Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 3 Individual <strong>and</strong> Group Data Mean Percent Change Across Conditions-Target Mealtime Behaviors Group 1 BC2 condition <strong>and</strong> 96% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition was recorded. A total mean ga<strong>in</strong> of 30% from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was recorded for Jason’s Goal 2. Denver. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (no spill<strong>in</strong>g on self or tray) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 12%. A mean 44% accurate response was achieved <strong>in</strong> the BC condition <strong>and</strong> decreased to 37% <strong>in</strong> the B condition. In the C condition, Denver <strong>in</strong>creased his accurate response rate to 52% <strong>in</strong> the C condition but decreased to a mean 49% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition. He improved <strong>in</strong> the BC condition to a mean of 54%. Denver ga<strong>in</strong>ed a total mean of 42% from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition for Goal 1. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Denver’s Goal 2 (close lips with chew<strong>in</strong>g) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 24%. In the BC condition, his mean rate <strong>in</strong>creased by 36% to 60% correct responses <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>creased to a mean 80% <strong>in</strong> the B condition. In the C condition, Denver’s mean accurate response rate decreased to 70%. This rema<strong>in</strong>ed unchanged <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition, but <strong>in</strong>creased by 5% to 75% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Basel<strong>in</strong>e Mean BC B C BC2 BC Total Mean Ga<strong>in</strong> Brett (Take Small Bites) 47 35 8 6 2 2 49 Jason (Use Napk<strong>in</strong> with Request) 7 90 3 0 0 0 93 Denver (No Spills on Self or Tray) 12 32 7 15 3 5 42 Comb<strong>in</strong>ed Group Means 22 52 1 7 2 2 61 Group 2 Basel<strong>in</strong>e Mean B BC C BC2 BC Total Mean Ga<strong>in</strong> Nate (Assist <strong>in</strong> Self-Feed<strong>in</strong>g with Spoon) 8 47 27 14 2 2 88 Stacy (Open Mouth <strong>in</strong> Anticipation of Spoon) 44 27 11 2 8 8 52 Jessica (Assist <strong>in</strong> Self-Feed<strong>in</strong>g with Spoon) 8 1 16 14 36 17 82 Comb<strong>in</strong>ed Group Means 20 24 18 9 14 9 74 Group 3 Basel<strong>in</strong>e Mean C BC B BC2 BC Total Mean Ga<strong>in</strong> Dust<strong>in</strong> (Eat Non-preferred Foods) 9 20 5 7 1 37 60 Kyle (Self-feed with Spoon) 70 3 8 2 14 0 23 Anna (Eat Non-preferred Foods) 4 46 16 7 16 23 76 Comb<strong>in</strong>ed Group Means 28 23 6 4 0 20 53 92 / <strong>Education</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2005 Denver ga<strong>in</strong>ed a total mean of 51% from the <strong>in</strong>itial basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) through the BC condition for Goal 2. Nate. Nate’s performance data are shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 2. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (assist <strong>in</strong> self-feed<strong>in</strong>g with spoon) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 8%. This rate rose to 55% <strong>in</strong> the B condition, to 82% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition, <strong>and</strong> to 96% <strong>in</strong> the C condition. In the BC2 condition, Nate’s accurate response rate decreased by 2% to 94%. In the BC condition, this rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 96%. Percent ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 88%. Nate’s h<strong>and</strong>-tomouth movements improved throughout the study from requir<strong>in</strong>g maximal assistance to <strong>in</strong>dependent performance. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Nate’s Goal 2 (rhythmic sequence of 3 or more jaw movements with chew<strong>in</strong>g) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 70%. This rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 76% <strong>in</strong> the B condition <strong>and</strong> to 79% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. In the C condition, Nate’s mean accurate response rate decreased to 68% but <strong>in</strong>creased to 76% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition. In the BC condi-
tion, this rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 82%. Total percent ga<strong>in</strong> for Nate’s Goal 2 from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 12%. Stacy. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Stacy’s Goal 1 (open mouth <strong>in</strong> anticipation of spoon) was measured at a mean 44% accurate response rate. This rate rose to 71% <strong>in</strong> the B condition <strong>and</strong> 82% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition, but decreased to 80% <strong>in</strong> the C condition. In the BC2 condition, Stacy’s mean accurate response rate rose to 88% <strong>and</strong> 96% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Stacy’s total mean ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 52% for Goal 1. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Stacy’s Goal 2 (close lips with spoon<strong>in</strong>g) was a mean accurate response rate of 15%. In the B condition, this rate rose 23% to 75%. In the BC condition, accurate responses decreased to a mean rate of 57% but <strong>in</strong>creased to 65% <strong>in</strong> the C condition. Stacy’s mean accurate response rate decreased to 59% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition. In the BC condition, Stacy’s mean accurate response rate was 21%, correspond<strong>in</strong>g to a decrease of 38%. Total mean ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 6% for Goal 2. Jessica. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (assist <strong>in</strong> self-feed<strong>in</strong>g with spoon) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 8%. In the B condition, this rate decreased to a mean 7%, but <strong>in</strong>creased to a mean 23% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. In the C condition, Jessica’s mean accurate response rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 37% <strong>and</strong> to 73% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition. In the BC condition, Jessica ga<strong>in</strong>ed an additional 17% <strong>in</strong> accurate responses to a mean 90%. From the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition, Jessica ga<strong>in</strong>ed a mean 82% accurate responses. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Jessica’s Goal 2 (active lips with spoon<strong>in</strong>g) was 4% for mean accurate responses. In the B condition, this rate was 15% <strong>and</strong> rema<strong>in</strong>ed stable throughout the BC condition, but fell to 11% <strong>in</strong> the C condition. In the BC2 condition, Jessica’s mean rate of accurate responses <strong>in</strong>creased to 31%. In the BC condition, her mean rate decreased to 13%. Total ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 9%. Dust<strong>in</strong>. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (eat nonpreferred food) was measured at a mean accurate response rate of 9%. In the C condition, this rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 29% but decreased to 24% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Dust<strong>in</strong>’s mean accurate response rate improved to 31% <strong>in</strong> the B condition, 32% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition, <strong>and</strong> improved by 37% to 69% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Total mean ga<strong>in</strong> from basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 60%. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Dust<strong>in</strong>’s Goal 2 (use napk<strong>in</strong> without request) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 6%. In the C condition, this rate dropped to a mean 0%, <strong>in</strong>creased to 1% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition, <strong>and</strong> decreased aga<strong>in</strong> to 0% <strong>in</strong> the B condition. In the BC2 condition, Dust<strong>in</strong>’s mean rate of accurate responses <strong>in</strong>creased to 45% but decreased by 27% to 18% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Total <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> mean rate of accurate responses from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 12% for Dust<strong>in</strong>’s Goal 2. Kyle. Kyle’s performance data are shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 3. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (assist <strong>in</strong> self-feed<strong>in</strong>g with spoon<strong>in</strong>g) revealed a mean rate of accurate responses of 70%. In the C condition, this rate was 73%, <strong>in</strong>creased to 81% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition, <strong>and</strong> decreased to 79% <strong>in</strong> the B condition. In the BC2 condition, Kyle’s mean rate of accurate responses <strong>in</strong>creased to 93% <strong>and</strong> was ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Dur<strong>in</strong>g the BC condition, Kyle demonstrated <strong>in</strong>dependent spoon<strong>in</strong>g, an act that had previously required full physical assistance to complete. Total ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the f<strong>in</strong>al condition (BC) was 23% for Kyle’s Goal 1. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data (A) for Kyle’s Goal 2 (active lips with spoon<strong>in</strong>g) revealed a mean rate of accurate responses of 68%. In the C condition, this rate was unchanged. In the BC condition, the mean accurate response rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 83%, to 87% <strong>in</strong> the B condition, to 91% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition, <strong>and</strong> to 95% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Total ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) to the BC condition was 27% for Kyle’s Goal 2. Anna. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Goal 1 (accept non-preferred foods) revealed a mean accurate response rate of 4%. In the C condition, this rate <strong>in</strong>creased 46% to 50%. Anna’s mean accurate response <strong>in</strong>creased to 66% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition, <strong>and</strong> to 73% <strong>in</strong> the B condition, but decreased to 57% <strong>in</strong> the BC2 condition. This rate <strong>in</strong>creased to 80% <strong>in</strong> the BC condition. Total ga<strong>in</strong> from the basel<strong>in</strong>e condition (A) through the BC condition was 76% for Goal 1. Basel<strong>in</strong>e data for Anna’s Goal 2 (accept face wip<strong>in</strong>g) revealed a mean rate of accurate responses of 4%. In the C condition, this rate <strong>in</strong>creased by 46% to 50% <strong>and</strong> rema<strong>in</strong>ed stable throughout the BC condition. In the B condi- Feed<strong>in</strong>g Skills <strong>and</strong> Mealtime Behaviors / 93
Page 1 and 2:
Education
Page 3 and 4:
Education
Page 5 and 6:
Education
Page 7 and 8:
Using Self-Monitor
Page 9 and 10:
monitor their frequency of follow<s
Page 11 and 12:
instructional task
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1. Percentage of correct res
Page 15 and 16:
Social Validity Informal feedback f
Page 17 and 18:
itoring procedure.
Page 19 and 20:
ple characteristics of communicatio
Page 21 and 22:
TABLE 1 Demographic Information, St
Page 23 and 24:
TABLE 2 Levels of Social Preference
Page 25 and 26:
esponses given by students
Page 27 and 28:
(1997). The effects of peer network
Page 29 and 30:
his or her monitorin</stron
Page 31 and 32:
the five minute pe
Page 33 and 34:
the token system (see Figures 1 <st
Page 35 and 36:
ing, number of tok
Page 37 and 38:
self-monitoring to
Page 39 and 40:
potatoes) in a mic
Page 41 and 42:
.”), and the tea
Page 43 and 44:
While hearing the
Page 45 and 46: Figure 2. Graphic data for Alley. O
Page 47 and 48: Joe met criterion of 100% correct r
Page 49 and 50: trials. Ninth, det
Page 51 and 52: Computer-Based Video Instruction to
Page 53 and 54: ing materials. He
Page 55 and 56: Generalization Probe Procedures Pri
Page 57 and 58: Figure 1. Hyperstudio “card” wi
Page 59 and 60: to emit the behaviors, multiplied b
Page 61 and 62: curred after the prompt. Dur<strong
Page 63 and 64: ulation train<stro
Page 65 and 66: enhance the indepe
Page 67 and 68: een a part of the expected rout<str
Page 69 and 70: Figure 4. Kent’s performance on c
Page 71 and 72: Mirenda, P., Wilk, D., & Carson, P.
Page 73 and 74: search indicates t
Page 75 and 76: sions were conducted week days afte
Page 77 and 78: Maintenance Probe
Page 79 and 80: Figure 2. Number of correct respons
Page 81 and 82: TABLE 1 Instructional Data for Each
Page 83 and 84: Fetko, K. S., Schuster, J. W., Harl
Page 85 and 86: lar challenge for school personnel
Page 87 and 88: TABLE 1 Participant Demographic Cha
Page 89 and 90: vidually identified feedin<
Page 91 and 92: (i.e., before the in</stron
Page 93 and 94: Figure 2. Graphic display of Nate
Page 95: TABLE 2 Individual and</str
Page 99 and 100: A functional relationship was estab
Page 101: Search the entire archives of <stro
show all

Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?