong>the</strong> story with a few prompts at <strong>the</strong> beginning of <strong>the</strong> intervention phase, followed by no prompts from <strong>the</strong> second session. For Kenji, his teacher asked him to read <strong>the</strong> SS with PS, explaining <strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> added perspective sentence <strong>the</strong> first session of <strong>the</strong> intervention phase. He did not have any questions, and he read <strong>the</strong> story independently from <strong>the</strong> second session. Baseline 2. Taro’s did not provide him any opportunities to access <strong>the</strong> Social Story book (SS with PS) throughout <strong>the</strong> day. No Baseline 2 was implemented for Kenji due to <strong>the</strong> termination of <strong>the</strong> semester. Results 52 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-March 2008 Figure 1 shows <strong>the</strong> change of Taro’s persistent and aggressive verbal behaviors across Baseline, Intervention 1, Intervention 2, and Baseline 2. As illustrated, during <strong>the</strong> first baseline phase, <strong>the</strong> percentage of his inappropriate verbal behaviors was high, for an average of 49.1%, ranging from 19.4% to 86.1%. Following <strong>the</strong> implementation of SS without PS, his inappropriate behaviors showed a downward trend, for an average of 10.6%, ranging from 0.0% to 16.7%. It should be noted, however, that <strong>the</strong> difference in level between Baseline and Intervention 1 was not substantial. After
Figure 2. Percentage of 10-s intervals with inappropriate sitting behaviors during baseline (A), Social Story without perspective sentences (B), and Social Story with perspective sentences (C) for Kenji. initiating SS with PS, <strong>the</strong> level of his inappropriate verbal behaviors remained low from Session 10 to Session 13 (M 6.6%), but rebounded in Sessions 14 and 15 (M 16.7%), resulting in an average of 9.7%, with a range from 0% to 16.7%. Immediately after withdrawing <strong>the</strong> SS with PS in Baseline 2, no inappropriate verbal behaviors occurred. Figure 2 presents <strong>the</strong> results of observations of Kenji’s inappropriate sitting across Baseline, Intervention 1, and Intervention 2. As illustrated, during <strong>the</strong> baseline phase, he frequently exhibited inappropriate sitting, for an average of 72.3%, ranging from 52.5% to 96.7%. Immediately after sitting on <strong>the</strong> sofa, he initiated repetitive behaviors, followed by putting his leg on <strong>the</strong> sofa or lying down. In contrast, his inappropriate sitting behaviors disappeared immediately following introduction of <strong>the</strong> SS without PS (M 0.84%). Introducing <strong>the</strong> SS with PS was immediately followed by high percentage and low percentage of <strong>the</strong> target behavior alternately (M 23.9%, range 0% – 73.5%). Discussion In Study 1, an ABCA or ABC pre-experimental design was used for two students with ASD to examine <strong>the</strong> effects of adding a perspective sentence on reducing problem behaviors. Visual inspection indicated that a Social Story was effective in improving adaptive behaviors even though <strong>the</strong> story did not include any perspective sentences. Adding a perspective sentence did not have any additional impact on improving <strong>the</strong> target behaviors. “When everybody complies with <strong>the</strong> turn, everybody feels good because everybody can be fairly in <strong>the</strong> chair” was added as a perspective sentence to Taro’s SS without PS. “So, many people in <strong>the</strong> hotel thought I am cool. Many people around me watched me do something and think I am cool” were added as perspective sentences to Kenji’s SS without PS. This was done based on <strong>the</strong> belief that information was missing for each participant to understand why he needed to behave in a certain way and that consequently his inappropriate behaviors would improve when he obtained <strong>the</strong> information. However, <strong>the</strong> results were different from our expectation. One factor that may need to be addressed is motivation. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, it should be discussed whe<strong>the</strong>r or not <strong>the</strong> information conveyed by <strong>the</strong> perspective sentences can elevate <strong>the</strong> motivation of participants to <strong>the</strong> level that <strong>the</strong>y want to change <strong>the</strong> behaviors. Effects of Perspective Sentences / 53
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Developme
Page 3 and 4:
Education and Training in Developme
Page 5 and 6: 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 and 44: the trained peers
Page 45 and 46: Group B between one and two times p
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: Kenji. For Kenji, all observation s
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?