etadd_48(1) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
etadd_48(1) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
etadd_48(1) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Training<br />
in<br />
<strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Volume <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g> Number 1<br />
Focusing <strong>on</strong> individuals with<br />
autism, intellectual disability <strong>and</strong> other developmental disabilities<br />
DAD<br />
D<br />
March 2013
March 2013 Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> Vol. <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>, No. 1, pp. 1–144
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
The Journal of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children<br />
Editor: Stanley H. Zucker<br />
Ariz<strong>on</strong>a State University<br />
Mary Lou Fult<strong>on</strong> Teachers College<br />
C<strong>on</strong>sulting Editors<br />
Martin Agran<br />
Reuben Altman<br />
Phillip J. Belfiore<br />
Samuel A. DiGangi<br />
Michael P. Brady<br />
Fredda Brown<br />
Mary Lynne Calhoun<br />
Shar<strong>on</strong> F. Cramer<br />
Caroline Dunn<br />
Lise Fox<br />
David L. Gast<br />
Herbert Goldstein<br />
Juliet E. Hart<br />
Carolyn Hughes<br />
Larry K. Irvin<br />
James V. Kahn<br />
H. Earle Knowlt<strong>on</strong><br />
Barry W. Lavay<br />
Rena Lewis<br />
Kathleen J. Marshall<br />
Editorial Assistant: Kathleen M. Corley<br />
Ariz<strong>on</strong>a State University<br />
Mary Lou Fult<strong>on</strong> Teachers College<br />
John McD<strong>on</strong>nell<br />
Gale M. Morris<strong>on</strong><br />
Gabriel A. Nardi<br />
John Nietupski<br />
James R. Patt<strong>on</strong><br />
Edward A. Polloway<br />
Thomas G. Roberts<br />
Robert S. Rueda<br />
Diane L. Ryndak<br />
Edward J. Sabornie<br />
Laurence R. Sargent<br />
Gary M. Sasso<br />
Tom E. C. Smith<br />
Scott Sparks<br />
Fred Spo<strong>on</strong>er<br />
Robert Stodden<br />
Keith Storey<br />
David L. Westling<br />
John J. Wheeler<br />
Mark Wolery<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> is sent to all members of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> of The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children. All <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> members must first be members of The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children.<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> membership dues are $30.00 for regular members <strong>and</strong> $15.00 for full time students. Membership is <strong>on</strong> a yearly basis. All inquiries<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerning membership, subscripti<strong>on</strong>, advertising, etc. should be sent to the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2900 Crystal<br />
Drive, Suite 1000, Arlingt<strong>on</strong>, VA 22202-3557. Advertising rates are available up<strong>on</strong> request.<br />
Manuscripts should be typed, double spaced, <strong>and</strong> sent (five copies) to the Editor: Stanley H. Zucker, Mary Lou Fult<strong>on</strong> Teachers College, Box<br />
871811, Ariz<strong>on</strong>a State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1811. Each manuscript should have a cover sheet that gives the names, affiliati<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong><br />
complete addresses of all authors.<br />
Editing policies are based <strong>on</strong> the Publicati<strong>on</strong> Manual, the American Psychological Associati<strong>on</strong>, 2009 revisi<strong>on</strong>. Additi<strong>on</strong>al informati<strong>on</strong> is<br />
provided <strong>on</strong> the inside back cover. Any signed article is the pers<strong>on</strong>al expressi<strong>on</strong> of the author; likewise, any advertisement is the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility<br />
of the advertiser. Neither necessarily carries <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> endorsement unless specifically set forth by adopted resoluti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> is abstracted <strong>and</strong> indexed in Psychological Abstracts, PsycINFO, e-psyche,<br />
Abstracts for Social Workers, Internati<strong>on</strong>al Journal of Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong> Research, Current C<strong>on</strong>tents/Social <strong>and</strong> Behavioral Sciences, Excerpta<br />
Medica, Social Sciences Citati<strong>on</strong> Index, Adolescent Mental Health Abstracts, Educati<strong>on</strong>al Administrati<strong>on</strong> Abstracts, Educati<strong>on</strong>al Research<br />
Abstracts, <strong>and</strong> Language <strong>and</strong> Language Behavior Abstracts. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, it is annotated <strong>and</strong> indexed by the ERIC Clearinghouse <strong>on</strong><br />
H<strong>and</strong>icapped <strong>and</strong> Gifted Children for publicati<strong>on</strong> in the m<strong>on</strong>thly print index Current Index to Journals in Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> the quarterly index,<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Child Educati<strong>on</strong> Resources.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> Vol. <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>, No. 1, March 2013, Copyright 2013 by the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> Austim <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children.<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children<br />
Board of Directors<br />
Officers<br />
Past President Richard Gargiulo<br />
President Nikki Murdick<br />
President-Elect Am<strong>and</strong>a Boutot<br />
Vice President Dianne Zager<br />
Secretary Dagny Fidler<br />
Treasurer Gardner Umbarger<br />
Members<br />
Debra Cote<br />
Beth Kavannagh<br />
Lynn Stansberry-Brusnahan<br />
Angie St<strong>on</strong>e-MacD<strong>on</strong>ald<br />
Debora Wichmanowski<br />
Leah Wood (Student Representative)<br />
Executive Director<br />
Tom E.C. Smith<br />
Publicati<strong>on</strong>s Chair<br />
Michael Wehmeyer<br />
Communicati<strong>on</strong>s Chair<br />
Emily C. Bouck<br />
C<strong>on</strong>ference Coordinator<br />
Cindy Perras<br />
The purposes of this organizati<strong>on</strong> shall be to advance the educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> welfare of pers<strong>on</strong>s with autism <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities, research<br />
in the educati<strong>on</strong> of pers<strong>on</strong>s with autism <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities, competency of educators in this field, public underst<strong>and</strong>ing of autism<br />
<strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities, <strong>and</strong> legislati<strong>on</strong> needed to help accomplish these goals. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> shall encourage <strong>and</strong> promote professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
growth, research, <strong>and</strong> the disseminati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> utilizati<strong>on</strong> of research findings.<br />
EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (ISSN 2154-1647) (USPS 0016-8500) is published<br />
quarterly, by The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite<br />
1000, Arlingt<strong>on</strong>, Virginia 22202-3557. Members’ dues to The Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
include $8.00 for subscripti<strong>on</strong> to EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES. Subscripti<strong>on</strong><br />
to EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES is available without membership; Individual—<br />
U.S. $60.00 per year; Canada, PUAS, <strong>and</strong> all other countries $44.00; Instituti<strong>on</strong>s—U.S. $195.00 per year; Canada, PUAS, <strong>and</strong> all other<br />
countries $199.50; single copy price is $30.00. U.S. Periodicals postage is paid at Arlingt<strong>on</strong>, Virginia 22204 <strong>and</strong> additi<strong>on</strong>al mailing<br />
offices.<br />
POSTMASTERS: Send address changes to EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES,<br />
2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 1000, Arlingt<strong>on</strong>, Virginia 22202-3557.
Manuscripts Accepted for Future Publicati<strong>on</strong> in Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
June 2013<br />
Effectiveness of gluten-free <strong>and</strong> casein-free diets for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: An<br />
evidence-based research synthesis. Jie Zhang, Michael R. Mayt<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> John J. Wheeler, Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Human Development, The College of Brockport, State University of New York, 350 New<br />
Campus Drive, Brockport, NY 14420.<br />
Portable <strong>and</strong> accessible video modeling:Teaching a series of novel skills within school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
settings. Teresa Taber-Doughty, Bridget Miller, Jordan Shurr, <strong>and</strong> Benjamin Wiles, Purdue<br />
University, Dept. of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Studies, 100 N. University Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2098.<br />
Utilizing teaching interacti<strong>on</strong>s to facilitate social skills in the natural envir<strong>on</strong>ment. Alyne Kuymjian,<br />
Mitchell Taubman, Eric Rudrud, Justin B. Leaf, Andrew Edwards, John McEachin, R<strong>on</strong> Leaf, <strong>and</strong><br />
Kim Schulze, 200 Marina Drive, Seal Beach, CA 90740.<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of the effects of video modeling with narrati<strong>on</strong> vs. video modeling <strong>on</strong> the functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
skill acquisiti<strong>on</strong> of adolescents with autism. Molly Smith, Kevin Ayres, Linda Mechling, <strong>and</strong> Katie<br />
Smith, Department of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, The University of Georgia, 516 Aderhold Hall, Athens,<br />
GA 30602.<br />
Effects of computer-based instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> teaching emergency teleph<strong>on</strong>e numbers to students with<br />
intellectual disability. Serife Yucesoy Ozkan, Nuray Oncul, <strong>and</strong> Ozlem Kaya, Anadolu Universitesi,<br />
Egitim Fakultesi, Ozel Egitim Bolumu, 26470, Eskisehir, TURKEY.<br />
Use of an iPh<strong>on</strong>e 4 with video features to assist locati<strong>on</strong> of students with moderate intellectual<br />
disability when lost in community settings. Kaitlin Purrazzella <strong>and</strong> Linda C. Mechling, University of<br />
North Carolina Wilmingt<strong>on</strong>, Department of Early Childhood & Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 601 South<br />
College Road, Wilmingt<strong>on</strong>, NC 28403-5940.<br />
Teaching adults with moderate intellectual disability ATM use via the iPod. Renee Scott, Belva<br />
Collins, Victoria Knight, <strong>and</strong> Harold Kleinert, Department of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 229 Taylor<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Building, University of Kentucky, Lexingt<strong>on</strong>, KY 40506-0001.<br />
Effects of Wh-questi<strong>on</strong> graphic organizers <strong>on</strong> reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong> skills of students with autism<br />
spectrum disorders. Keri S. Bethune <strong>and</strong> Charles L. Wood, Department of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Child Development, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard,<br />
Charlotte, NC 28223.<br />
Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of manual spelling, observati<strong>on</strong>al, <strong>and</strong> incidental learning using computer-based instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
with a tablet PC, large screen projecti<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> a forward chaining procedure. Kimberly<br />
Purrazzella <strong>and</strong> Linda C. Mechling, University of North Carolina Wilmingt<strong>on</strong>, Department of Early<br />
Childhood & Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 601 South College Road, Wilmingt<strong>on</strong>, NC 28403-5940.<br />
Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of multiple-stimulus preference assessment with adults with developmental disabilities.<br />
Gareth Davies, Carly Ch<strong>and</strong>,C.T. Yu, Toby L. Martin, <strong>and</strong> Garry L. Martin, University of Manitoba,St.<br />
Amant Research Centre, 440 River Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba R2M 3Z9 CANADA.<br />
Effects of the CD-Rom versi<strong>on</strong> of the self-advocacy strategy <strong>on</strong> quality c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong>s in IEP meetings<br />
of high school students with intellectual disability. Jennifer Cease-Cook, David W. Test, <strong>and</strong> La’<br />
Shawndra Scroggins, Nati<strong>on</strong>al Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Transiti<strong>on</strong> Technical Assistance Center, UNC Charlotte,<br />
Department of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Child Development, 9201 University City Blvd., Charlotte,<br />
NC 28223.<br />
Address is supplied for author in boldface type.
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
VOLUME <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g> NUMBER 1 MARCH 2013<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong>: A Preliminary Investigati<strong>on</strong> of the Role of<br />
Participati<strong>on</strong> in Inclusive Settings 3<br />
CAROLYN HUGHES, JOSEPH C. COSGRIFF, MARTIN AGRAN, <strong>and</strong> BARBARA H. WASHINGTON<br />
General Educati<strong>on</strong> Teachers’ Goals <strong>and</strong> Expectati<strong>on</strong>s for their Included<br />
Students with Mild <strong>and</strong> Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong> 18<br />
DAVID LANSING CAMERON <strong>and</strong> BRYAN G. COOK<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality am<strong>on</strong>g African American Students at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level:<br />
Examining the MID Disability Category 31<br />
ANDREA D. JASPER <strong>and</strong> EMILY C. BOUCK<br />
Teaching Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Language Skills to Students with<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorders <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> Using Direct<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong> 41<br />
MARGARET M. FLORES, CYNTHIA NELSON, VANESSA HINTON, TONI M. FRANKLIN,<br />
SHAUNITA D. STROZIER, LATONYA TERRY, <strong>and</strong> SUSAN FRANKLIN<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics: Teaching Word-Analysis Skills to<br />
Students with Moderate Intellectual Disability 49<br />
LAURA D. FREDRICK, DAWN H. DAVIS, PAUL A. ALBERTO, <strong>and</strong> REBECCA E. WAUGH<br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students with <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum<br />
Disorder: A Systematic Review of the Literature 67<br />
KYLE D. BENNETT <strong>and</strong> CHARLES DUKES<br />
Research <strong>on</strong> Curriculum for Students with Moderate <strong>and</strong> Severe Intellectual<br />
Disability: A Systematic Review 76<br />
JORDAN SHURR <strong>and</strong> EMILY C. BOUCK<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling in Teaching First Aid Skills to<br />
Children with Intellectual Disability 88<br />
SERIFE YUCESOY OZKAN<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> with Individuals with<br />
Intellectual Disability in Employment Settings 103<br />
AILSA E. GOH <strong>and</strong> LINDA M. BAMBARA<br />
Collaborative Training <strong>and</strong> Practice am<strong>on</strong>g Applied Behavior Analysts who<br />
Support Individuals with <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorder 120<br />
AMY KELLY <strong>and</strong> MATT TINCANI<br />
Impact of Online Training Videos <strong>on</strong> the Implementati<strong>on</strong> of M<strong>and</strong> Training<br />
by Three Elementary School Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als 132<br />
EMALEY B. MCCULLOCH <strong>and</strong> MARY JO NOONAN<br />
Manuscripts Accepted for Future Publicati<strong>on</strong> in Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> 2<br />
The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> retains literary property rights <strong>on</strong> copyrighted articles. Up<br />
to 100 copies of the articles in this journal may be reproduced for n<strong>on</strong>profit distributi<strong>on</strong> without permissi<strong>on</strong> from<br />
the publisher. All other forms of reproducti<strong>on</strong> require permissi<strong>on</strong> from the publisher.
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 3–17<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong>: A Preliminary Investigati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
the Role of Participati<strong>on</strong> in Inclusive Settings<br />
Carolyn Hughes<br />
Queens College, CUNY<br />
Martin Agran<br />
University of Wyoming<br />
Joseph C. Cosgriff<br />
V<strong>and</strong>erbilt University<br />
Barbara H. Washingt<strong>on</strong><br />
Murray State University<br />
Abstract: Little is known about the effects of participati<strong>on</strong> in inclusive settings <strong>on</strong> student self-determinati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In this exploratory study, we examined the associati<strong>on</strong> between students’ inclusive school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
activities <strong>and</strong> the self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills of active involvement in IEP activities <strong>and</strong> use of selected selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
strategies. Forty-seven students with severe intellectual disability from three high schools participated;<br />
<strong>on</strong>e high school was undergoing state takeover for c<strong>on</strong>sistently failing to make AYP <strong>and</strong> served students<br />
living in a high-poverty community. Findings revealed significant differences across schools in student<br />
participati<strong>on</strong> in general educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> school- <strong>and</strong> community-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities, which were associated<br />
with level of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use. Students attending schools offering more inclusive activities<br />
reported significantly more use of six of nine self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills. Active student IEP participati<strong>on</strong> was<br />
reported to be low across all schools. We discuss implicati<strong>on</strong>s of findings for future research <strong>and</strong> practice.<br />
Accumulating evidence has suggested the role<br />
of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in promoting positive<br />
academic, social, <strong>and</strong> adult outcomes for students<br />
with intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities<br />
(e.g., Fowler, K<strong>on</strong>rad, Walker, Test, &<br />
Wood, 2007; Lachapelle et al., 2005; Martorell,<br />
Gutierrez-Recacha, Perda, & Ayuso-<br />
Mateos, 2008; Wehmeyer & Palmer, 2003).<br />
For example, Lachapelle <strong>and</strong> colleagues<br />
(2005) reported that self-determinati<strong>on</strong> status<br />
related positively to quality of life for adults<br />
with intellectual disability. Wehmeyer <strong>and</strong><br />
Palmer (2003) found a positive relati<strong>on</strong> between<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> post-school outcomes<br />
(e.g., employment <strong>and</strong> independent<br />
living) for students with intellectual <strong>and</strong> learning<br />
disabilities. Active involvement by students<br />
in their individualized educati<strong>on</strong> programs<br />
(IEPs) <strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong> planning is valued as a<br />
means to promote students’ self-advocacy, self-<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Carolyn Hughes, Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong><br />
Community Programs, Queens College, City University<br />
of New York, 65-30 Kissena Blvd., Powdermaker<br />
Hall 033, Flushing, NY 11367. E-mail:<br />
Carolyn.hughes@qc.cuny.edu<br />
determinati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> positive post-school outcomes,<br />
<strong>and</strong> provides a measure of students’<br />
level of self-directed learning (Martin, Van<br />
Dycke, Christensen et al., 2006; Test et al.,<br />
2004; Wehmeyer, Palmer, Soukup, Garner, &<br />
Lawrence, 2007). The importance placed <strong>on</strong><br />
students’ involvement in their own educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
decisi<strong>on</strong> making was established in the<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act<br />
(IDEA) Amendments of 1997 m<strong>and</strong>ating the<br />
inclusi<strong>on</strong> of students in their IEP meetings<br />
when transiti<strong>on</strong> planning is being discussed<br />
<strong>and</strong> requiring educati<strong>on</strong>al decisi<strong>on</strong>s to be<br />
based <strong>on</strong> students’ declared interests <strong>and</strong><br />
preferences—a further example of self-determined<br />
behavior.<br />
Research suggests that exercise of self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills (e.g., choice making, problem<br />
solving, self-advocating) <strong>and</strong> active involvement<br />
in transiti<strong>on</strong> planning is positively related<br />
to skill instructi<strong>on</strong> received <strong>and</strong> opportunity<br />
to practice skills in inclusive settings<br />
(e.g., Wehmeyer et al., 2007). Early studies in<br />
residential settings for adults with intellectual<br />
disability revealed that, in general, residents<br />
had little opportunity for making choices or<br />
decisi<strong>on</strong>s or advocating for themselves in their<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 3
daily lives (e.g., Kishi, Teelucksingh, Zollers,<br />
Park-Lee, & Meyer, 1988; Wehmeyer & Meltzer,<br />
1995). Subsequent studies examined restrictiveness<br />
of residential envir<strong>on</strong>ment in<br />
relati<strong>on</strong> to opportunities to practice self-determinati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In general, more inclusive settings<br />
that provided supports <strong>and</strong> accommodati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were associated with greater opportunities for<br />
choice, decisi<strong>on</strong> making, <strong>and</strong> promoti<strong>on</strong> of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> for adults with intellectual<br />
disability (e.g., Roberts<strong>on</strong> et al., 2001; Wehmeyer<br />
& Bolding, 2001; Wehmeyer & Garner,<br />
2003). We found <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e published study,<br />
however, in which self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills<br />
were taught to adults in a residential setting.<br />
Specifically, Hughes (1992) taught four adults<br />
with severe intellectual disability living in a<br />
group home to solve problems related to daily<br />
living skills by learning to direct their own<br />
performance.<br />
In c<strong>on</strong>trast, a sizable number of investigati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of the effects of instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> active involvement in educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
planning has been c<strong>on</strong>ducted in<br />
school settings (cf. Carter, Owens, Trainer,<br />
Sun, & Swedeen 2009; Chambers et al., 2007;<br />
Shogren et al., 2007). Several researchers have<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated the effectiveness of published<br />
curricula in promoting positive measures of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> (e.g., Cross, Cooke, Wood,<br />
& Test, 1999; Hoffman & Field, 1995; Powers<br />
et al., 2001; Zhang, 2001b). For example,<br />
Cross et al. (1999) found that introducing the<br />
ChoiceMaker curriculum (Martin & Marshall,<br />
1995) to students with intellectual disability to<br />
teach choice making <strong>and</strong> goal setting resulted<br />
in increased scores <strong>on</strong> The Arc’s Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
Scale (Wehmeyer & Kelchner, 1995).<br />
Research has also examined the effects of<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> to increase students’ active involvement<br />
in transiti<strong>on</strong> planning <strong>and</strong> the IEP process,<br />
primarily with students with high-incidence<br />
disabilities (e.g., Allen, Smith, Test,<br />
Flowers, & Wood, 2001; Martin, Van Dycke,<br />
Christensen et al., 2006; Mas<strong>on</strong>, McGahee-<br />
Kovac, Johns<strong>on</strong>, & Stillerman, 2002). For example,<br />
Martin, Van Dycke, Christensen et al.<br />
(2006) used the Self-Directed IEP curriculum<br />
(Martin, Marshall, Maxs<strong>on</strong>, & Jerman, 1997)<br />
to teach sec<strong>on</strong>dary special educati<strong>on</strong> students<br />
(9% with intellectual disability) to increase<br />
their speaking, goal setting, <strong>and</strong> leadership<br />
roles in their IEP meetings. Studies show, how-<br />
ever, that without instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> support, few<br />
students are actively involved in the IEP process.<br />
Martin, Van Dycke, Greene et al. (2006)<br />
reported that, without training, sec<strong>on</strong>dary students<br />
at IEP meetings generally talk <strong>on</strong>ly 3%<br />
of the time. Sec<strong>on</strong>dary students in Agran <strong>and</strong><br />
Hughes’s (2008) study likewise self-reported<br />
having received little instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> assuming<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly a minimal role at their IEP meetings.<br />
However, few investigati<strong>on</strong>s in schools have<br />
examined inclusiveness of setting in relati<strong>on</strong><br />
to self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills (Shogren, Bovaird,<br />
Palmer, & Wehmeyer, 2010). Zhang (2001a)<br />
asked general <strong>and</strong> special educati<strong>on</strong> teachers<br />
to rate how often students with mild intellectual<br />
disability dem<strong>on</strong>strated 13 self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
behaviors (e.g., making choices, setting<br />
goals, self-advocating) in their respective classrooms.<br />
Special versus general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teachers reported higher rates of self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
behavior, suggesting that special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
settings are more c<strong>on</strong>ducive to selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
than are general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ments. However, Zhang suggested that<br />
teacher bias or expectati<strong>on</strong>s may have influenced<br />
results because special educati<strong>on</strong> teachers<br />
are more likely to be aware of the 1997<br />
IDEA m<strong>and</strong>ate to address students’ interests,<br />
preferences, <strong>and</strong> choices in educati<strong>on</strong>al programming.<br />
Unfortunately, Zhang did not report<br />
actual opportunities or activities that may<br />
have related to exercising self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
in either setting. Further, student perspective<br />
<strong>on</strong> opportunity to exercise self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
(e.g., making choices) across settings was not<br />
sought.<br />
Carter et al. (2009) asked special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teachers of high school students with severe<br />
intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities to<br />
use the AIR Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> Scale (AIR;<br />
Wolman, Campeau, DuBois, Mithaug, & Stolarski,<br />
1994) to rate opportunity to engage in<br />
<strong>and</strong> dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> behaviors<br />
at school. The AIR provides examples<br />
of opportunities for self-determinati<strong>on</strong> for<br />
each of six questi<strong>on</strong>naire items; however, examples<br />
relate <strong>on</strong>ly to teachers’ provisi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
opportunities that could influence self-determinati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
To illustrate, the example for the<br />
goal-setting item is “Troy’s teachers let him<br />
know that he is resp<strong>on</strong>sible for setting his own<br />
goals to get his needs <strong>and</strong> wants met.” Therefore,<br />
the AIR asks teachers to rate their own<br />
4 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
acti<strong>on</strong>s in providing opportunities for students<br />
to practice self-determinati<strong>on</strong>, which<br />
could lead to inflated scoring. Indeed, teachers<br />
in Carter et al.’s (2009) study rated opportunities<br />
for self-determinati<strong>on</strong> as sometimes to<br />
almost always available at school, although they<br />
reported that students almost never to sometimes<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated self-determined behaviors.<br />
However, no evidence was provided by the<br />
authors to corroborate teacher report; therefore,<br />
it is not known to what extent opportunities<br />
actually existed in school settings. In<br />
additi<strong>on</strong>, Carter et al. did not provide student<br />
input <strong>on</strong> opportunities to practice self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills because of c<strong>on</strong>cerns with the<br />
validity of resp<strong>on</strong>ses of students with severe<br />
intellectual disability.<br />
This study is a preliminary investigati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
the associati<strong>on</strong> of level of participati<strong>on</strong> in<br />
inclusive activities in school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
<strong>and</strong> students’ reported self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill<br />
use. As argued by Walker et al. (2011), “the<br />
degree to which <strong>on</strong>e is socially included affects<br />
<strong>on</strong>e’s opportunities to engage in selfdetermined<br />
acti<strong>on</strong>s; it also impacts the experiences<br />
in which <strong>on</strong>e learns about individual<br />
preferences, interests, wants, needs, <strong>and</strong> desires”<br />
(p. 15). Walker <strong>and</strong> colleagues further<br />
argued that research (e.g., Wehmeyer et al.,<br />
2007) clearly shows, as compared to more restrictive<br />
settings <strong>and</strong> experiences, inclusi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
community <strong>and</strong> school provides greater opportunities<br />
to make choices, express preferences,<br />
set goals, <strong>and</strong> become more self-determined.<br />
However, participati<strong>on</strong> in inclusive<br />
settings <strong>and</strong> activities has not been investigated<br />
in relati<strong>on</strong> to self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in<br />
school settings. Our hypothesis was that participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in more inclusive school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
activities would be associated with<br />
greater self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, we sought to extend the literature<br />
<strong>on</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> student involvement<br />
in educati<strong>on</strong>al programming by<br />
addressing limitati<strong>on</strong>s of previous studies of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in school settings. First, because<br />
students from low-income communities<br />
rarely have been included in investigati<strong>on</strong>s of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong>, we included a high school<br />
serving high-poverty youth in our study sample.<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, participants in previous studies<br />
investigating self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in both residential<br />
<strong>and</strong> school settings were largely White<br />
(e.g., Carter et al., 2009; Shogren et al., 2007;<br />
Wehmeyer & Meltzer, 1995), whereas the majority<br />
of our participants was from groups<br />
underrepresented in the disability literature<br />
(e.g., Blacks <strong>and</strong> Hispanics).<br />
Third, rather than include participants with<br />
less intense disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities<br />
or mild intellectual disability), as in the<br />
majority of studies investigating self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> IEP involvement (cf. Test et al.,<br />
2004), students in our study had severe intellectual<br />
disability. Fourth, instead of querying<br />
teachers with respect to students’ active IEP<br />
involvement <strong>and</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong> (e.g.,<br />
Zhang, 2001a), we interviewed students directly<br />
to obtain their perspective <strong>on</strong> IEP involvement<br />
<strong>and</strong> engagement in self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
behaviors. Last, to address the c<strong>on</strong>cerns<br />
of Carter et al. (2009) <strong>and</strong> others with respect<br />
to validity of resp<strong>on</strong>ses of people with severe<br />
intellectual disability <strong>and</strong> their tendency to<br />
acquiesce when queried, we introduced a<br />
novel methodological feature by asking participants<br />
to provide an example when a resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
was affirmative. If the example <strong>and</strong> resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
did not match in meaning, the resp<strong>on</strong>se was<br />
invalidated. Retained resp<strong>on</strong>ses provided rich<br />
illustrati<strong>on</strong>s of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> use as reported<br />
by students themselves.<br />
Method<br />
Settings<br />
Students from three high schools located in a<br />
large urban school district of 78,000 students<br />
in southeastern U.S. participated in the study.<br />
We selected these three high schools because<br />
they represented geographically <strong>and</strong> demographically<br />
diverse areas of the school district.<br />
School A was purposely chosen because we<br />
wished to sample the self-reported self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills of students attending an under-resourced,<br />
ec<strong>on</strong>omically challenged high<br />
school serving students from a high-poverty<br />
community. In c<strong>on</strong>trast, students attending<br />
Schools B <strong>and</strong> C were from more middleincome<br />
communities (see below). Further,<br />
unlike the other two schools, School A was<br />
being taken over by the state due to a 53%<br />
dropout rate <strong>and</strong> failing to make Annual<br />
Yearly Progress (AYP) <strong>on</strong> state exit exams.<br />
School A had also been identified as a segre-<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 5
TABLE 1<br />
Participati<strong>on</strong> in General Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Transiti<strong>on</strong> Activities<br />
gated, high-need “dropout factory” (Balfanz &<br />
Legters, 2004), whereas Schools B <strong>and</strong> C were<br />
in good st<strong>and</strong>ing with respect to graduati<strong>on</strong><br />
rates <strong>and</strong> exit exam scores.<br />
School A enrolled 1070 students, of which<br />
81% were Black, 16% White, <strong>and</strong> 3% Hispanic<br />
or Asian; 74% of students qualified for free or<br />
reduced lunch. The majority of households<br />
(56%) in the community were single-parent<br />
<strong>and</strong> 42% had an income of less than $25,000.<br />
In comparis<strong>on</strong>, free or reduced lunch rates at<br />
Schools B <strong>and</strong> C were 41% <strong>and</strong> 53%, respectively.<br />
Majority student populati<strong>on</strong>s at these<br />
schools were 53% Black (40% White; School<br />
B) <strong>and</strong> 52% Black (24% White, 20% Hispanic;<br />
School C). Single-parent households in the<br />
communities served by these schools were<br />
28% (School B) <strong>and</strong> 30% (School C), <strong>and</strong><br />
household incomes of less than $25,000 were<br />
27% (School B) <strong>and</strong> 17% (School C). Because<br />
preliminary Pears<strong>on</strong> Chi-square tests revealed<br />
significant differences across demographic<br />
characteristics of School A compared to each<br />
of Schools B <strong>and</strong> C when analyzed separately<br />
(i.e., students’ race/ethnicity .001, graduati<strong>on</strong><br />
rate .001, free/reduced lunch status <br />
.001, single-parent households .001, household<br />
income .001), for all subsequent analyses,<br />
we compared School A against Schools B<br />
<strong>and</strong> C combined.<br />
School<br />
No. of class periods A B-C p<br />
Total participants 19 28<br />
In general educati<strong>on</strong> classes (daily) .001*<br />
N<strong>on</strong>e 15 (79) a<br />
8 (29)<br />
1 class period 3 (16) 5 (18)<br />
2 or more class periods 1 (5) 15 (54)<br />
In school-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities (daily) .001*<br />
N<strong>on</strong>e 16 (84) 11 (39)<br />
1 class period 2 (11) 1 (4)<br />
2 or more class periods 1 (5) 16 (57)<br />
In community-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities (weekly) .007*<br />
N<strong>on</strong>e 11 (58) 11 (39)<br />
1 class or less per week 8 (42) 6 (31)<br />
2 or more classes per week 0 (0) 11 (39)<br />
Note. * p .01.<br />
a Number <strong>and</strong> percentage of participants. School A is compared against Schools B-C combined.<br />
Participati<strong>on</strong> in inclusive settings. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
extensive direct observati<strong>on</strong> by the authors<br />
in these high schools prior to the current<br />
study indicated that participati<strong>on</strong> in<br />
inclusive school- <strong>and</strong> community-based activities<br />
by students with severe disabilities varied<br />
c<strong>on</strong>siderably for School A students versus students<br />
attending Schools B <strong>and</strong> C. To c<strong>on</strong>firm<br />
our observati<strong>on</strong>s, we compared amount of<br />
time in <strong>and</strong> type of general educati<strong>on</strong> classes<br />
attended, <strong>and</strong> amount of time participating<br />
in transiti<strong>on</strong>-related activities (e.g., in-school<br />
jobs, vocati<strong>on</strong>al classes, community work experiences)<br />
as drawn from school records. We<br />
used Pears<strong>on</strong> Chi-square tests in SPSS (p <br />
.01) to compare findings.<br />
Table 1 displays participants’ enrollment in<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong> classes <strong>and</strong> involvement in<br />
school- <strong>and</strong> community-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities.<br />
Significant differences were found using<br />
Pears<strong>on</strong> Chi-squared tests for number of class<br />
periods in (a) general educati<strong>on</strong>, (b) schoolbased<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> activities, <strong>and</strong> (c) communitybased<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> activities for School A students<br />
versus School B-C students combined.<br />
Only four of the 19 participating students in<br />
School A attended <strong>on</strong>e or more general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classes daily outside their self-c<strong>on</strong>tained<br />
classes. Similarly, <strong>on</strong>ly three students from<br />
School A were enrolled in <strong>on</strong>e or more class<br />
6 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
periods per day of school-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities.<br />
Only eight (42%) of School A’s participants<br />
spent up to <strong>on</strong>e class period per day<br />
in transiti<strong>on</strong> activities in the community. On<br />
the other h<strong>and</strong>, 15 of 28 students in Schools<br />
B-C attended two or more general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classes per day; five attended <strong>on</strong>e class daily.<br />
Over half (n 16) of School B-C participants<br />
engaged in two or more class periods of<br />
school-based transiti<strong>on</strong> activities daily, <strong>and</strong><br />
over <strong>on</strong>e third (n 11) spent two or more<br />
class periods daily in community-based transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
activities.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, a two-tailed t-test (p .05) for<br />
the combined categories of enrollment in<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> school- <strong>and</strong> community-based<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> activities was significant,<br />
t(45) 7.88, p .001, with a mean of<br />
.89 (SD 1.05) for School A versus a mean of<br />
3.43 (SD 1.10) for Schools BC where n<strong>on</strong>e <br />
0 <strong>and</strong> two or more classes per week 2. The effect<br />
size was large (Cohen’s d 2.35).<br />
Based <strong>on</strong> our preliminary analyses across<br />
School A compared to Schools B-C, we determined<br />
that proceeding with our investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
of students’ participati<strong>on</strong> in the IEP process<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use was justified,<br />
as follows.<br />
Participants<br />
Participants (N 47) were enrolled in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> programs for students with intellectual<br />
disability that emphasized functi<strong>on</strong>al academics<br />
<strong>and</strong> employment skills. Participant<br />
selecti<strong>on</strong> criteria were: (a) students had an<br />
Individualized Educati<strong>on</strong> Program (IEP) <strong>and</strong><br />
received special educati<strong>on</strong> services in classes<br />
for moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability,<br />
(b) students had moderate to extensive support<br />
needs as documented by school records,<br />
(c) students could resp<strong>on</strong>d verbally to spoken<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s in four-to-five word phrases <strong>and</strong> follow<br />
<strong>on</strong>e- to two-part directi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> (d) written<br />
parental <strong>and</strong> student c<strong>on</strong>sent was obtained.<br />
Students meeting these criteria were<br />
19 of 38 students (School A), 14 of 25 (School<br />
B), <strong>and</strong> 14 of 41 (School C) enrolled in these<br />
classes. Students excluded were those who<br />
did not communicate verbally (e.g., used gestures)<br />
<strong>and</strong> those with limited support needs<br />
(e.g., <strong>on</strong>ly m<strong>on</strong>itoring or verbal prompts<br />
needed to complete daily living skills indepen-<br />
dently). Participants’ ages ranged from 14–21<br />
years (M 17) <strong>and</strong> 25 of 47 students were<br />
female. Participants at School A were 16<br />
Blacks <strong>and</strong> three Whites; at School B, five<br />
Blacks <strong>and</strong> nine Whites; <strong>and</strong> at School C, eight<br />
Blacks, four Whites, <strong>and</strong> two Hispanics.<br />
Instruments <strong>and</strong> Administrati<strong>on</strong><br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> Survey (SS-DS).<br />
We developed the Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
Survey (SS-DS) based <strong>on</strong> an extensive review<br />
of literature in self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> student<br />
involvement in the IEP process. The SS-DS<br />
comprised 18 interview items (17 forcedchoice<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s with requests to give examples<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e open-ended questi<strong>on</strong>) related to:<br />
(a) involvement in the IEP process (n 8;<br />
e.g., Agran, Snow, & Swaner, 1999; Martin,<br />
Greene, & Borl<strong>and</strong>, 2004; Test et al., 2004)<br />
<strong>and</strong> (b) use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> strategies,<br />
such as problem-solving (n 9; e.g. Agran &<br />
Hughes, 2008; Wehmeyer, Agran, & Hughes,<br />
2000). A final open-ended questi<strong>on</strong> asked students<br />
to identify their post-school goals (e.g.,<br />
Benz, Lindstrom, & Yovanoff, 2000). A draft<br />
instrument was field-tested for clarity of wording<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g five research staff <strong>and</strong> 17 racially<br />
<strong>and</strong> ethnically diverse high school students<br />
with severe intellectual disability; revisi<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
wording were incorporated into a final instrument.<br />
Cr<strong>on</strong>bach’s alpha for the SS-DS was .82<br />
(18 items, 54 resp<strong>on</strong>dents with severe disabilities).<br />
The survey was c<strong>on</strong>ducted as individual interviews<br />
by graduate students in special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
by following a written script (Agran &<br />
Hughes, 2008) to ensure c<strong>on</strong>sistency in administrati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Interviewers read the questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to each participant individually in a quiet area<br />
of the classroom, providing clarificati<strong>on</strong> or<br />
rewording as needed to promote comprehensi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Participants were asked to identify if <strong>and</strong><br />
how often they engaged in an IEP-related behavior<br />
(e.g., attending IEP meeting) or a selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill, such as goal setting. If<br />
they resp<strong>on</strong>ded affirmatively, they were asked<br />
to describe an occurrence as an illustrati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
when they had used the skill. To c<strong>on</strong>trol for<br />
acquiescence as is characteristic of individuals<br />
with severe intellectual disability, if, after<br />
probing for underst<strong>and</strong>ing, participants’ examples<br />
did not match their resp<strong>on</strong>se, affirma-<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 7
tive resp<strong>on</strong>ses were invalidated. As interviews<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted, interviewers recorded participants’<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses <strong>on</strong> the interview protocol.<br />
Data Analysis<br />
Data analysis was comprised of the following<br />
four steps: First, students’ educati<strong>on</strong>al programming<br />
<strong>and</strong> participant resp<strong>on</strong>ses were numerically<br />
coded <strong>and</strong> tabulated. Descriptive statistics<br />
were calculated for both data sets using<br />
Pears<strong>on</strong> Chi-square tests in SPSS. To c<strong>on</strong>trol<br />
for r<strong>and</strong>om significance due to the number<br />
of descriptive comparis<strong>on</strong>s (18), the p-value of<br />
the Chi-square analyses was set at .01. Sec<strong>on</strong>d,<br />
because school <strong>and</strong> community demographic<br />
characteristics differed significantly for School<br />
A when compared to each of Schools B <strong>and</strong> C<br />
(see Setting), we compared School A findings<br />
against School B-C combined resp<strong>on</strong>ses, as<br />
previously indicated. Third, up<strong>on</strong> visually examining<br />
histograms to assure normality of<br />
the data, we performed two t-tests to compare<br />
the mean summative resp<strong>on</strong>ses of School A<br />
participants against the combined mean summative<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses of School B-C participants.<br />
We compared students’ (a) reported level of<br />
involvement in their IEP process <strong>and</strong> (b) reported<br />
use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> strategies.<br />
We set the p-value at .05 for both hypothesisbased<br />
comparis<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> also calculated effect<br />
sizes. Fourth, we combined student-reported<br />
qualitative statements of their self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill use <strong>and</strong> chose representative examples<br />
to illustrate findings.<br />
Results<br />
Findings are displayed in Tables 2 <strong>and</strong> 3, in<br />
which resp<strong>on</strong>ses for School A are compared<br />
to combined resp<strong>on</strong>ses for Schools B-C. Representative<br />
examples of students’ self-reported<br />
statements in resp<strong>on</strong>se to questi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the<br />
SS-DS are included below.<br />
Participati<strong>on</strong> in the IEP Process<br />
Overall IEP participati<strong>on</strong>. Students’ self-reported<br />
participati<strong>on</strong> in the IEP process in resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
to SS-DS questi<strong>on</strong>s is shown in Table 2.<br />
Low participati<strong>on</strong> was reported across participants<br />
<strong>and</strong> schools for all phases of the IEP<br />
process queried, revealing no significant dif-<br />
ferences in resp<strong>on</strong>ses for School A compared<br />
to combined School B-C resp<strong>on</strong>ses. Less than<br />
half of participants across all schools (n 21)<br />
reported even knowing what an IEP was <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong>ly five students (School A 0) reported<br />
leading their IEP meetings, although twothirds<br />
(n 31) did report attending their<br />
meetings. When asked to tell what an IEP was,<br />
<strong>on</strong>e student from School A said, “It’s a record<br />
for how you’re doing.” A School C participant<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ded that “an IEP is like a place, a meeting.<br />
They ask a couple of questi<strong>on</strong>s, like what<br />
you want to do, what you want to work at, <strong>and</strong><br />
you have to tell them what, <strong>and</strong> where you<br />
want to work at <strong>on</strong>ce you leave out of this<br />
school.” Another School C participant stated,<br />
“It is when you get the chance to talk about<br />
what you need, your goals, <strong>and</strong> what you need<br />
to work <strong>on</strong> your need.”<br />
When asked to tell about an IEP meeting<br />
he or she had attended, a School A student<br />
reported, “I sit in them. They talk about my<br />
reading skills, math skills, <strong>and</strong> what I will do<br />
after graduati<strong>on</strong>.” Similarly, a student from<br />
School B said, “They talked about me. They<br />
talked about school.” Just over a third (n <br />
17) of all participants reported knowing what<br />
their IEP goals were, while two-thirds (n 31)<br />
said they never read their IEPs. Those reporting<br />
to know their IEP goals gave examples,<br />
primarily related to academic performance.<br />
For example, <strong>on</strong>e student attending School A<br />
said, “Working <strong>on</strong> my reading <strong>and</strong> getting<br />
better at math,” while a School B student<br />
stated, “Do good in subjects, pass, <strong>and</strong> get As<br />
in classes.”<br />
Only 12 students reported ever evaluating<br />
their progress <strong>on</strong> their IEP goals, although<br />
seven students across Schools B-C reported<br />
evaluating their goals <strong>on</strong>ce a week (School<br />
A 1) or daily (School A 0). Only 40%<br />
(n 19) of participants reported ever discussing<br />
their IEP goals with parents or family,<br />
although nine students across Schools B-C reported<br />
doing so daily or weekly (School A <br />
2). Similarly, <strong>on</strong>ly 28% (n 13) of participants<br />
reported ever discussing IEP goals with<br />
teachers. Examples of IEP goal discussi<strong>on</strong> primarily<br />
related to IEP meetings. For example,<br />
<strong>on</strong>e School A student remarked that she discussed<br />
her IEP goals with her teachers “when<br />
we have an IEP meeting with my mom.”<br />
8 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 2<br />
IEP Participati<strong>on</strong><br />
Statistical analysis of IEP participati<strong>on</strong>. A twotailed<br />
t-test (p .05) revealed no significant<br />
statistical difference between means of the cumulative<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses to questi<strong>on</strong>s about participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in the IEP process between School A<br />
<strong>and</strong> Schools B-C combined, t(45) 1.44, p <br />
.158 with M 3.05, SD 2.34 (School A)<br />
versus M 4.46, SD 3.82 (Schools B-C),<br />
where no 0 <strong>and</strong> yes 1; never 0 <strong>and</strong> daily <br />
3.<br />
Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> Skills<br />
Table 3 shows findings for questi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the<br />
SS-DS related to self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills.<br />
School A participants reported significantly<br />
less (p .01) frequent use of six of nine<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills: specifically, self-advocacy<br />
(How often do you speak up for yourself?),<br />
choice making (How often do you make<br />
choices by yourself?), self-reinforcing (How often<br />
do you tell or reward yourself that you did<br />
well when you finish a task?), self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
Item School No Yes p<br />
1. Do you know what an IEP is? A 9 (47) a<br />
10 (53) .390<br />
B-C 17 (61) 11 (39)<br />
A 8 (42) 11 (58) .366<br />
2. Do you go to your IEP meetings? B-C 8 (29) 20 (71)<br />
A 19(100) 0 (0) .051<br />
3. Do you lead your IEP meetings?<br />
B-C 23 (82) 5 (18)<br />
A 9 (47) 10 (53) .069<br />
4. Do you know what your IEP goals are? B-C 21 (75) 7 (25)<br />
Never Yearly Weekly Daily<br />
5. How often do you read your IEP?<br />
6. How often do you evaluate your<br />
progress <strong>on</strong> goals since last IEP?<br />
7. How often do you discuss your<br />
IEP goals with parents/family?<br />
8. How often do you discuss your<br />
IEP goals with teachers?<br />
A 15 (79) 4 (21) 0 (0) 0 (0) .087<br />
B-C 16 (57) 6 (21) 6 (21) 0 (0)<br />
A 15 (79) 3 (16) 1 (5) 0 (0) .103<br />
B-C 14 (64) 1 (5) 2 (9) 5 (23)<br />
A 13 (68) 4 (21) 2 (11) 0 (0) .400<br />
B-C 15 (56) 3 (11) 3 (11) 6 (22)<br />
A 14 (74) 4 (21) 0 (0) 1 (5) .745<br />
B-C 14 (64) 5 (23) 1 (5) 2 (9)<br />
Note. * p .01.<br />
a Frequency <strong>and</strong> percentage of resp<strong>on</strong>ses. Variati<strong>on</strong> in number of resp<strong>on</strong>ses (range 41–47) is due to<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses being invalidated if no example was provided or example did not match resp<strong>on</strong>se. School A is<br />
compared against Schools B-C combined.<br />
(How often do you count the number of times<br />
you perform a task?), self-evaluating (How often<br />
do you compare how well you are doing<br />
now with how well you did in the past?), <strong>and</strong><br />
problem solving (How often do you solve problems<br />
by yourself at school, work, or home?)<br />
than did students attending Schools B-C combined.<br />
At the same time, similarities across<br />
schools were evident in examples of use of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills provided by students,<br />
as follows.<br />
Self-advocating occurrences (Questi<strong>on</strong> 10)<br />
reported by students across schools primarily<br />
related to defending themselves in social situati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
or from bullying. Examples included<br />
“When some<strong>on</strong>e says you did something <strong>and</strong><br />
you didn’t, you have to say ‘No,’ you didn’t”<br />
(School A); “Yeah, with bullies—two boys that<br />
I’m not even scared of—used to be a little girl<br />
but not now” (School B). Students’ examples<br />
of making choices by themselves (Questi<strong>on</strong><br />
11) generally related to daily life outside<br />
school, such as “I make choices to listen to my<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 9
TABLE 3<br />
Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> Skill Use<br />
CD” (School C). Self-reinforcing (Questi<strong>on</strong><br />
12) reportedly occurred in resp<strong>on</strong>se to both<br />
school (e.g., “When I did well <strong>and</strong> made the<br />
h<strong>on</strong>or roll, I told myself ‘Good job’” [School<br />
A]) <strong>and</strong> outside school events (e.g., “I say ‘Be<br />
cool’ when I did good playing soccer” [School<br />
C]). Students reported that they self-m<strong>on</strong>itored<br />
(Questi<strong>on</strong> 13) primarily when exercising<br />
“I count when I’m <strong>on</strong> a track—I got to do<br />
five laps” (School A) or engaging in commu-<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
School Never Sometimes Most of the time All of the time p<br />
9. How often do you set your own goals in school, not with your parents/guardians?<br />
(goal setting) .069<br />
A 13 (68) a<br />
3 (16) 2 (11) 1 (5)<br />
B-C 9 (36) 3 (12) 4 (16) 9 (36)<br />
10. How often do you speak up for yourself? (self-advocating) .002*<br />
A 11 (57) 2 (11) 2 (11) 4 (21)<br />
B-C 2 (7) 12 (44) 3 (11) 10 (37)<br />
11. How often do you make choices by yourself? (choice making) .003*<br />
A 8 (42) 8 (42) 2 (11) 1 (5)<br />
B-C 3 (12) 4 (16) 8 (32) 10 (40)<br />
12. How often do you tell or reward yourself that you did well when you finish a task?<br />
(self-reinforcing) .005*<br />
A 11 (58) 4 (21) 0 (0) 4 (21)<br />
B-C 3 (11) 8 (30) 4 (15) 12 (44)<br />
13. How often do you count the number of times you perform a task? (self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring) .002*<br />
A 16 (84) 3 (16) 0 (0) 0 (0)<br />
B-C 8 (30) 7 (26) 6 (22) 6 (22)<br />
14. How often do you tell yourself how to do a job or task? (self-instructing) .016<br />
A 11 (58) 6 (32) 1 (5) 1 (5)<br />
B-C 5 (19) 8 (31) 2 (8) 11 (42)<br />
15. How often do you compare how well you are doing now with how well you did in the past?<br />
(self-evaluating) .004*<br />
A 15 (79) 2 (11) 1 (5) 1 (5)<br />
B-C 7 (26) 5 (19) 4 (15) 11 (41)<br />
16. How often do you solve problems by yourself at school, work, or at home? (problem-solving) .002*<br />
A 9 (47) 8 (42) 2 (11) 0 (0)<br />
B-C 2 (8) 9 (36) 4 (16) 10 (40)<br />
17. How often do you make decisi<strong>on</strong>s for yourself? (decisi<strong>on</strong> making) .165<br />
A 7 (37) 7 (37) 2 (11) 3 (16)<br />
B-C 4 (15) 7 (27) 4 (15) 11 (42)<br />
Note. *p .01.<br />
a Frequency <strong>and</strong> percentage of resp<strong>on</strong>ses. Variati<strong>on</strong> in number of resp<strong>on</strong>ses (range 44–46) is due to<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses being invalidated if no example was provided or example did not match resp<strong>on</strong>se. School A is<br />
compared against Schools B-C combined.<br />
nity-based job training “I count the number<br />
of tables I wash” (School C). Self-evaluating<br />
(Questi<strong>on</strong> 15) was reported to occur in relati<strong>on</strong><br />
to academic or work performance (e.g.,<br />
“In the past I couldn’t read <strong>and</strong> write <strong>and</strong> now<br />
I can help people when they are sick or hurt”<br />
[School C]) <strong>and</strong> pers<strong>on</strong>al interacti<strong>on</strong>s (“I’m<br />
getting al<strong>on</strong>g with my family better now”<br />
[School B]). Problem-solving examples generally<br />
were in resp<strong>on</strong>se to outside school events,<br />
10 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
such as losing a house key (e.g., “My mom told<br />
me she’d leave the key under the trash can<br />
<strong>and</strong> it wasn’t there so I had to call my mom<br />
<strong>and</strong> she had to leave work” [School A]) or<br />
challenges at home (e.g., “When there are<br />
problems at home, it’s very hard to study during<br />
it. Had to ask Mom to help with sister”<br />
[School B]).<br />
Although findings for the remaining three<br />
skills (i.e., goal setting, self-instructing, decisi<strong>on</strong><br />
making) were not significantly different at the<br />
p .01 level (self-instructing was at p .05),<br />
School A participants reported never using<br />
these skills more frequently than did students<br />
in Schools B <strong>and</strong> C combined. For example,<br />
11 School A participants reported never selfinstructing,<br />
whereas 11 School B-C reported<br />
self-instructing all of the time (e.g., “Yeah, sometimes<br />
I do talk to myself, it’s a good idea <strong>and</strong><br />
learning strategy” [School B]). Self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills reported most frequently by<br />
School B-C students were self-advocating,<br />
choice making, self-reinforcing, <strong>and</strong> problem<br />
solving.<br />
Statistical analysis of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills.<br />
A two-tailed t-test (p .05) revealed a significant<br />
difference between means of the cumulative<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses to self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill<br />
items for School A <strong>and</strong> Schools B-C combined,<br />
t(44) 5.54, p .001. School A had a mean<br />
score of 5.89 (SD 4.50) whereas Schools B-C<br />
combined had a mean of 15.22 (SD 6.29),<br />
where never 0 <strong>and</strong> all of the time 3. The<br />
effect size was large (Cohen’s d 1.71).<br />
Post-school Goals<br />
When asked the open-ended questi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the<br />
SS-DS “What do you want to do when you<br />
graduate from high school?,” two-thirds of students<br />
across schools (n 30) indicated wanting<br />
to seek employment. Resp<strong>on</strong>ses included<br />
“Work in a grocery store putting things in a<br />
bag” (School A) <strong>and</strong> “I want to become a<br />
model <strong>and</strong> a fashi<strong>on</strong> designer, because I like<br />
to design prom dresses” (School C). Nine students<br />
cited post-sec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong> goals,<br />
primarily related to career training, such as<br />
“Go to technical school—do paint collisi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
custom painting” (School A) or “Go to college<br />
<strong>and</strong> graduate in culinary arts” (School B).<br />
Seven students indicated wanting to stay home<br />
<strong>and</strong>, in some cases, care for children, such as<br />
reported by a student from School B: “Stay<br />
home, keep my cousins.” Three students did<br />
not indicate any post-school goals.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
In this exploratory study, we examined the<br />
role of participati<strong>on</strong> in inclusive settings <strong>and</strong><br />
activities associated with active involvement<br />
in IEP activities <strong>and</strong> use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
strategies am<strong>on</strong>g high school students with<br />
severe intellectual disability. We included a<br />
populati<strong>on</strong> rarely participating in self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
investigati<strong>on</strong>s: students attending<br />
a high-poverty high school—many of whom<br />
were Black, Hispanic, or other ethnicities. Further,<br />
student interview data provided rich<br />
narrative findings to corroborate student selfreported<br />
use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills.<br />
Findings revealed significant differences<br />
in student participati<strong>on</strong> in general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong> activities across schools, which<br />
were associated, in turn, with level of selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill use. Students with severe<br />
intellectual disability who were primarily educated<br />
throughout the day in their special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms (School A) reported significantly<br />
less use of six of nine self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills than did School B-C counterparts<br />
who experienced significantly more opportunity<br />
for inclusi<strong>on</strong> in school <strong>and</strong> community.<br />
We also found significantly lower composite<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses <strong>on</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use. Student-reported<br />
IEP participati<strong>on</strong> was found to<br />
be low with no significant differences across<br />
schools. Most students across schools indicated<br />
wanting employment after high school<br />
versus post-sec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong>. Our findings<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tribute to the literature in several important<br />
ways, as follows.<br />
First, an empirical associati<strong>on</strong> has been established<br />
in the literature between indicators<br />
of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> participati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
IEP process <strong>and</strong> positive post-school outcomes,<br />
such as employment (Martorell et al.,<br />
2008). It is critical, therefore, to know what<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ents of transiti<strong>on</strong> programming promote<br />
the development of self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills <strong>and</strong> active involvement in educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programming. This questi<strong>on</strong> is particularly<br />
compelling in light of the chr<strong>on</strong>ically poor<br />
post-school outcomes faced by students with<br />
severe intellectual disability (e.g., unemploy-<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 11
ment, ec<strong>on</strong>omic dependence, segregati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
Newman, Wagner, Cameto, & Knokey, 2009).<br />
Researchers have examined the role of instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
in promoting students’ self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> IEP involvement (e.g., Cross et al.,<br />
1999); in c<strong>on</strong>trast, little is known about the<br />
influence of participati<strong>on</strong> in inclusive settings<br />
<strong>and</strong> activities (e.g., Shogren et al., 2010).<br />
We found that School A students participated<br />
in inclusive classes <strong>and</strong> school- <strong>and</strong><br />
community-based transiti<strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> significantly<br />
less than did students attending<br />
Schools B-C. Numerous studies have dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
the positive effects of both inclusive<br />
school envir<strong>on</strong>ments <strong>and</strong> community-based<br />
training <strong>on</strong> post-school outcomes, such as employment,<br />
postsec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> independent<br />
living (e.g., Cimera, 2010; Test et al.,<br />
2009). It is likely that attending school exclusively<br />
in a separate special educati<strong>on</strong> classroom,<br />
such as did 79% of School A participants<br />
(Table 1), <strong>and</strong> having very limited or<br />
no community-based instructi<strong>on</strong> (all School A<br />
participants), provided students little opportunity<br />
to independently make choices, solve<br />
problems, or speak up for themselves. As suggested<br />
by Wehmeyer <strong>and</strong> Metzler (1995), educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ments that are highly structured,<br />
restrictive, or protective typically do<br />
not provide opportunities for independent<br />
problem solving or decisi<strong>on</strong> making. When<br />
daily activities are totally predictable, students<br />
likely do not have the opportunity to develop<br />
the skills to resp<strong>on</strong>d independently to the<br />
ever-changing, unpredictable events <strong>and</strong> vicissitudes<br />
that comprise everyday life in inclusive<br />
school <strong>and</strong> community settings.<br />
In c<strong>on</strong>trast, inclusive envir<strong>on</strong>ments may<br />
present frequent challenges that can prompt<br />
independent performance <strong>and</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills. For example, the bus route that a<br />
student takes to a community-based job site<br />
may unexpectedly change, causing the student<br />
to have to problem-solve opti<strong>on</strong>s to get<br />
to work. Or when walking in the hall to her<br />
inclusive class without a teacher, a student<br />
must learn to prompt <strong>and</strong> reinforce herself to<br />
get to class <strong>on</strong> time. School A students in our<br />
study—who were already h<strong>and</strong>icapped by limited<br />
access to inclusive school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al envir<strong>on</strong>ments—reported significantly<br />
less use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills than<br />
did their counterparts experiencing more in-<br />
clusive educati<strong>on</strong>al envir<strong>on</strong>ments, suggesting<br />
that segregated settings can hinder self-determinati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Our findings suggest that the degree<br />
to which students are included in school<br />
<strong>and</strong> community may affect their opportunities<br />
to make choices, set pers<strong>on</strong>al goals, express<br />
preferences, <strong>and</strong> develop other self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills, as argued by others (e.g., Walker<br />
et al., 2011; Wehmeyer et al., 2007).<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, our study is important because it is<br />
<strong>on</strong>e of the few to examine self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> IEP participati<strong>on</strong> am<strong>on</strong>g ethnically <strong>and</strong><br />
racially diverse students with severe intellectual<br />
disability (Schools A-C), as well as those<br />
attending a failing, high-poverty high school<br />
(School A). Studies of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
IEP participati<strong>on</strong> have overwhelmingly included<br />
White, middle-class participants (e.g.,<br />
Carter et al., 2009). Further, rarely have highpoverty<br />
youth with severe intellectual disability<br />
(or any transiti<strong>on</strong>-age youth with severe<br />
disabilities, for that matter) been asked about<br />
their self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> IEP involvement,<br />
highlighting the need to include these students<br />
as study participants. Students attending<br />
high-poverty School A reported significantly<br />
less use of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills than<br />
School B-C students. They also spent significantly<br />
less time in general educati<strong>on</strong> classes<br />
<strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong> activities in school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
than did their School B-C counterparts.<br />
We cannot assume a relati<strong>on</strong> between highpoverty<br />
schools <strong>and</strong> lack of inclusi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
activities from these findings; however,<br />
limited resources typically associated with<br />
high-poverty envir<strong>on</strong>ments likely present challenges<br />
to providing inclusive activities in highpoverty<br />
schools. For example, lack of transportati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
job sites, <strong>and</strong> recreati<strong>on</strong>al facilities<br />
typically associated with high-poverty neighborhoods<br />
(Bart<strong>on</strong> & Coley, 2010) may severely<br />
limit community-based instructi<strong>on</strong> for<br />
students attending these schools. Likewise,<br />
limited numbers of paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als <strong>and</strong><br />
other school staff may prevent teachers from<br />
implementing job training sites <strong>on</strong> campus,<br />
such as in the cafeteria, school office, or sports<br />
facilities, because of lack of supervisory staff<br />
across dispersed training sites. If participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in inclusive activities in school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
relates to increased self-determinati<strong>on</strong>, as suggested<br />
by this study, the “deck may be stacked”<br />
against students with severe intellectual dis-<br />
12 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ability attending high-poverty schools. These<br />
students may be entering adult life a step<br />
behind their counterparts attending more<br />
affluent schools who may have had access to<br />
inclusi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> community-based transiti<strong>on</strong> experiences.<br />
Not <strong>on</strong>ly may post-school success<br />
be compromised, but self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
student-directed learning may be as well.<br />
As argued by Wehmeyer et al. (2011), poverty,<br />
segregati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> restrictiveness of setting<br />
may inhibit the development of individuals’<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong>, especially when coexisting<br />
with disability. When limited inclusi<strong>on</strong> is compounded<br />
with the lack of resources <strong>and</strong> opportunity<br />
for enriched <strong>and</strong> varied experiences<br />
traditi<strong>on</strong>ally associated with high-poverty envir<strong>on</strong>ments,<br />
development of self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills is likely to be hindered. C<strong>on</strong>sequently,<br />
researchers have cited the need to examine<br />
the effects of racial <strong>and</strong> ethnic marginalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> ec<strong>on</strong>omic status <strong>on</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
(e.g., Carter et al., 2009; Wehmeyer et al.,<br />
2011). This call is particularly timely c<strong>on</strong>sidering<br />
that by 2020, the majority of public school<br />
students is expected to be low-income <strong>and</strong> of<br />
color—as is already true in the South <strong>and</strong><br />
several western states (Nati<strong>on</strong>al Center for Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Statistics, 2006; Suitts, 2010).<br />
Third, low participati<strong>on</strong> in IEP activities was<br />
reported by students across Schools A-C. Although<br />
the majority of participants reported<br />
attending their IEP meetings (School A 58%;<br />
Schools B-C 71%), few students across schools<br />
reported ever leading their IEP meetings or<br />
knowing or evaluating their IEP goals. Comments<br />
of students who did report attending<br />
their IEP meetings suggested limited involvement<br />
(e.g., “I sit in them. They talk . . .”). Our<br />
findings are particularly disc<strong>on</strong>certing because<br />
not <strong>on</strong>ly is IEP participati<strong>on</strong> required<br />
by IDEA legislati<strong>on</strong>; it has been advocated<br />
since the 1990s as a means to improve student<br />
outcomes (e.g., Martin & Marshall, 1995).<br />
However, as observed by Martin, Van Dycke,<br />
Greene et al. (2006), active participati<strong>on</strong> in<br />
IEP meetings will not occur without instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In particular, students with severe intellectual<br />
disability <strong>and</strong> limited verbal skills are<br />
unlikely to state their goals, ask for feedback,<br />
<strong>and</strong> other recommended acti<strong>on</strong>s at their IEP<br />
meetings (e.g., Martin et al., 1997) without<br />
c<strong>on</strong>siderable instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> support. Our<br />
findings suggest, however, that instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> support for IEP participati<strong>on</strong> may be<br />
rare across even affluent schools that provide<br />
greater opportunity for inclusi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> community<br />
experiences.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, we found few differences across<br />
schools with respect to students’ post-school<br />
goals or views toward pers<strong>on</strong>al decisi<strong>on</strong> making.<br />
Most students (30 of 47) cited employment<br />
as a post-school goal, primarily in entrylevel<br />
jobs, such as bagging groceries. Only<br />
nine menti<strong>on</strong>ed postsec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong> as a<br />
goal <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly in the c<strong>on</strong>text of technical training<br />
(e.g., auto body work). Over 20% (n 10)<br />
of students either wanted to stay home or<br />
expressed no post-school goal. Such limited<br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s for adult life likely show that,<br />
despite some transiti<strong>on</strong> programming—especially<br />
at Schools B-C—little career explorati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> planning may have occurred even am<strong>on</strong>g<br />
the more inclusive schools. Lack of career<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> may also explain students’ seeming<br />
ambivalence about having decisi<strong>on</strong>s made<br />
by parents or teachers at an age when most<br />
adolescents would be less than favorable toward<br />
pers<strong>on</strong>al decisi<strong>on</strong>s made by others.<br />
Decisi<strong>on</strong>-making skills are best taught within<br />
the framework of having actual opportunities<br />
to make relevant life choices (Walker et al.,<br />
2011), which likely were absent in participants’<br />
curricula.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Future Research<br />
Our findings also highlight limitati<strong>on</strong>s of our<br />
study <strong>and</strong> directi<strong>on</strong>s for future research. First,<br />
we did not directly observe students’ participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in school- or community-based activities<br />
across schools. Therefore, we do not know<br />
if opportunity to make choices <strong>and</strong> so forth<br />
actually occurred more frequently in inclusive<br />
school <strong>and</strong> community settings. We do c<strong>on</strong>tend<br />
that stimulus variati<strong>on</strong> increases when<br />
students routinely enter different envir<strong>on</strong>ments<br />
comprised of ever-changing dem<strong>and</strong>s,<br />
pers<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> features to which students must<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>d. Studies in residential envir<strong>on</strong>ments<br />
have shown that simply moving to a less restrictive<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ment can increase opportunities<br />
to choose (e.g., Wehmeyer & Bolding,<br />
2001) <strong>and</strong> that both opportunities to choose<br />
<strong>and</strong> social inclusiveness of the envir<strong>on</strong>ment<br />
relate to level of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> (e.g.,<br />
Wehmeyer & Garner, 2003). Restrictiveness<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 13
of setting may serve as a mediating variable<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistent with c<strong>on</strong>temporary social-ecological<br />
views of envir<strong>on</strong>mental factors that enhance<br />
or inhibit self-determinati<strong>on</strong> (e.g.,<br />
Walker et al., 2011; Wehmeyer et al., 2011).<br />
Future researchers should develop means to<br />
observe both inclusiveness of settings <strong>and</strong> activities<br />
<strong>and</strong> occurrences of actual self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
use (e.g., when given the opportunity<br />
to choose lunch items in the cafeteria, a student<br />
exercises choice either independently or<br />
with assistance).<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, we did not investigate the psychometric<br />
properties of the SS-DS, the instrument<br />
we developed to identify student use of selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills. Although we did establish<br />
a Cr<strong>on</strong>bach’s alpha of .82 for the SS-DS<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g 54 resp<strong>on</strong>dents with severe intellectual<br />
disability, indicating a high level of internal<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistency am<strong>on</strong>g items, the validity <strong>and</strong> reliability<br />
of the instrument were not dem<strong>on</strong>strated.<br />
Drawing items extensively from the<br />
literature, as we did when we developed the<br />
instrument, however, does provide some evidence<br />
of its c<strong>on</strong>tent validity. Developing a<br />
psychometrically sound self-report instrument<br />
to assess students’ self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use<br />
would c<strong>on</strong>tribute substantially to the research<br />
base. We do hold, however, that the SS-DS was<br />
sufficient with respect to the exploratory nature<br />
of this study.<br />
Third, we did not report or c<strong>on</strong>trol for IQ<br />
of participants, although all students met<br />
our criteria for <strong>and</strong> were identified by their<br />
schools as having severe intellectual disability<br />
based <strong>on</strong> assessment data in their school records.<br />
It could be that variati<strong>on</strong> in students’<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses related to unreported differences in<br />
cognitive skills. However, researchers report<br />
that IQ is not a str<strong>on</strong>g predictor of level of<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong>; rather, IQ is a str<strong>on</strong>ger<br />
predictor of restrictiveness of placement (e.g.,<br />
Wehmeyer & Garner, 2003). We also compared<br />
schools by demographic characteristics<br />
(e.g., free <strong>and</strong> reduced lunch status) <strong>and</strong> inclusiveness<br />
of participants’ activities. However,<br />
we did not address or c<strong>on</strong>trol for variables<br />
such as family support, teacher quality, or<br />
community resources that could have influenced<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> behavior. It could<br />
be that schools differed <strong>on</strong> many additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
characteristics that influenced self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill use reported by students. Future<br />
studies would benefit from an exp<strong>and</strong>ed array<br />
of variables that are systematically measured<br />
<strong>and</strong> accounted for when comparing studentreported<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skill use across<br />
settings <strong>and</strong> schools.<br />
Fourth, we had <strong>on</strong>ly 47 participants in our<br />
study representing three high schools within<br />
<strong>on</strong>e urban school district. Although we purposely<br />
selected three schools within the district<br />
that were diverse geographically <strong>and</strong><br />
ec<strong>on</strong>omically, generalizability of findings is<br />
limited. Having more participants across<br />
school settings <strong>and</strong> additi<strong>on</strong>al studentreported<br />
examples of self-determinati<strong>on</strong> behavior,<br />
such as we requested from students to<br />
validate affirmative resp<strong>on</strong>ses, however, would<br />
have strengthened the argument for generalizability<br />
of findings. Future research efforts<br />
should address study limitati<strong>on</strong>s by incorporating<br />
direct observati<strong>on</strong> of opportunities for<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> across school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
settings; developing a psychometrically<br />
sound assessment of student self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill use; c<strong>on</strong>trolling for IQ <strong>and</strong> other<br />
participant, school, <strong>and</strong> community characteristics;<br />
<strong>and</strong> exp<strong>and</strong>ing participant pools <strong>and</strong><br />
envir<strong>on</strong>mental settings.<br />
Implicati<strong>on</strong>s for Practice<br />
Findings from this exploratory study suggest<br />
that students with severe intellectual disability<br />
with limited access to inclusive school <strong>and</strong><br />
community experiences are likely to experience<br />
arrested development in self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills compared to peers experiencing<br />
more inclusive educati<strong>on</strong>al opportunities. On<br />
its most basic level, this study highlights the<br />
need to increase inclusiveness of settings <strong>and</strong><br />
experiences available to students with severe<br />
intellectual disability to foster students’ selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> post-school success. This<br />
recommendati<strong>on</strong> may especially apply to students<br />
attending high-poverty schools where<br />
opportunities for inclusi<strong>on</strong> in school <strong>and</strong> community<br />
characteristically are limited. Relating<br />
inclusiveness of school <strong>and</strong> community settings<br />
to students’ post-school outcomes is an<br />
area warranting further investigati<strong>on</strong>, particularly<br />
in light of the limited postschool employment<br />
<strong>and</strong> postsec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong> experiences<br />
reported for students from low-income<br />
14 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
households as compared to those from more<br />
affluent homes (Newman et al., 2011).<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, findings illustrate the need to<br />
instruct <strong>and</strong> support students across all<br />
schools in acquiring IEP participati<strong>on</strong> skills.<br />
As argued by Shogren et al. (2007), we need to<br />
have more, not fewer, opportunities <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
for those who traditi<strong>on</strong>ally have had<br />
restricted opportunities to learn <strong>and</strong> practice<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> educati<strong>on</strong>al planning<br />
skills (i.e., students with severe intellectual disability<br />
<strong>and</strong> those who are low-income). These<br />
students can learn to make choices, self-advocate,<br />
<strong>and</strong> direct their own performance (e.g.,<br />
Wehmeyer et al., 2007). We need to provide<br />
the opportunity, instructi<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> support for<br />
them to do so.<br />
References<br />
Agran M., & Hughes, C. (2008). Asking student<br />
input: Students’ opini<strong>on</strong>s regarding their individualized<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> program involvement. Career<br />
Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 31, 69–76.<br />
doi: 10.1177/0885728808317657<br />
Agran, M., Snow, K., & Swaner, J. (1999). Teacher<br />
percepti<strong>on</strong>s of self-determinati<strong>on</strong>: Benefits, characteristics,<br />
strategies. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in<br />
Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
34, 293–301.<br />
Allen, S. K., Smith, A. C., Test, D. W., Flowers, C., &<br />
Woods, W. M. (2001). The effects of Self-Directed<br />
IEP <strong>on</strong> student participati<strong>on</strong> in IEP meetings.<br />
Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 4,<br />
107–120.<br />
Balfanz, R., & Legters, N. E. (2004). Locating the<br />
dropout crisis: Which high schools produce the<br />
nati<strong>on</strong>’s dropouts? In G. Orfield, (Ed.), Dropouts<br />
in America: C<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>ting the graduati<strong>on</strong> crisis (pp.<br />
57–84). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Press.<br />
Bart<strong>on</strong>, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2010). The Black-White<br />
achievement gap: When progress stopped. Princet<strong>on</strong>, NJ:<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al Testing Service. Retrieved from http:<br />
//www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICBWGAP.<br />
pdf<br />
Benz, M. R., Lindstrom, L. E., & Yovanoff, P. (2000).<br />
Improving graduati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> employment outcomes<br />
of students with disabilities: Predictive factors<br />
<strong>and</strong> student perspectives. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
66, 509–529.<br />
Carter, E. W., Owens, L., Trainor, A. A., Sun, Y., &<br />
Swedeen, B. (2009). Self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills <strong>and</strong><br />
opportunities of adolescents with severe intellectual<br />
<strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities. American Jour-<br />
nal <strong>on</strong> Intellectual <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 114,<br />
179–192. doi: 10.1352/1944-7558-114.3.179<br />
Chambers, C. R., Wehmeyer, M. L., Saito, Y., Lida,<br />
K. M., Lee, Y., & Singh, V. (2007). Self-determinati<strong>on</strong>:<br />
What do we know? Where do we go?<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 15, 3–15. doi: 10.1080/<br />
09362830709336922<br />
Cimera, R. E. (2010). Can community-based high<br />
school transiti<strong>on</strong> programs improve the cost-efficiency<br />
of supported employment? Career Development<br />
for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 33, 4–12. doi:<br />
10.1177/0885728809346959<br />
Cross, T., Cooke, N. L., Wood, W. M., & Test, D. W.<br />
(1999). Comparis<strong>on</strong> of the effects of MAPS <strong>and</strong><br />
ChoiceMaker <strong>on</strong> students’ self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 34, 499–510.<br />
Fowler, C. H., K<strong>on</strong>rad, M., Walker, A. R., Test,<br />
D. W., & Wood, W. M. (2007). Self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>s’ effects <strong>on</strong> the academic performance<br />
of students with developmental disabilities.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
42, 270–285.<br />
Hoffman, A., & Field, S. (1995). Promoting selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
through effective curriculum development.<br />
Interventi<strong>on</strong> in School <strong>and</strong> Clinic, 30,<br />
134–141.<br />
Hughes, C. (1992). Teaching self-instructi<strong>on</strong> utilizing<br />
multiple exemplars to produce generalized<br />
problem-solving by individuals with severe mental<br />
retardati<strong>on</strong>. American Journal <strong>on</strong> Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
97, 302–314.<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act (IDEA)<br />
Amendments of 1997, PL 105-17, 20 U.S.C.<br />
§§ 1400 et seq.<br />
Kishi, G., Teelucksingh, B., Zollers, N., Park-Lee, S.,<br />
& Meyer, L. (1988). Daily decisi<strong>on</strong>-making in<br />
community residences: A social comparis<strong>on</strong> of<br />
adults with <strong>and</strong> without mental retardati<strong>on</strong>. American<br />
Journal <strong>on</strong> Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong>, 92, 430–435.<br />
Lachapelle, Y., Wehmeyer, M. L., Haelewyck, M. C.,<br />
Curbois, Y., Keith, K. D., Schalock, R., & Walsh,<br />
P. N. (2005). The relati<strong>on</strong>ship between quality<br />
of life <strong>and</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong>: An internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49,<br />
740–744. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00743.x<br />
Martin, J. E., Greene, B. A., & Borl<strong>and</strong>, B. J. (2004).<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>dary students’ involvement in their IEP<br />
meetings: Administrators’ percepti<strong>on</strong>s. Career Development<br />
for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 27, 177–188.<br />
Martin, J. E., & Marshall, L. H. (1995). Choice-<br />
Maker: A comprehensive self-determinati<strong>on</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
program. Interventi<strong>on</strong> in School <strong>and</strong> Clinic,<br />
30, 147–156.<br />
Martin, J. E., Marshall, L. H., Maxs<strong>on</strong>, L. M., &<br />
Jerman, P. L. (1997). The Self-Directed IEP. L<strong>on</strong>gm<strong>on</strong>t,<br />
CO: Sopris West.<br />
Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Christensen, W. R.,<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 15
Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., & Lovett, D. L.<br />
(2006). Increasing student participati<strong>on</strong> in IEP<br />
meetings: Establishing the Self-Directed IEP as an<br />
evidence-based practice. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 72,<br />
299–316.<br />
Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Greene, B. A., Gardner,<br />
J. E., Christensen, W. R., Woods, L. L., &<br />
Lovett, D. L. (2006). Direct observati<strong>on</strong> of teacher-directed<br />
IEP meetings: Establishing the need<br />
for student IEP meeting instructi<strong>on</strong>. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 72, 187–200.<br />
Martorell, A., Gutierrez-Recacha, P., Perda, A., &<br />
Ayuso-Mateos, J. L. (2008). Identificati<strong>on</strong> of pers<strong>on</strong>al<br />
factors that determine work outcome for<br />
adults with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual<br />
Disability Research, 52, 1091–1101.<br />
Mas<strong>on</strong>, C. Y., McGahee-Kovac, M., Johns<strong>on</strong>, L., &<br />
Stillerman, S. (2002). Implementing student-led<br />
IEPs: Student participati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> teacher reacti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 25,<br />
171–192.<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al Center for Educati<strong>on</strong> Statistics. (2006).<br />
Characteristics of the 100 largest public elementary <strong>and</strong><br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary school districts in the United States: 2003–04<br />
statistical analysis report. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: U.S. Department<br />
of Educati<strong>on</strong>. Retrieved from http://<br />
nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006329.pdf<br />
Newman, L., Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Knokey,<br />
A.-M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth<br />
with disabilities up to 4 years after high school. A report<br />
of findings from the Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al.<br />
Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/reports/<br />
2009_04/nlts2_report_2009_04_complete.pdf<br />
Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A.-M., Marder,<br />
C., Nagle, K., Shaver, D., & Wei, X. (2011). The<br />
post-high school outcomes of young adults up to 8 years<br />
after high school. A report from the Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal<br />
Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA:<br />
SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al. Retrieved from http://www.<br />
nlts2.org/reports/2011_09_02/nlts2_report_2011_<br />
09_02_complete.pdf<br />
Powers, L. E., Turner, A., Westwood, D., Matuszewski,<br />
J., Wils<strong>on</strong>, R., & Phillips, A. (2001). TAKE<br />
CHARGE for the Future: A c<strong>on</strong>trolled field-test of<br />
a model to promote student involvement in transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
planning. Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Individuals, 24, 89–104.<br />
Roberts<strong>on</strong>, J., Emers<strong>on</strong>, E., Hatt<strong>on</strong>, C., Gregory, N.,<br />
Kessissoglou, S., Hallam, A., & Walsh, P. N.<br />
(2001). Envir<strong>on</strong>mental opportunities <strong>and</strong> supports<br />
for exercising self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in community-based<br />
residential settings. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 22, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>7–502. doi: 10.1016/<br />
S0891-4222(01)00085-3<br />
Shogren, K. A., Bovaird, J. A., Palmer, S. B., &<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L. (2010). Locus of c<strong>on</strong>trol orientati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
in students with intellectual disability,<br />
learning disabilities, <strong>and</strong> no disabilities: A latent<br />
growth curve analysis. Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 35, 80–92.<br />
Shogren, K. A., Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B.,<br />
Soukup, J. H., Little, T. D., Garner, N., & Lawrence,<br />
M. (2007). Examining individual <strong>and</strong> ecological<br />
predictors of the self-determinati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
students with disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 73,<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>8–509.<br />
Suitts, S. T. (2010). A new diverse majority: Students of<br />
color in the South’s public schools. Atlanta: Southern<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Foundati<strong>on</strong>. Retrieved from www.<br />
southerneducati<strong>on</strong>.org<br />
Test, D. W., Mas<strong>on</strong>, C., Hughes, C., K<strong>on</strong>rad, M.,<br />
Neale, M., & Wood, W. M. (2004). Student involvement<br />
in individualized educati<strong>on</strong> program<br />
meetings. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 70, 391–412.<br />
Test, D. W., Mazzotti, V. L., Mustain, A. L., Fowler,<br />
C. H., Kortering, L., & Kohler, P. (2009). Evidence-based<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary transiti<strong>on</strong> predictors for<br />
improving post-school outcomes for students<br />
with disabilities. Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Individuals, 32, 160-181. doi: 10.1177/<br />
0885728809346960<br />
Walker, H. M., Calkins, C., Wehmeyer, M. L.,<br />
Walker, L., Bac<strong>on</strong>, A., Palmer, S. B., & Johns<strong>on</strong>,<br />
D. R. (2011). A social-ecological approach to promote<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong>. Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 19, 6–18.<br />
doi: 10.1080/09362835.2011.537220<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Abery, B. H., Zhang, D., Ward, K.,<br />
Willis, D., Hossain, W. A., & Walker, H. M. (2011).<br />
Pers<strong>on</strong>al self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> moderating variables<br />
that impact efforts to promote self-determinati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 19, 19–30. doi: 10.1080/<br />
09362835.2011.537225<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Agran, M., & Hughes, C. (2000).<br />
A nati<strong>on</strong>al survey of teachers’ promoti<strong>on</strong> of selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> student-directed learning.<br />
Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 34, 58–68. doi:<br />
10.1177/002246690003400201<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Agran, M., Hughes, C., Martin,<br />
J. E., Mithaug, D. E., & Palmer, S. B. (2007).<br />
Promoting self-determinati<strong>on</strong> in students with developmental<br />
disabilities. New York: Guilford.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Bolding, N. (2001). Enhanced<br />
self-determinati<strong>on</strong> of adults with intellectual disability<br />
as an outcome of moving to communitybased<br />
work or living envir<strong>on</strong>ments. Journal of<br />
Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 371-383. doi:<br />
10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00342.x<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Garner, N. W. (2003). The<br />
impact of pers<strong>on</strong>al characteristics of people with<br />
intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental disability <strong>on</strong> selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> aut<strong>on</strong>omous functi<strong>on</strong>ing.<br />
Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
16, 255-265. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-31<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>.2003.00161.x<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Kelchner, K. (1995). The Arc’s<br />
Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> Scale: Procedural Guidelines. Ar-<br />
16 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
lingt<strong>on</strong>, TX: The Arc. Retrieved from http://<br />
www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED441322.pdf<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Meltzer, C. A. (1995). How<br />
self-determined are people with mental retardati<strong>on</strong>?<br />
The Nati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>sumer Survey. Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
33, 111–119.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Palmer, S. B. (2003). Adult<br />
outcomes for students with cognitive disabilities<br />
three years after high school: The impact of selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 38, 131–144.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., Soukup, J. H.,<br />
Garner, N. W., & Lawrence, M. (2007). Selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> student transiti<strong>on</strong> planning<br />
knowledge <strong>and</strong> skills: Predicting involvement.<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 15, 31–44. doi: 10.1080/<br />
09362830709336924<br />
Wolman, J. M., Campeau, P. L., DuBois, P. A., Mithaug,<br />
D. E., & Stolarski, V. S. (1994). AIR Self-<br />
Determinati<strong>on</strong> Scale <strong>and</strong> user guide. Palo Alto, CA:<br />
American Institutes for Research.<br />
Zhang, D. (2001a). Self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> inclusi<strong>on</strong>:<br />
Are students with mild mental retardati<strong>on</strong><br />
more self-determined in regular classrooms? Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 36, 357–362.<br />
Zhang, D. (2001b). The effect of Next S.T.E.P. instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong> the self-determinati<strong>on</strong> skills of high school<br />
students with learning disabilities. Career Development<br />
for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 24, 121–132.<br />
Received: 15 December 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 15 February 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 20 June 2012<br />
Student Self-Determinati<strong>on</strong> / 17
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 18–30<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
General Educati<strong>on</strong> Teachers’ Goals <strong>and</strong> Expectati<strong>on</strong>s for their<br />
Included Students with Mild <strong>and</strong> Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
David Lansing Camer<strong>on</strong><br />
University of Agder<br />
Bryan G. Cook<br />
University of Hawaii at Manoa<br />
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine general educati<strong>on</strong> teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for their<br />
included students with mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities. Participants were seven inclusive classroom teachers who<br />
were interviewed about their goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s regarding <strong>on</strong>e of their included students with a mild<br />
disability <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e of their included students with a severe disability. Teachers described their primary goals for<br />
students with severe disabilities to be in the area of social development <strong>and</strong> reported that academic performance<br />
for these children was of little relevance. For children with mild disabilities, goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s focused <strong>on</strong><br />
classroom <strong>and</strong> behavior skills, academic performance, <strong>and</strong> improved self-c<strong>on</strong>fidence. Findings are c<strong>on</strong>sidered in<br />
relati<strong>on</strong> to a model of differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s (Cook, 2001; Cook & Semmel, 2000), which suggests that<br />
teachers’ attitudes towards students c<strong>on</strong>form to their percepti<strong>on</strong>s of the obviousness of the child’s disability.<br />
The prevailing view am<strong>on</strong>g many parents, educators,<br />
<strong>and</strong> policymakers is that the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classroom is the preferred placement<br />
for students with disabilities (Coster &<br />
Haltiwanger, 2004; Fergus<strong>on</strong>, 2008; Marks,<br />
Schrader, & Levine, 1999). In fact, it seems<br />
that the debate over inclusi<strong>on</strong> has largely<br />
shifted from a discussi<strong>on</strong> about whether students<br />
with disabilities should be served in general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> settings to a focus <strong>on</strong> how best<br />
to implement inclusive practices effectively<br />
<strong>and</strong> provide appropriate access to the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum (Ford, Davern, &<br />
Schnorr, 2001; Soukup, Wehmeyer, Bashinski,<br />
& Bovaird, 2007). Initially, growth in inclusive<br />
placements occurred primarily for students<br />
with mild disabilities such as learning disabilities<br />
<strong>and</strong> behavioral disorders. However, in<br />
recent years schools have also experienced a<br />
dramatic increase in the percentage of time<br />
that children with severe <strong>and</strong> profound disabilities<br />
spend in general educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms<br />
(United States Department of Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
[USDOE,] 2006). A significant c<strong>on</strong>sequence of<br />
this expansi<strong>on</strong> is that general educati<strong>on</strong> teach-<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to David Lansing Camer<strong>on</strong>, Department<br />
of Educati<strong>on</strong>, University of Agder, Service<br />
Box 422, 4604 Kristians<strong>and</strong>, NORWAY. Email:<br />
david.l.camer<strong>on</strong>@uia.no<br />
ers have been required to take <strong>on</strong> greater resp<strong>on</strong>sibility<br />
for educating students with mild,<br />
moderate, <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities al<strong>on</strong>gside students<br />
without disabilities.<br />
Advocates for inclusi<strong>on</strong> argue that both students<br />
with disabilities <strong>and</strong> their n<strong>on</strong>disabled<br />
peers benefit from integrated envir<strong>on</strong>ments<br />
(Agran & Alpers, 2000; Hollowood, Salisbury,<br />
Rainforth, & Palombaro, 1994), yet they also<br />
acknowledge that what occurs for students<br />
with severe disabilities in general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
settings is very different from what occurs for<br />
students with mild disabilities or typically developing<br />
students (Giangreco & Broer, 2005;<br />
Hollowood et al.). Traditi<strong>on</strong>ally, goals for students<br />
with severe disabilities have focused <strong>on</strong><br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al, vocati<strong>on</strong>al, <strong>and</strong> social skills (Westling<br />
& Fox, 2008; Soukup, Wehmeyer, Bashinski,<br />
& Bovaird, 2007). However, legal m<strong>and</strong>ates<br />
now require that all students, including<br />
those with severe disabilities, have access to<br />
the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum (IDEA,<br />
2004). Thus, inclusive classroom teachers today<br />
are faced with the challenging tasks of<br />
determining (a) which aspects of the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum are appropriate for<br />
which students; (b) how <strong>and</strong> when to provide<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
to different students; <strong>and</strong> (c) how <strong>and</strong><br />
when to address the functi<strong>on</strong>al, behavioral,<br />
<strong>and</strong> social goals of their included students.<br />
18 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Teachers’ approaches to these tasks are clearly<br />
related to the goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s that they<br />
hold for their students.<br />
The importance of setting goals <strong>and</strong> holding<br />
high expectati<strong>on</strong>s for improving learning<br />
outcomes has been dem<strong>on</strong>strated in numerous<br />
studies (e.g., Babad, 1998; Brophy, 1986;<br />
Good & Weinstein, 1986; Grahm, MacArthur,<br />
Schwartz, & Page-Voth, 1992; Miller & Kelley,<br />
1994; Page-Voth & Grahm, 1999; Rubie-Davies,<br />
Peters<strong>on</strong>, Irving, Widdows<strong>on</strong>, & Dix<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2006; Shilts, Horowitz, & Townsend, 2004;<br />
Weinstein, 2002). The assumpti<strong>on</strong> underlying<br />
these findings is that there is a direct relati<strong>on</strong>ship<br />
between the goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s held<br />
by teachers <strong>and</strong> their behaviors towards individual<br />
students. This is undoubtedly the rati<strong>on</strong>ale<br />
behind the use of measurable goals <strong>and</strong><br />
objectives in Individual Educati<strong>on</strong> Programs<br />
(IEP), which are seen as a cornerst<strong>on</strong>e of<br />
effective special educati<strong>on</strong> practice.<br />
The process by which teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong><br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s affect the performance of students<br />
with disabilities is further clarified by<br />
research <strong>on</strong> teacher efficacy (e.g., Brownell &<br />
Pajares, 1999; Page-Voth & Graham, 1999;<br />
Ruble, Usher, & McGrew, 2011). This body of<br />
research draws largely <strong>on</strong> the tenets of B<strong>and</strong>ura’s<br />
(1986) social cognitive theory <strong>and</strong> the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>struct of self-efficacy. Simply stated, selfefficacy<br />
suggests that, “individuals pursue activities<br />
<strong>and</strong> situati<strong>on</strong>s in which they feel competent<br />
<strong>and</strong> avoid situati<strong>on</strong>s in which they<br />
doubt their capability to perform successfully”<br />
(Brownell & Pajares, 1999, p. 154). Research<br />
examining teacher efficacy with respect to inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
has found that general educators who<br />
believe that they are successful in teaching<br />
children with disabilities are more willing to<br />
include those students in their classrooms <strong>and</strong><br />
direct more teaching effort towards included<br />
students than teachers who feel less successful<br />
in this area (Asht<strong>on</strong> & Webb, 1986; Brownell<br />
& Pajares, 1999). A logical extensi<strong>on</strong> of this<br />
reas<strong>on</strong>ing is that teachers will be more likely<br />
to set goals <strong>and</strong> hold expectati<strong>on</strong>s for their<br />
included students in areas where they feel<br />
c<strong>on</strong>fident in their own ability to help students<br />
achieve.<br />
Despite c<strong>on</strong>siderable attenti<strong>on</strong> devoted to<br />
the need to differentiate goals for included<br />
students with disabilities (Baker & Zigm<strong>on</strong>d,<br />
1995; Carter & Hughes, 2006; Vaughn,<br />
Hughes, Moody, & Elbaum, 2001; Vaugh &<br />
Linan-Thomps<strong>on</strong>, 2003), little is known about<br />
how teachers actually plan <strong>and</strong> set goals for<br />
students whose learning characteristics differ<br />
meaningfully. However, several investigati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
have c<strong>on</strong>sidered teachers’ percepti<strong>on</strong>s regarding<br />
the goals of inclusi<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
<strong>and</strong> without disabilities in general. For example,<br />
Carter <strong>and</strong> Hughes (2006) studied administrators,<br />
general educators, special educators,<br />
<strong>and</strong> paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als’ percepti<strong>on</strong>s regarding<br />
the inclusi<strong>on</strong> of students with severe disabilities<br />
in 11 high schools. C<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous<br />
research (Agran & Alper, 2000; Fisher &<br />
Meyer, 2002; Kennedy, Shukla, & Fryxell,<br />
1997), they found that teachers perceived social<br />
outcomes to be the most important benefit<br />
of inclusi<strong>on</strong> for students with disabilities.<br />
Although studies such as these suggest that<br />
teachers place greater emphasis <strong>on</strong> the social<br />
benefits of inclusi<strong>on</strong> as compared to other<br />
curricular areas, observati<strong>on</strong>al research indicates<br />
that the vast majority of instructi<strong>on</strong> for<br />
students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms<br />
tends to be related to academic c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
(Camer<strong>on</strong>, Cook, & Tankersley, 2011; Helmstetter,<br />
Curry, Brennan, & Samps<strong>on</strong>-Saul,<br />
1998).<br />
The model of differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s (see<br />
Cook, 2001; Cook & Semmel, 2000), which<br />
draws <strong>on</strong> aspects of attributi<strong>on</strong> theory<br />
(Weiner, 1979) <strong>and</strong> social comparis<strong>on</strong> processes<br />
(Festinger, 1954), holds that readily apparent<br />
external cues as to the presence of a<br />
disability impact teachers’ expectati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong><br />
feelings towards students with disabilities. The<br />
model suggests that teachers hold typical expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for students with mild disabilities<br />
(e.g., learning disabilities, behavioral disorders)<br />
because these “hidden” disabilities provide<br />
no clear indicator as to the presence of a<br />
disability. In essence, teachers treat students<br />
with mild disabilities much like their n<strong>on</strong>disabled<br />
peers because they look just like them.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>versely, teachers may be more likely to<br />
adjust their expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students with severe<br />
disabilities because their disabilities are<br />
“obvious” <strong>and</strong> provide a clear signal to teachers<br />
that their abilities are different from others.<br />
The model provides a possible explanati<strong>on</strong><br />
for findings that students with mild<br />
disabilities such as learning disabilities <strong>and</strong><br />
behavioral disorders are more often rejected<br />
Teachers’ Goals / 19
y teachers than students with more severe<br />
disabilities, despite the increased teaching dem<strong>and</strong>s<br />
that are likely to accompany students<br />
with severe disabilities in inclusive classrooms<br />
(Cook, 2001; Cook & Camer<strong>on</strong>, 2010).<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, the model of differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
suggests that in c<strong>on</strong>trast to children<br />
with mild disabilities, inclusive teachers may<br />
be less likely to perceive the poor performance<br />
of students with severe disabilities to be<br />
a c<strong>on</strong>sequence of their own teaching effort<br />
(Cook, 2004). Thus, general educati<strong>on</strong> teachers<br />
may c<strong>on</strong>clude that they have little to offer<br />
included students with severe disabilities <strong>and</strong><br />
set goals for these students that are unreas<strong>on</strong>ably<br />
low with respect to students’ actual potential.<br />
With respect to students with mild disabilities,<br />
teachers may set goals <strong>and</strong> expect<br />
improvement in academic areas that are c<strong>on</strong>sistent<br />
with those held for modal students,<br />
assuming that if the child just “tried harder”<br />
then he or she could perform as well as n<strong>on</strong>disabled<br />
students.<br />
Several studies have found a c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> between<br />
teachers’ attitudes <strong>and</strong> the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
effort that teachers direct towards students<br />
with diverse learning <strong>and</strong> behavioral characteristics<br />
(Brophy & Good, 1986; Cook & Camer<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2010; Good & Brophy, 1972; Jordan,<br />
Lindsay, & Stanovich, 1997; Ruble, Usher, &<br />
McGrew, 2011). Moreover, ample evidence indicates<br />
that the goals that teachers set for<br />
students have a clear <strong>and</strong> profound effect <strong>on</strong><br />
student performance (Christens<strong>on</strong>, Ysseldyke,<br />
& Thurlow, 1989; Doherty & Hilberg, 2007;<br />
Fuchs, Fuchs, & Deno, 1985; Hattie & Timperley,<br />
2007). The purpose of this study was to<br />
explore the goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> teachers hold for their included<br />
students with mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities <strong>and</strong><br />
to examine how these intenti<strong>on</strong>s differ by student<br />
group.<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
We began the process of selecting participants<br />
by c<strong>on</strong>tacting special educati<strong>on</strong> administrators<br />
from local school districts in the regi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
northeast Ohio. Administrators were asked to<br />
identify schools that practiced inclusi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
whose faculty would be willing to participate<br />
in the study. We then met with principals <strong>and</strong><br />
teachers from nine schools, briefly observed<br />
their programs, <strong>and</strong> discussed the study with<br />
potential participants. After identifying general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> teachers who taught classes in<br />
which students with both mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities<br />
were included, we asked <strong>on</strong>e general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> teacher from each of the schools to<br />
participate in the study. Two of these teachers<br />
were unable to participate. Each of the remaining<br />
teachers represented a different<br />
school, including five elementary <strong>and</strong> two<br />
middle schools, ranging in size from 333 to<br />
980 students. All seven teachers interviewed in<br />
this study comprise a subsample of participants<br />
from an investigati<strong>on</strong> reported by Camer<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Cook, <strong>and</strong> Tankersley (2011).<br />
The sample comprised two 3 rd grade teachers<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e teacher from grades 1, 2, 5, 6, <strong>and</strong><br />
8. Participants had an average of 8.7 years of<br />
teaching experience <strong>and</strong> between 1 to 16<br />
years of experience teaching in classrooms in<br />
which students with disabilities were included<br />
(M 6.6 years). Four teachers reported having<br />
between 5 <strong>and</strong> 9 years of experience teaching<br />
in inclusive classrooms. One teacher had<br />
taught in an inclusive classroom for 16 years,<br />
<strong>and</strong> two teachers had less than 2 years of<br />
experience teaching in inclusive classrooms.<br />
All of the teachers were female <strong>and</strong> reported<br />
their race as Caucasian. Each teacher was resp<strong>on</strong>sible<br />
for a separate classroom in which<br />
average daily attendance ranged from 16 to 25<br />
students. N<strong>on</strong>e of the classrooms were cotaught<br />
with other teachers. However, there<br />
were often other educati<strong>on</strong>al professi<strong>on</strong>als, including<br />
assistants <strong>and</strong> special educati<strong>on</strong> teachers,<br />
present in these classrooms <strong>on</strong> an intermittent<br />
basis.<br />
Students<br />
Interviews focused <strong>on</strong> the goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
teachers held for seven students with<br />
severe disabilities <strong>and</strong> seven students with<br />
mild disabilities. Demographic informati<strong>on</strong><br />
for included students is provided in Table 1.<br />
Students identified as having severe disabilities<br />
(a) were nominated by teachers as having<br />
a severe disability, (b) had scores that fell in<br />
the severe range <strong>on</strong> the Basic Scale of Disability<br />
Severity (Camer<strong>on</strong>, 2004; described below),<br />
<strong>and</strong> (c) were categorized by their<br />
20 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 1<br />
Demographic Characteristics of Participating Students with <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
schools as having a multiple disability (MD) or<br />
intellectual disability (ID). Each of the teachers<br />
was resp<strong>on</strong>sible for a separate inclusive<br />
classroom in which <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e student with a<br />
severe disability was included (i.e., <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e<br />
student in each classroom met the above criteria).<br />
Students grouped as having mild disabilities<br />
(a) were nominated by their teacher<br />
as having a mild disability, <strong>and</strong> (b) had scores<br />
that fell in the mild range <strong>on</strong> the BSDS. Children<br />
in the mild disability group were labeled<br />
as having a learning disability (LD), behavioral<br />
disorder (BD), or were in the high functi<strong>on</strong>ing<br />
range of autism spectrum disorder<br />
(ASD). Teachers reported that children with<br />
mild disabilities were included from 60% to<br />
100% of the school day (M 80.0, SD 15.0),<br />
whereas students with severe disabilities spent<br />
from 20% to 70% of the day in general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classrooms (M 42.1, SD 23.4). All<br />
of the students with severe disabilities were<br />
supported by a paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al when in general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> settings.<br />
Procedure<br />
Student Grade Gender Age Disability % Included a<br />
Mild disabilities<br />
Student 1 1st male 7–10 Learning disability 85<br />
Student 2 2nd female 7–10 <strong>Autism</strong> 90<br />
Student 3 3rd male 10–3 Learning disability 65<br />
Student 4 3rd male 9–7 Learning disability 90<br />
Student 5 5th male 11–0 Learning disability 70<br />
Student 6 6th male 12–8 Behavioral disorder 100<br />
Student 7 8th female 15–0 Learning disability 60<br />
Severe disabilities<br />
Student 8 1st male 7–1 Multiple disability 30<br />
Student 9 2nd male 7–11 Intellectual disability 20<br />
Student 10 3rd male 10–2 Multiple disability 25<br />
Student 11 3rd female 9–8 Multiple disability 40<br />
Student 12 5th male 11–11 Multiple disability 70<br />
Student 13 6th male 12–1 Multiple disability 80<br />
Student 14 8th male 13–11 Multiple disability/Down syndrome 30<br />
Note. a Percent of school day the student is included in general educati<strong>on</strong> settings.<br />
After obtaining informed c<strong>on</strong>sent from teachers,<br />
we asked them to nominate included students<br />
with identified disabilities (i.e., receiv-<br />
ing special educati<strong>on</strong> services under the<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act)<br />
for participati<strong>on</strong> in the study. We then solicited<br />
informed c<strong>on</strong>sent for participati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
study from the parents of these students.<br />
Teachers were asked to nominate students as<br />
having a mild or severe disability based <strong>on</strong><br />
their percepti<strong>on</strong>s of the level of support that<br />
students required. Students with mild disabilities<br />
were described as students with identified<br />
disabilities whom teachers perceived as requiring<br />
little or <strong>on</strong>ly “intermittent” levels of support,<br />
whereas students with severe disabilities<br />
required “pervasive” or “extensive” support<br />
(Westling & Fox, 2008). In additi<strong>on</strong>, the first<br />
author <strong>and</strong> a graduate student in special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
observed students over the course of<br />
several less<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> rated students nominated<br />
by teachers using the BSDS (Camer<strong>on</strong>, 2004).<br />
The BSDS involves rating a student’s ability as<br />
compared to his/her same-age peers <strong>on</strong> a<br />
4-point scale in three areas: (a) intellectual<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing, (b) behavior, <strong>and</strong> (c) motor, sensory<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or communicati<strong>on</strong> skills. Reliability<br />
of the scale (k 0.81) was calculated by Camer<strong>on</strong><br />
(2004) using Cohen’s kappa (Cohen<br />
1961). Researchers r<strong>and</strong>omly selected a student<br />
with a mild disability in each class to be<br />
the subject of interviews from am<strong>on</strong>g the<br />
Teachers’ Goals / 21
three to four students identified as having<br />
mild disabilities based <strong>on</strong> the above criteria.<br />
Teachers also completed a short survey with a<br />
number of demographic questi<strong>on</strong>s prior to<br />
the interview.<br />
The interviews were c<strong>on</strong>ducted by the first<br />
author in a private setting at each school several<br />
days after our initial observati<strong>on</strong>s. Interviews<br />
ranged from approximately 45 minutes<br />
to 1 hour <strong>and</strong> were audio-recorded. Interview<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s were broadly grouped into three<br />
themes: (a) goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students<br />
in general, (b) l<strong>on</strong>g-term versus shortterm<br />
(e.g., day to day) goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (c) how goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s differed<br />
for the different children. However, the interviews<br />
themselves were semi-structured so that<br />
we were able to move back <strong>and</strong> forth between<br />
themes or discuss adjacent topics, such as dilemmas<br />
<strong>and</strong> successes that teachers had experienced<br />
with particular children. We did not<br />
refer to “students with mild/severe disabilities”<br />
in the interviews, but rather to the individual<br />
students described above.<br />
Analysis<br />
The first author transcribed each of the interviews.<br />
Teachers’ resp<strong>on</strong>ses were then separated<br />
into their smallest meaningful units <strong>and</strong><br />
a process of c<strong>on</strong>stant comparis<strong>on</strong> was employed<br />
to develop a series of themes (Lincoln<br />
& Guba, 1985). The sec<strong>on</strong>d author then independently<br />
coded these items using themes derived<br />
from the first phase of analysis. We then<br />
compared resp<strong>on</strong>ses <strong>and</strong> calculated an agreement<br />
coefficient (88%) using the point-bypoint<br />
method (Kazdin, 1982). We discussed<br />
individual items where coding was in disagreement<br />
until we arrived at a c<strong>on</strong>sensus as to the<br />
meaning of each item <strong>and</strong> the major themes<br />
of the interviews. Some of the themes were<br />
broadened or adapted so that all items that we<br />
perceived as being meaningful for the study<br />
were included.<br />
Presentati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Interpretati<strong>on</strong> of Findings<br />
Five themes emerged from our analysis of the<br />
interview transcripts. These involved goals <strong>and</strong><br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s relating to (a) social development,<br />
(b) classroom <strong>and</strong> behavior skills, (c)<br />
academic improvement, (d) student self-c<strong>on</strong>-<br />
fidence, <strong>and</strong> (e) the perceived insignificance<br />
of academics (Table 2). Although teachers’<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses to questi<strong>on</strong>s about students with<br />
mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities were often quite<br />
similar, two of these themes pertained almost<br />
exclusively to <strong>on</strong>e group of students. First,<br />
teachers’ emphasis <strong>on</strong> improving student selfc<strong>on</strong>fidence<br />
emerged when discussing children<br />
with mild disabilities. Sec<strong>on</strong>d, the percepti<strong>on</strong><br />
that academic progress was largely<br />
irrelevant pertained solely to students with severe<br />
disabilities. With respect to other between<br />
group differences, a str<strong>on</strong>g trend was<br />
found am<strong>on</strong>g teachers’ resp<strong>on</strong>ses c<strong>on</strong>cerning<br />
two themes: (a) teachers reported that social<br />
development was the primary goal for students<br />
with severe disabilities, whereas (b) expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for students with mild disabilities<br />
centered <strong>on</strong> behavioral <strong>and</strong> classroom management<br />
issues.<br />
As teachers’ goals largely overlapped with<br />
the expectati<strong>on</strong>s they held for students, we<br />
chose to combine these two c<strong>on</strong>cepts in the<br />
analysis. However, in general it seems that<br />
beliefs c<strong>on</strong>cerning teachers’ goals for students<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>ded to l<strong>on</strong>g-term hopes or aspirati<strong>on</strong>s;<br />
whereas expectati<strong>on</strong>s related more directly<br />
to daily aspects of classroom life (e.g., “I<br />
expect all my students to pay attenti<strong>on</strong>”). Yet,<br />
this distincti<strong>on</strong> was far from c<strong>on</strong>sistent.<br />
Social Development<br />
The social development theme comprised<br />
statements indicating that the goal for included<br />
children was to gain social skills, make<br />
friends, or generally interact with other students.<br />
Also included in this category were<br />
items referring to the broad social benefits for<br />
both general <strong>and</strong> special educati<strong>on</strong> students,<br />
such as “greater diversity.” All seven teachers<br />
made multiple statements about the value of<br />
children with disabilities socializing <strong>and</strong> developing<br />
relati<strong>on</strong>ships with n<strong>on</strong>disabled peers.<br />
The <strong>on</strong>ly other theme that was emphasized to<br />
a similarly high degree was that of classroom<br />
<strong>and</strong> behavior skills. Although teachers at times<br />
referred to the social benefits of inclusi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
general; when talking about individual children,<br />
this issue was almost exclusively used to<br />
describe teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
students with severe disabilities. Only <strong>on</strong>e<br />
22 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 2<br />
Teachers’ Goals <strong>and</strong> Expectati<strong>on</strong>s for their Included Students<br />
Category Descripti<strong>on</strong> of Category Examples Focus<br />
Social<br />
Development<br />
Classroom <strong>and</strong><br />
Behavior<br />
Skills<br />
Academic<br />
Improvement<br />
Student Selfc<strong>on</strong>fidence<br />
Insignificance<br />
of Academics<br />
Statements c<strong>on</strong>cerning the goal<br />
or expectati<strong>on</strong> that students<br />
with disabilities gain social<br />
skills, make friends, or<br />
generally interact with<br />
n<strong>on</strong>disabled students.<br />
Statements related to the<br />
expectati<strong>on</strong> or goal of<br />
performance in areas such as<br />
following routines, paying<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong>, staying <strong>on</strong> task,<br />
turning in homework,<br />
organizing materials, <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
motivati<strong>on</strong> to work.<br />
Statements that the teacher<br />
would like to see<br />
improvement with regard to<br />
some aspect of academic<br />
performance.<br />
Statements that the teacher<br />
would like to see the<br />
students’ percepti<strong>on</strong> of<br />
themselves <strong>and</strong>/or their<br />
abilities improve.<br />
Statements referring to the<br />
teacher’s belief that the<br />
academic performance of the<br />
student is not likely to<br />
improve, is of lesser<br />
importance than other areas,<br />
is not the general educator’s<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>sibility, <strong>and</strong> statements<br />
describing a lack of<br />
knowledge regarding student<br />
abilities.<br />
teacher made this point when referring to her<br />
student with a mild disability.<br />
The social aspect of inclusi<strong>on</strong> was also more<br />
frequently represented in teachers’ discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
of l<strong>on</strong>g-term goals than with regard to shortterm<br />
objectives. The few statements referring<br />
to short-term expectati<strong>on</strong>s related to socially<br />
appropriate behavior for the entire class, such<br />
as the expectati<strong>on</strong>, “that they get al<strong>on</strong>g <strong>and</strong><br />
accept everybody.” In c<strong>on</strong>trast, l<strong>on</strong>g-term<br />
goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s tended to be applied<br />
toward students with severe disabilities <strong>and</strong><br />
focused <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>cepts such as making friends,<br />
fitting in, or feeling comfortable with <strong>on</strong>e an-<br />
“My l<strong>on</strong>g-term goal is really<br />
just to get them<br />
comfortable with<br />
interacting with peers<br />
<strong>and</strong> being part of a<br />
group.”<br />
“An expectati<strong>on</strong> would be<br />
that they come to<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong> when I direct<br />
them...sothat they are<br />
sitting down ready to<br />
listen.”<br />
“I would hope that his<br />
reading would improve.”<br />
“I think a goal that I have<br />
for them is for them to<br />
see themselves as able to<br />
be successful.”<br />
“She had an academic<br />
plateau. She’s not going<br />
to go past what she has<br />
right now.”<br />
“I’m probably not real sure<br />
what his abilities are<br />
going to be at the<br />
moment.”<br />
Primarily emphasized for<br />
students with severe<br />
disabilities <strong>and</strong> as a<br />
l<strong>on</strong>g-term goal.<br />
Primarily emphasized for<br />
students with mild<br />
disabilities in<br />
associati<strong>on</strong> with shortterm<br />
goals <strong>and</strong><br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Primarily emphasized for<br />
students with mild<br />
disabilities. Referred<br />
to as both a l<strong>on</strong>g-term<br />
<strong>and</strong> short-term goal.<br />
Solely in reference to<br />
students with mild<br />
disabilities <strong>and</strong><br />
primarily as a l<strong>on</strong>gterm<br />
goal.<br />
The <strong>on</strong>ly area for which<br />
teachers stated what<br />
they did not see as a<br />
goal for students.<br />
These statements<br />
referred solely to<br />
students with severe<br />
disabilities.<br />
other. For example, <strong>on</strong>e teacher noted, “Probably<br />
the most important thing is getting them<br />
comfortable with relating to their peers.” Another<br />
teacher expressed her hopes that a student<br />
with a severe disability would “become a<br />
real member of the class.”<br />
Teachers were also adamant about the goal<br />
of getting typically developing students to become<br />
more accepting of children with disabilities.<br />
For example, <strong>on</strong>e teacher stated, “My<br />
biggest goal for all the children with special<br />
needs is that the kids see them as kids just like<br />
them, but with differences.” The issue of acceptance<br />
was particularly prominent for stu-<br />
Teachers’ Goals / 23
dents with severe disabilities. A teacher reflected<br />
over her l<strong>on</strong>g-term goals for a student<br />
with a severe disability <strong>and</strong> issues such as, “how<br />
he’s going to fit in with the kids. Are they<br />
going to accept him? Are they going to be<br />
kind <strong>and</strong> respect him as a pers<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> treat<br />
him as a class member?”<br />
In accordance with c<strong>on</strong>cerns over students’<br />
acceptance of <strong>on</strong>e another, a number of<br />
teachers described scenes that depicted successful<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s between children with <strong>and</strong><br />
without disabilities. For instance, <strong>on</strong>e teacher<br />
described peers’ interacti<strong>on</strong>s with a student<br />
with severe disabilities during recess, “Out <strong>on</strong><br />
the playground, like, <strong>on</strong>e nice day last week—<br />
he’s never out <strong>on</strong> the playground—he was out<br />
there <strong>and</strong> the kids just had a ball with him. So,<br />
the socializati<strong>on</strong> part is what it’s for.” A sec<strong>on</strong>d<br />
teacher described a scene in which <strong>on</strong>e general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> student made a specific request<br />
to work with a child with significant intellectual<br />
<strong>and</strong> physical impairments, “I was kind of<br />
like putting the kids with their partners <strong>and</strong> D<br />
came up to me <strong>and</strong> said, ‘I’ll be A’s partner.’<br />
She picked him. She wanted to do it. So, I<br />
thought that was awesome. So I was like, yeah,<br />
alright! I was just going to leave him with the<br />
aide.”<br />
The finding that teachers set goals for included<br />
students in the area of social development<br />
is c<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous literature indicating<br />
that interacti<strong>on</strong> with peers is<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidered <strong>on</strong>e of the major benefits of inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
(Agran & Alper, 2000; Carter & Hughes,<br />
2006; Janney, Snell, Beers, & Raynes, 1995).<br />
For example, Agran <strong>and</strong> Alper (2000) found<br />
that teachers emphasized social interacti<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
friendships, <strong>and</strong> self-determinati<strong>on</strong> as more<br />
important skills for successful inclusi<strong>on</strong> than<br />
academic performance. Presumably, the emphasis<br />
participants placed <strong>on</strong> setting goals related<br />
to social development is due to the important<br />
role that social skills play in forming<br />
friendships <strong>and</strong> emoti<strong>on</strong>al well-being.<br />
On the other h<strong>and</strong>, it is also possible that<br />
teachers perceive social development as the<br />
area that they feel most qualified to address.<br />
In accordance with the model of differential<br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s (Cook & Semmel, 2000), setting<br />
goals for students with severe disabilities primarily<br />
in the area of social development<br />
would be perceived as appropriate given<br />
teachers’ differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s for chil-<br />
dren with “obvious” disabilities. In c<strong>on</strong>trast,<br />
teachers may be less c<strong>on</strong>cerned with setting<br />
goals in the area of social development for<br />
students with mild disabilities as the difficulties<br />
they experience are largely “hidden”, leading<br />
to the expectati<strong>on</strong> that their social skills<br />
<strong>and</strong> related needs are essentially the same as<br />
n<strong>on</strong>disabled students.<br />
Classroom <strong>and</strong> Behavior Skills<br />
Teachers often expressed the goal that their<br />
students improve in the area of classroom <strong>and</strong><br />
behavior skills. Included in this theme were<br />
teachers’ expectati<strong>on</strong>s that students observe<br />
classroom rules <strong>and</strong> procedures, follow directi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> develop time-management skills.<br />
Examples of statements included in this<br />
theme were references to staying <strong>on</strong> task, completing<br />
classwork <strong>and</strong> homework, <strong>and</strong> asking<br />
appropriate questi<strong>on</strong>s at appropriate times.<br />
The frequency of statements falling within this<br />
area was sec<strong>on</strong>d <strong>on</strong>ly to that of social development.<br />
The issue of students’ attenti<strong>on</strong> to task was<br />
the most frequently expressed of teachers’<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerns in this area, referring primarily to<br />
students with mild disabilities. Six of the seven<br />
teachers cited this issue as a major goal for<br />
included students. Examples of teacher comments<br />
included expectati<strong>on</strong>s that students<br />
“pay attenti<strong>on</strong>” or “keep their attenti<strong>on</strong> focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> me.” These expectati<strong>on</strong>s also varied<br />
with respect to student ability. For example,<br />
<strong>on</strong>e teacher noted, “that he’s engaged as<br />
much as he can be,” when referring to her<br />
student with a severe disability.<br />
Teachers were also adamant that students<br />
be prepared when class begins <strong>and</strong> organized<br />
in their work. For example, an eighth grade<br />
teacher noted, “that’s a big thing, teaching<br />
them those skills like getting ready <strong>and</strong> being<br />
ready when we start.” In a fifth grade classroom<br />
a teacher <strong>and</strong> her colleagues had focused<br />
their efforts <strong>on</strong> ensuring that students<br />
kept their homework folders up-to-date <strong>and</strong><br />
organized. When describing her goal for a<br />
child with a mild disability, she stated, “Our<br />
goal is that this year, he would just have it<br />
ready because he knows that we’ll be coming<br />
by to check it.”<br />
Although behavior was an important goal<br />
for teachers, <strong>on</strong>ly a h<strong>and</strong>ful of comments re-<br />
24 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ferred explicitly to reducing or c<strong>on</strong>trolling<br />
misbehavior such as aggressi<strong>on</strong> or defiance<br />
towards teachers. Regarding her sixth grade<br />
student with a behavioral disorder, <strong>on</strong>e<br />
teacher commented, “I have more c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with him because of his behavior. I’m<br />
c<strong>on</strong>stantly redirecting him. Whereas other<br />
kids I might not say anything to them during<br />
the entire class period about behavior.” Despite<br />
these c<strong>on</strong>cerns, teachers seemed generally<br />
more c<strong>on</strong>cerned with what they perceived<br />
as apathy or lethargy <strong>on</strong> the part of students.<br />
One teacher c<strong>on</strong>cluded that her student with<br />
a mild disability was simply “lazy.” She surmised,<br />
“with him, my l<strong>on</strong>g-term goal would<br />
probably be to light a fire under his behind<br />
<strong>and</strong> get him moving.”<br />
Findings that teachers emphasized classroom<br />
<strong>and</strong> behavior skills for students with<br />
mild disabilities are c<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous<br />
research. In fact, since the beginning of inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
reforms, teachers have expressed the importance<br />
of task <strong>and</strong> order-related behaviors<br />
for successful integrati<strong>on</strong> of students with disabilities<br />
into general educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms<br />
(Cartledge, Frew, & Zaharias, 1985). In a<br />
more recent study, 441 special educators rated<br />
the importance of different st<strong>and</strong>ards of practice<br />
for inclusi<strong>on</strong> (Grskovic & Trzcinka, 2011).<br />
Findings indicated that classroom management<br />
skills were seen as more important than<br />
almost all other areas; <strong>on</strong>ly instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies<br />
received higher ratings (Grskovic &<br />
Trzcinka). Thus, it is not surprising that teachers<br />
in this study also placed a great deal of<br />
emphasis <strong>on</strong> the issue of classroom skills <strong>and</strong><br />
behavior. Teachers’ differentiati<strong>on</strong> of goals<br />
for students with mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities<br />
in this area also appears to be c<strong>on</strong>nected to<br />
the theme of academic improvement presented<br />
in the following secti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Academic Improvement<br />
A third theme emerging from the data reflected<br />
teachers’ desire that students realize<br />
improvement in overall academic performance<br />
or within specific academic subjects<br />
(e.g., reading, mathematics). Four of the<br />
seven participants made at least <strong>on</strong>e reference<br />
to this issue. In additi<strong>on</strong>, goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
in this area almost exclusively pertained<br />
to students with mild disabilities. Whereas a<br />
third grade teacher had in mind a fairly c<strong>on</strong>crete<br />
l<strong>on</strong>g-term objective that her student with<br />
a mild disability would eventually “read <strong>on</strong><br />
grade level,” another teacher stated that her<br />
goal for a student with a learning disability<br />
was, more broadly, “that his reading would<br />
improve.”<br />
In c<strong>on</strong>trast to l<strong>on</strong>g-term objectives, shortterm<br />
objectives were more closely aligned with<br />
academic issues pertaining to daily instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
For example, a sixth grade teacher expressed<br />
the desire that included students<br />
“leave the classroom with an underst<strong>and</strong>ing of<br />
the key c<strong>on</strong>cept that we’ve g<strong>on</strong>e over.” Another<br />
teacher stated her hopes that “academically”<br />
an included student with a severe disability<br />
would become “more involved with the<br />
regular classroom.” Thus, even within the area<br />
of academics, the social aspect of inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
played an important role for this teacher.<br />
We interpret the finding that teachers set<br />
clear objectives <strong>and</strong> hold high expectati<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
the area of academics as a positive sign for the<br />
potential for academic growth am<strong>on</strong>g included<br />
students with mild disabilities. However,<br />
teachers’ lack of attenti<strong>on</strong> to academic<br />
goals <strong>and</strong> access to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
for included students with severe disabilities<br />
may be cause for c<strong>on</strong>cern. Carter <strong>and</strong><br />
Hughes (2006) found that teachers rated instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
in academic <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-academic areas<br />
as significantly higher for general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
students than students with severe disabilities.<br />
These areas included: (a) following rules <strong>and</strong><br />
procedures, (b) learning resp<strong>on</strong>sibility <strong>and</strong><br />
good work habits, (c) developing skills for<br />
adult life, (d) actively participating in class,<br />
(e) acquiring academic or vocati<strong>on</strong>al skills, (f)<br />
learning course c<strong>on</strong>tent, (g) developing critical<br />
thinking, <strong>and</strong> (h) completing homework<br />
assignments. In fact, the <strong>on</strong>ly goal that was<br />
significantly higher for students with severe<br />
disabilities was special educators’ ratings in<br />
the area of “interacting socially with classmates”<br />
(Carter & Hughes). Corresp<strong>on</strong>dingly,<br />
our finding that teachers are more likely to<br />
hold academic goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students<br />
with mild disabilities as compared to<br />
children with severe disabilities suggests that<br />
goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s are lower for the latter<br />
group of students in areas not related to social<br />
development. One plausible explanati<strong>on</strong> for<br />
this difference is that the teachers have lower<br />
Teachers’ Goals / 25
feelings of self-efficacy (B<strong>and</strong>ura, 1986) c<strong>on</strong>cerning<br />
their ability to engender positive outcomes<br />
for included students with severe disabilities.<br />
Accordingly, students will logically<br />
set higher goals for the performance of students<br />
whom they perceive as being able to<br />
help to achieve academic goals.<br />
Student Self-c<strong>on</strong>fidence<br />
A small number of teacher resp<strong>on</strong>ses dealt<br />
with the issue of student self-c<strong>on</strong>fidence. Statements<br />
coded under this theme described<br />
teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s that students’<br />
percepti<strong>on</strong>s of themselves <strong>and</strong> their abilities<br />
would improve. The vast majority of these<br />
statements were derived from resp<strong>on</strong>ses to<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s about teachers’ l<strong>on</strong>g-term goals for<br />
their included students <strong>and</strong> all of the statements<br />
coded under this theme c<strong>on</strong>cerned students<br />
with mild disabilities or included students<br />
in general. Whereas a first grade teacher<br />
reflected <strong>on</strong> her goal that her student’s “attitude<br />
about himself would improve,” another<br />
teacher was c<strong>on</strong>cerned that students in her<br />
class recognize their potential for success.<br />
From her perspective, this goal was not likely<br />
to be accomplished in a segregated setting:<br />
A lot of times I think special ed kids are<br />
used to coming in <strong>and</strong> saying, “oh, I can’t<br />
do that” . . . or “they d<strong>on</strong>’t make me do<br />
that.” I just kind of go “well, you’re going to<br />
do it.” So, I try to make them believe that<br />
they can do things.<br />
Previous research applying the theory of<br />
differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s to teachers’ attitudes<br />
in inclusive classrooms found that, in comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
to students with severe disabilities, students<br />
with mild disabilities were significantly<br />
over-represented am<strong>on</strong>g teachers’ c<strong>on</strong>cern<br />
nominati<strong>on</strong>s (Cook, 2004). Early research establishing<br />
the validity of these categories identified<br />
“c<strong>on</strong>cern students” as those with whom<br />
teachers became intensely <strong>and</strong> pers<strong>on</strong>ally involved<br />
because they felt that their efforts<br />
would make the difference between the<br />
child’s success <strong>and</strong> failure (Good & Brophy,<br />
1972; Silberman, 1971). It is revealing that<br />
participants felt str<strong>on</strong>gly about the emoti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
well-being of their included students with<br />
mild disabilities <strong>and</strong> suggests that they were<br />
aware of the important role that self-worth<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-esteem play in motivati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
achievement (Covingt<strong>on</strong>, 2002; Thomps<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1994).<br />
Insignificance of Academics<br />
In c<strong>on</strong>trast to the goals of improved academic<br />
performance, a theme emerged from our<br />
analysis suggesting that academic improvement<br />
was seen as “insignificant” for students<br />
with severe disabilities. Often it was the belief<br />
that academic goals were of less importance<br />
than goals related to social skills that led to<br />
this c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>. For example, a third grade<br />
teacher stated, “it works to come up here for<br />
the socializati<strong>on</strong> part, but I d<strong>on</strong>’t think I’m<br />
doing anything for his educati<strong>on</strong>.” A middle<br />
school teacher expressed a similar sentiment,<br />
“The reas<strong>on</strong> for her being here is more for the<br />
socializati<strong>on</strong> than for the academics . . . if they<br />
catch something academic al<strong>on</strong>g the way than<br />
that’s a plus.”<br />
Statements of this kind were also associated<br />
with the percepti<strong>on</strong> that a child’s academic<br />
performance was unlikely to improve. “She<br />
had an academic plateau,” noted <strong>on</strong>e teacher,<br />
“she’s not going past what she has right now.”<br />
Also grouped in this category were items indicating<br />
that included students were not c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />
the general educator’s resp<strong>on</strong>sibility <strong>and</strong><br />
academic objectives were, therefore, not a primary<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cern. One participant came to the<br />
following c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>, “I’m not c<strong>on</strong>cerned<br />
with his comprehensi<strong>on</strong> levels. I’m not his<br />
classroom teacher.” With reference to her student<br />
who had an individual assistant, another<br />
teacher stated, “She doesn’t take up more<br />
time because the aide works with her.”<br />
Given the assumpti<strong>on</strong> am<strong>on</strong>g many participants<br />
that students with severe disabilities<br />
were not the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility of general educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
it is not surprising that teachers also<br />
professed a lack of knowledge with respect to<br />
these students. In describing an included student<br />
with multiple disabilities, <strong>on</strong>e teacher<br />
stated plainly, “I’m not sure what his abilities<br />
are.” This same teacher argued that attending<br />
to the academic instructi<strong>on</strong> of this child would<br />
distract her from teaching her “core students,”<br />
stating, “There are things that I’ve<br />
changed because he’s in the classroom but, as<br />
in teaching, or, you know, being c<strong>on</strong>cerned<br />
26 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
with his academics or actually what he’s doing,<br />
I can’t take my focus off of what I’m doing.”<br />
Schuster, Hemmeter, <strong>and</strong> Ault (2001) studied<br />
the frequency of teaching opportunities<br />
delivered <strong>on</strong> the IEP objectives of 12 students<br />
with low-incidence disabilities in inclusive<br />
classrooms. In 383 minutes of observati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
four students did not receive any teaching<br />
related to their IEP objectives, <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly 45%<br />
of objectives were addressed am<strong>on</strong>g those students<br />
who did receive instructi<strong>on</strong> related to<br />
their IEPs. Although we did not investigate the<br />
IEP objectives of students in this study, it is<br />
highly unlikely that these students’ IEPs did<br />
not include a number of goals related to areas<br />
other than social development. In other<br />
words, it appears that these teachers placed a<br />
disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate emphasis <strong>on</strong> social goals for<br />
included students with severe disabilities at<br />
the potential expense of other areas.<br />
In accordance with the theory of differential<br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s (Cook, 2001), teachers may<br />
set inappropriately low goals for their included<br />
students with severe disabilities because<br />
they perceive the likelihood that students<br />
will experience gains from their<br />
teaching efforts as minimal. Moreover, as the<br />
theoretical c<strong>on</strong>struct of self-efficacy (B<strong>and</strong>ura,<br />
1986) suggests, if teachers see themselves as<br />
lacking the knowledge <strong>and</strong> ability to teach<br />
these students, they are not likely to invest<br />
energy in an area that they do not feel c<strong>on</strong>fident.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>sequently, the combinati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
teachers’ lack of awareness of educati<strong>on</strong>al objectives<br />
<strong>and</strong> low expectati<strong>on</strong>s for included students<br />
with severe disabilities may have serious<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sequences for the quality of educati<strong>on</strong> that<br />
these children receive, at least with respect to<br />
areas other than social development.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Suggesti<strong>on</strong>s for Future Research<br />
It is important to recognize a number of limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with regard to this investigati<strong>on</strong>. First,<br />
it is not certain that teachers’ statements of<br />
their goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students reflect<br />
their actual practice with these students.<br />
Teachers certainly interact with students <strong>on</strong> a<br />
daily basis in accordance with specific learning<br />
tasks in many different areas. Thus, teachers<br />
are likely to hold a range of activity-specific<br />
goals for students that are perhaps more relevant<br />
to the “here <strong>and</strong> now” of teaching than<br />
the broad categories we have presented here.<br />
Observati<strong>on</strong>al research of teachers while they<br />
interact with students is necessary to clarify<br />
this picture. In additi<strong>on</strong>, given the importance<br />
placed <strong>on</strong> IEPs in establishing the educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
objectives of included students, more research<br />
is needed to investigate the degree to which<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong> teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
align with students’ IEPs. An additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
limitati<strong>on</strong> of the study is that we did not<br />
analyze individual student factors such as pers<strong>on</strong>ality,<br />
disability type, gender, ethnicity, or<br />
age <strong>and</strong> grade level, which may have revealed<br />
subtleties about the way teachers think about<br />
<strong>and</strong> form goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for included<br />
students. By grouping children broadly into<br />
mild <strong>and</strong> severe disability groups <strong>and</strong> across<br />
grade levels we have potentially overlooked<br />
informati<strong>on</strong> about how teachers adjust their<br />
goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students <strong>on</strong> an individual<br />
basis. We suggest that future research<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sider both c<strong>on</strong>textual variables as well as<br />
individual characteristics of students <strong>and</strong><br />
teachers in relati<strong>on</strong> to the goals that teachers<br />
set for their included students.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong><br />
Findings from this study indicate two str<strong>on</strong>g<br />
trends with respect to the different goals that<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong> teachers hold for their included<br />
students with mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities:<br />
(a) participants reported that social development<br />
was the primary goal for students<br />
with severe disabilities, whereas (b) expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for included students with mild disabilities<br />
centered <strong>on</strong> classroom <strong>and</strong> behavior skills.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, the goal of improving student<br />
self-c<strong>on</strong>fidence emerged when discussing children<br />
with mild disabilities. In c<strong>on</strong>trast, teachers<br />
in this study viewed goals related to academic<br />
performance to be of little importance<br />
for students with severe disabilities.<br />
We applied a model differential expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to assist in explaining how teachers’<br />
goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for individual students<br />
with mild <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities differ. Our<br />
findings suggest that teachers’ goals <strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for their included students with disabilities<br />
c<strong>on</strong>form to their percepti<strong>on</strong>s of the<br />
obviousness of the child’s disability, leading<br />
teachers to c<strong>on</strong>clude that they have little to<br />
offer included students with severe disabilities<br />
Teachers’ Goals / 27
ey<strong>on</strong>d the opportunity to socialize with other<br />
children. Whereas it is clear that students with<br />
different abilities should have different educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
goals, the finding that teachers’ goals<br />
<strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s for students with severe disabilities<br />
were narrowly focused <strong>on</strong> social development<br />
may reduce the learning opportunities<br />
for these students in other important<br />
areas. We recommend that school administrators,<br />
special educators, <strong>and</strong> general educators<br />
take the time to reflect <strong>on</strong> the different goals<br />
<strong>and</strong> expectati<strong>on</strong>s they hold for included students<br />
<strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sider how these beliefs may affect<br />
student achievement <strong>and</strong> development.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, in order for teachers to set realistic,<br />
challenging, <strong>and</strong> appropriate goals for<br />
their included students with disabilities, it<br />
seems necessary that sentiments indicating<br />
that general educati<strong>on</strong> teachers do not c<strong>on</strong>sider<br />
themselves primarily resp<strong>on</strong>sible for educating<br />
students with severe disabilities must<br />
be addressed.<br />
References<br />
Agran, M., & Alper, S. (2000). Curriculum <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
in general educati<strong>on</strong>: Instructi<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
service delivery <strong>and</strong> teacher preparati<strong>on</strong>. Journal<br />
for the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe H<strong>and</strong>icaps,<br />
25, 167–174.<br />
Asht<strong>on</strong>, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference:<br />
Teacher efficacy <strong>and</strong> student achievement. White<br />
Plains, NY: L<strong>on</strong>gman.<br />
Babad, E. (1998). Preferential affect: The crux of<br />
the teacher expectancy issue. In J. Brophy (Ed.),<br />
Advances in research <strong>on</strong> teaching: Expectati<strong>on</strong>s in the<br />
classroom (pp. 183–214). Greenwich, CT: JAI<br />
Press.<br />
Baker, J., & Zigm<strong>on</strong>d, N. (1995). The meaning <strong>and</strong><br />
practice of inclusi<strong>on</strong> for students with learning<br />
disabilities: Themes <strong>and</strong> implicati<strong>on</strong>s from five<br />
cases. Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 29, 163–180.<br />
B<strong>and</strong>ura, A. (1986). Social foundati<strong>on</strong>s of thought <strong>and</strong><br />
acti<strong>on</strong>: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs,<br />
NJ: Prentice Hall.<br />
Brophy, J. E. (1986). Teacher influence <strong>on</strong> student<br />
achievement. The American Psychologist, 41, 1069-<br />
1077.<br />
Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior<br />
<strong>and</strong> student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock<br />
(Ed.), H<strong>and</strong>book of research <strong>on</strong> teaching (3rd ed.).<br />
(pp. 328–375). New York: McMillan.<br />
Brownell, M. T., & Pajares, F. (1999). Classroom<br />
teachers’ sense of efficacy to instruct special edu-<br />
cati<strong>on</strong> students. Teacher Educati<strong>on</strong> & Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
22, 154–164.<br />
Camer<strong>on</strong>, D. L. (2004). An analysis of teacher-student<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s in inclusive classrooms. PhD Diss., Kent<br />
State University.<br />
Camer<strong>on</strong>, D. L., Cook, B., & Tankersley, M. (2011).<br />
An analysis of the different patterns of 1:1 interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
between educati<strong>on</strong>al professi<strong>on</strong>als <strong>and</strong><br />
their students with varying abilities in inclusive<br />
classrooms. Internati<strong>on</strong>al Journal of Inclusive Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
iFirst, 1–20.<br />
Carter, E. W., & Hughes, C. (2006). Including high<br />
school students with severe disabilities in general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classes: Perspectives of general <strong>and</strong> special<br />
educators, paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als, <strong>and</strong> administrators.<br />
Research & Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
31, 174–185.<br />
Cartledge, G., Frew, T., & Zaharias, J. (1985). Social<br />
skill needs of mainstreamed students: Peer <strong>and</strong><br />
teacher percepti<strong>on</strong>s. Learning Disability Quarterly,<br />
8, 132–140.<br />
Christens<strong>on</strong>, S., Ysseldyke, J., & Thurlow, M. (1989).<br />
Critical instructi<strong>on</strong>al factors for students with<br />
mild h<strong>and</strong>icaps: An integrative view. Remedial <strong>and</strong><br />
Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 10, 21–31.<br />
Cohen, J. (1961). A coefficient of agreement for<br />
nominal scales. Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Psychological Measurement,<br />
20, 37–45.<br />
Cook, B. G. (2001). A comparis<strong>on</strong> of teachers’ attitudes<br />
towards their included students with mild<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
34, 203-213.<br />
Cook, B. G. (2004). Inclusive teachers’ attitudes<br />
toward their students with disabilities: A replicati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> extensi<strong>on</strong>. Elementary School Journal, 104,<br />
307–320.<br />
Cook, B. G., & Semmel, M. I. (2000). The inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
of students with mental retardati<strong>on</strong>. Theoretical<br />
perspectives <strong>and</strong> implicati<strong>on</strong>s. Special Services<br />
within the Schools, 15, 49–71.<br />
Cook, B. G., & Camer<strong>on</strong>, D. L. (2010). Inclusive<br />
teachers’ c<strong>on</strong>cern <strong>and</strong> rejecti<strong>on</strong> toward students:<br />
Investigating the validity of ratings <strong>and</strong> comparing<br />
student groups. Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
31, 67-76.<br />
Coster, W. J., & Haltiwanger, J. (2004). Social-behavioral<br />
skills of elementary students with physical<br />
disabilities included in general educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms.<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 25, 95–103.<br />
Covingt<strong>on</strong>, M. V. (2002). Rewards <strong>and</strong> intrinsic motivati<strong>on</strong>:<br />
A needs-based developmental perspective.<br />
In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic<br />
motivati<strong>on</strong> of adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Informati<strong>on</strong><br />
Age.<br />
Doherty, R. W., & Hilberg, R. S. (2007). St<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
for effective pedagogy, classroom organizati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
English proficiency, <strong>and</strong> student achievement.<br />
Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Research, 101(1), 24–35.<br />
28 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Fergus<strong>on</strong>, D. (2008). Internati<strong>on</strong>al trends in inclusive<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>: The c<strong>on</strong>tinuing challenge to<br />
teach each <strong>on</strong>e <strong>and</strong> every<strong>on</strong>e. European Journal of<br />
Special Needs Educati<strong>on</strong>, 23, 109–120.<br />
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
processes. Human Relati<strong>on</strong>s, 7, 117–140.<br />
Fisher, M., & Meyer, L. H. (2002). Development <strong>and</strong><br />
social competence after two years for students<br />
enrolled in inclusive <strong>and</strong> self-c<strong>on</strong>tained educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programs. Journal of the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with Severe H<strong>and</strong>icaps, 27, 165–174.<br />
Ford, A., Davern, L., & Schnorr, R. (2001). Learners<br />
with significant disabilities: Curricular relevance<br />
in an era of st<strong>and</strong>ards-based reform. Remedial <strong>and</strong><br />
Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 22, 214–222.<br />
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Deno, S. L. (1985). Importance<br />
of goal ambitiousness <strong>and</strong> goal mastery<br />
to student achievement. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 52,<br />
63–71.<br />
Giangreco, M. F., & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questi<strong>on</strong>able<br />
utilizati<strong>on</strong> of paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als in inclusive<br />
schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes?<br />
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
20, 10–26.<br />
Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1972). Behavioral<br />
expressi<strong>on</strong> of teacher attitudes. Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Psychology, 63, 617–624.<br />
Good, T., & Weinstein, R. (1986). Teacher expectati<strong>on</strong>s:<br />
A framework for exploring classrooms. In<br />
K. Zumwalt (Ed.), Improving teaching (pp. 63–85).<br />
Alex<strong>and</strong>ria, VA: Associati<strong>on</strong> for Supervisi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Curriculum Development.<br />
Graham, S., MacArthur, C., Schwartz, S., & Page-<br />
Voth, V. (1992). Improving the compositi<strong>on</strong>s of<br />
students with learning disabilities using a strategy<br />
involving product <strong>and</strong> process goal setting. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 58, 222–335.<br />
Grskovic J. A., & Trzcinka, S. M. (2011). Essential<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ards for preparing sec<strong>on</strong>dary c<strong>on</strong>tent teachers<br />
to effectively teach students with mild disabilities<br />
in included settings. American Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
39(2), 94–106.<br />
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of<br />
feedback. Review of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Research, 77, 81–<br />
112.<br />
Hollowood, T. M., Salisbury, C. L., Rainforth, B., &<br />
Palombaro, M. M. (1994). Use of instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
time in classrooms serving students with <strong>and</strong> without<br />
severe disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 61, 242<br />
–253.<br />
Helmstetter, E., Curry, C. A., Brennan, M., & Samps<strong>on</strong>-Saul,<br />
M. (1998). Comparis<strong>on</strong> of general <strong>and</strong><br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms of students with severe<br />
disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in Mental<br />
Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 33, 216–<br />
227.<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> in Educati<strong>on</strong> Improve-<br />
ment Act of 2004 (IDEA) 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.<br />
(2004).<br />
Janney, R. E., Snell, M. E., Beers, M. K., & Raynes,<br />
M. (1995). Integrating students with moderate<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe disabilities into general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classes. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 61, 425–439.<br />
Jordan, A., Lindsay, L., & Stanovich, P. (1997).<br />
Classroom teachers’ instructi<strong>on</strong>al interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with students who are excepti<strong>on</strong>al, at risk, <strong>and</strong><br />
typically achieving. Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
18(2), 82–93.<br />
Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: Methods<br />
for clinical <strong>and</strong> applied settings. Oxford, NY:<br />
Oxford University Press.<br />
Kennedy, C. H., Shukla, S., & Fryxell, D. (1997).<br />
Comparing the effects of educati<strong>on</strong>al placement<br />
<strong>on</strong> the social c<strong>on</strong>tacts <strong>and</strong> friendship networks of<br />
students with severe disabilities, Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
64, 1–47.<br />
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G., (1985). Naturalistic<br />
Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.<br />
Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999).<br />
Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings:<br />
Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 65, 315–328.<br />
Miller, D. L., & Kelley, M. L., (1994). The use of goal<br />
setting <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tingency c<strong>on</strong>tracting for improving<br />
children’s homework performance. Journal of<br />
Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 73–84.<br />
Page-Voth, V., & Graham, S. (1999). Effects of goal<br />
setting <strong>and</strong> strategy use <strong>on</strong> the writing performance<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-efficacy of students with writing<br />
<strong>and</strong> learning problems. Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychology,<br />
91, 230–240.<br />
Ruble, L. A., Usher, E. L., & McGrew, J. H. (2011).<br />
Preliminary investigati<strong>on</strong> of the sources of selfefficacy<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g teachers of students with autism.<br />
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
26, 67–74.<br />
Rubie-Davies, C. M., Peters<strong>on</strong>, E., Irving, E., Widdows<strong>on</strong>,<br />
D., & Dix<strong>on</strong>, R. (2006). Expectati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong><br />
achievement: Student, teacher <strong>and</strong> parent percepti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Research in Educati<strong>on</strong>, 33, 36–53.<br />
Schuster, J. W., Hemmeter, M. L., & Ault, M. J.<br />
(2001). Instructi<strong>on</strong> of students with moderate<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe disabilities in elementary classrooms.<br />
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 329–341.<br />
Shilts, M. K., Horowitz, M., & Townsend, M. S.<br />
(2004). An innovative approach to goal setting<br />
for adolescents: Guided goal setting. Journal of<br />
Nutriti<strong>on</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Behavior, 36, 155–156.<br />
Silberman, M. L. (1971). Teachers attitudes <strong>and</strong><br />
acti<strong>on</strong>s toward their students. In M. L. Silberman<br />
(Ed.), The experience of schooling (pp. 86–96). New<br />
York: Holt, Rinehart <strong>and</strong> Winst<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Soukup, J. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Bashinski, S. M., &<br />
Bovaird, J. A. (2007). Classroom variables <strong>and</strong><br />
Teachers’ Goals / 29
access to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 74, 101–120.<br />
Thomps<strong>on</strong>, T. (1994). Self-worth protecti<strong>on</strong>: Review<br />
<strong>and</strong> implicati<strong>on</strong>s for the classroom. Educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Review, 46, 259–274.<br />
United States Department of Educati<strong>on</strong> (USDOE).<br />
(2006). Twenty-eighth Annual Report to C<strong>on</strong>gress <strong>on</strong><br />
the Implementati<strong>on</strong> of the Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Act. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: Author.<br />
Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., Moody, S. W., & Elbaum,<br />
B. (2001). Instructi<strong>on</strong>al grouping for reading for<br />
students with LD: Implicati<strong>on</strong>s for practice. Interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
in School <strong>and</strong> Clinic, 36, 131–137.<br />
Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thomps<strong>on</strong>, S. (2003). Group<br />
size <strong>and</strong> time allotted to interventi<strong>on</strong>: Effects for<br />
students with reading difficulties. In B. Foorman<br />
(Ed.), Preventing <strong>and</strong> remediating reading difficulties:<br />
Bringing science to scale (pp. 299–324). Baltimore,<br />
MD: York Press.<br />
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivati<strong>on</strong> for some<br />
classroom experiences. Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychology,<br />
71, 421–431.<br />
Weinstein, R. S. (2002). Reaching higher: The power of<br />
expectati<strong>on</strong>s in schooling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard<br />
University Press.<br />
Westling, D. L., & Fox, L. (2008). Teaching Students<br />
with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle<br />
River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.<br />
Received: 30 November 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 10 February 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 18 April 2012<br />
30 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 31–40<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality am<strong>on</strong>g African American Students at the<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level: Examining the MID Disability Category<br />
Andrea D. Jasper<br />
Georgia Southern University<br />
Emily C. Bouck<br />
Purdue University<br />
Abstract: C<strong>on</strong>cern <strong>and</strong> research involving the overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> of African American students in the category<br />
of mild intellectual disability (MID) has existed for over four decades. Yet, little research focuses exclusively <strong>on</strong><br />
the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate representati<strong>on</strong> of African American students at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level. This study analyzed the<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2 (NLTS2) data using compositi<strong>on</strong> index <strong>and</strong> relative risk ratio<br />
approaches to explore the proporti<strong>on</strong> of African American students in the disability category of MID at the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary level. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses were used to examine whether ethnicity predicted the<br />
likelihood of a student being identified as MID. African American students were overrepresented in the disability<br />
category of MID <strong>and</strong> logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> results indicated ethnicity predicted the likelihood of students having<br />
MID.<br />
Decades of research document the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality<br />
of African American students in the<br />
high-incidence category of mild intellectual<br />
disability (MID) (Artiles, 2003; Chinn &<br />
Hughes, 1987; D<strong>on</strong>ovan & Cross, 2002; Hosp<br />
& Reschly, 2002; Skiba, Pol<strong>on</strong>i-Straudinger,<br />
Gallini, Simm<strong>on</strong>s, & Feggins-Azziz, 2006a;<br />
Waitoller, Artiles, & Cheney, 2010). In fact,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cern regarding the overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
African American students in the category of<br />
MID dates back to Dunn’s (1968) classic article<br />
in which he discussed unequal representati<strong>on</strong><br />
patterns of students of low status backgrounds<br />
(i.e., African American, American<br />
Indians, Mexicans <strong>and</strong> Puerto Rican Americans)<br />
in classes for students c<strong>on</strong>sidered ‘educable<br />
mentally retarded’ (Waitoller et al.,<br />
2010). Despite researchers’ extensive investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong> the issue of overrepresentati<strong>on</strong>, the<br />
disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate number of African American<br />
students receiving special educati<strong>on</strong> services<br />
persists. The durati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sistency of<br />
findings in literature dem<strong>on</strong>strates the magnitude<br />
of this issue (Hosp & Reschly, 2004).<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Andrea D. Jasper, Department of<br />
Teaching <strong>and</strong> Learning, P.O. Box 8134, Georgia<br />
Southern University, Statesboro, GA 30460. Email:<br />
ajasper@georgiasouthern.edu<br />
Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> occurs when the percentage<br />
of minority students in a disability category<br />
exceeds the percentage of these students<br />
in the total school-aged populati<strong>on</strong> (Zhang &<br />
Katsiyannis, 2002). The subjectivity of the determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
of high-incidence disabilities<br />
makes these categories more susceptible to<br />
overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> as opposed to low-incidence<br />
or severe disabilities (e.g., severe intellectual<br />
disability, deaf) (De Valenzuela, Copel<strong>and</strong>,<br />
Qi, & Park, 2006; Elhoweris, Mutua,<br />
Alsheikh, & Holloway, 2005; Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1994; Millan & Reschly, 1998). Hence,<br />
the overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> of African American<br />
students is more likely to occur in high-incidence<br />
disabilities, such as mild intellectual<br />
disability.<br />
Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> can be the result of inappropriate<br />
referral, identificati<strong>on</strong>, or culturally<br />
biased tests. Previous researchers dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
these processes tend to be discriminatory <strong>and</strong>,<br />
too often, individuals completing the process<br />
lack cultural awareness (Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1994; Harry & Klingner, 2006; Oswald,<br />
Coutinho, Best, & Singh, 1999; Skiba et al.,<br />
2006b). Teachers do a vast majority of referrals<br />
<strong>and</strong> biased percepti<strong>on</strong>s of students—intenti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
or unintenti<strong>on</strong>al—or a lack of cultural competence<br />
lead to more referrals of African American<br />
students than Caucasian students (Skiba et<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level / 31
al., 2008). Within the identificati<strong>on</strong> process,<br />
tests used for assessments are typically st<strong>and</strong>ardized<br />
<strong>on</strong> Caucasian Americans <strong>and</strong> reflect that<br />
particular cultural knowledge base. Hence, tests<br />
can be biased against students unfamiliar with<br />
the Caucasian American cultural knowledge<br />
base, such as African Americans (Artiles &<br />
Trent, 1994; Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>, 1994; Harry &<br />
Klingner, 2006). Last, <strong>on</strong>ce the referral process<br />
is initiated, the likelihood of African American<br />
students being placed in special educati<strong>on</strong> increases<br />
significantly with 85% of all referrals of<br />
African American students resulting in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> placement, as compared to 70–74%<br />
of students as a whole (Gottlieb, Atler, Gottlieb,<br />
& Wishner, 1994; Millan & Reschly, 1998;<br />
Ysseldyke, V<strong>and</strong>erwood, & Shriner, 1997).<br />
The lack of cultural awareness <strong>on</strong> the part<br />
of individuals referring <strong>and</strong> identifying minority<br />
students for special educati<strong>on</strong> services is of<br />
particular c<strong>on</strong>cern as the literature suggests<br />
ethnicity predicts disability (Artiles & Trent,<br />
1994; Chinn & Hughes, 1987; Skiba et al.,<br />
2006a; Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2002). In other<br />
words, African American students are more<br />
likely to be identified for special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
services in the MID disability category (Gottlieb<br />
et al., 1994; Harry & Klingner, 2006).<br />
Oswald et al. (1999) examined the influence<br />
of ec<strong>on</strong>omic <strong>and</strong> demographic factors <strong>on</strong> African<br />
American students’ identificati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
MID disability category. African American students<br />
were overrepresented in the MID category<br />
<strong>and</strong> were 2.5 times more likely to be<br />
identified as MID compared to n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American students.<br />
Impact of Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
The disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate representati<strong>on</strong> of African<br />
American students receiving special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
services for MID <strong>and</strong> the impact of<br />
disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality <strong>on</strong> African American students<br />
are two l<strong>on</strong>g-st<strong>and</strong>ing c<strong>on</strong>cerns in the<br />
field (Chinn & Hughes, 1987; Dunn, 1968;<br />
Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>, 1994). For <strong>on</strong>e, receipt of<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> services is often permanent<br />
through students’ school years <strong>and</strong> typically<br />
related to a more restrictive placement (e.g.,<br />
outside of general educati<strong>on</strong> classroom) (Polloway,<br />
Lubin, Smith, & Patt<strong>on</strong>, 2010). In fact,<br />
African American students identified with<br />
MID spend more time outside the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classroom compared to Caucasian<br />
students with MID (McDermott, Goldman, &<br />
Varenne, 2006; Reid & Knight, 2006). Restrictive<br />
placements may provide a less challenging<br />
<strong>and</strong> stimulating academic experience <strong>and</strong><br />
leave African American students unprepared<br />
to progress educati<strong>on</strong>ally (Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1994; Hosp & Reschly, 2004).<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, <strong>and</strong> equally problematic, are the<br />
negative postschool outcomes of students with<br />
MID. Compared to peers without disabilities,<br />
students with MID are more likely to drop out<br />
of school, less likely to access postsec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> or obtain employment, <strong>and</strong> more<br />
likely to be incarcerated (Nietupski, McQuillen,<br />
Berg, Daugherty, & Hamre-Nietupski,<br />
2001; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, &<br />
Garza, 2006). Students with disabilities who do<br />
not graduate from high school with a st<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
diploma are more apt to experience lifel<strong>on</strong>g<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sequences such as incarcerati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> the<br />
inability to become ec<strong>on</strong>omically self-sufficient<br />
(Gaumer-Ericks<strong>on</strong>, Kleinhammer-Tramill,<br />
& Thurlow, 2007). School completi<strong>on</strong> is<br />
a legitimate c<strong>on</strong>cern for students with MID, as<br />
students with MID are more likely to receive<br />
n<strong>on</strong>traditi<strong>on</strong>al exit certificates rather than a<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ard diploma (Gaumer-Ericks<strong>on</strong> et al.,<br />
2007; Polloway et al., 2010).<br />
Examining Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
Level<br />
Despite c<strong>on</strong>cerns about the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate<br />
representati<strong>on</strong> of African American students<br />
in high-incidence disability categories, few<br />
studies examine overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
level (excepti<strong>on</strong>s include Edgar, 1987;<br />
Wagner & Davis, 2006). Sec<strong>on</strong>dary students<br />
are often overlooked in the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality<br />
literature as most studies focus attenti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong><br />
students at the elementary level (Hosp &<br />
Reschly, 2004; Oswald et al., 1999). Thus, research<br />
is needed at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level (e.g.,<br />
seventh through twelfth grade) to determine<br />
whether African American students c<strong>on</strong>tinue<br />
to experience the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate representati<strong>on</strong><br />
occurring at the younger grades (e.g.,<br />
Hosp & Reschly, 2004; Oswald et al., 1999).<br />
Therefore, this study examined disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality<br />
(i.e., risk of being identified <strong>and</strong> frequency<br />
of identificati<strong>on</strong>) within the category<br />
of MID at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level to determine<br />
32 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
whether ethnicity influenced the proporti<strong>on</strong><br />
of students identified with MID.<br />
This study differs from previous studies in<br />
that it examines disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at <strong>on</strong>ly the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary level as opposed to the elementary<br />
<strong>and</strong> sec<strong>on</strong>dary level or just the elementary<br />
level (e.g., Hosp & Reschly, 2004; Skiba et al.,<br />
2006a; Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2002). To<br />
achieve the purposes of the study, Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2 (NLTS2)<br />
data were analyzed. The authors sought to<br />
answer the following four research questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for students with MID: (a) given a populati<strong>on</strong><br />
of students with disabilities, what are African<br />
American students’ risks of being identified<br />
with MID compared to the risk for n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American students?, (b) given a populati<strong>on</strong><br />
of students with disabilities, what are African<br />
American students’ risks of being<br />
identified with MID as compared to the risk<br />
for Caucasian students?, (c) to what extent are<br />
African American students over/under-represented<br />
in the MID disability category in comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
to their representati<strong>on</strong> in the schoolaged<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>?, <strong>and</strong> (d) does ethnicity<br />
predict whether students are more likely to<br />
have a primary disability of MID?<br />
Method<br />
Researchers focused <strong>on</strong> Wave 1 data from<br />
NLTS2 c<strong>on</strong>ducted by SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al (SRI<br />
Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.). In NLTS2, informati<strong>on</strong><br />
was collected over a 10-year period from parents,<br />
youth, <strong>and</strong> schools (i.e., teachers <strong>and</strong><br />
principals) to provide a nati<strong>on</strong>al picture of the<br />
experiences <strong>and</strong> achievements of sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
students with disabilities as they transiti<strong>on</strong>ed<br />
into early adulthood (SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.).<br />
Informati<strong>on</strong> was collected over five (5) waves,<br />
beginning in 2001 <strong>and</strong> ending in 2009, <strong>and</strong><br />
included six data collecti<strong>on</strong> mechanisms (parent/youth<br />
interview, student assessment,<br />
school characteristic survey, school program<br />
survey, transcripts, <strong>and</strong> general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teacher survey) (SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.).<br />
NLTS2 data were weighted to represent students<br />
nati<strong>on</strong>ally by creating populati<strong>on</strong> estimates<br />
(SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al, 2000). Using a twostage<br />
sampling process, a r<strong>and</strong>om sample of<br />
school districts was selected from the populati<strong>on</strong><br />
of school districts <strong>and</strong> was stratified to<br />
represent different regi<strong>on</strong>s, sizes <strong>and</strong> levels of<br />
school district wealth (Wagner & Davis, 2006).<br />
Of the 501 total school districts sampled, the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d stage c<strong>on</strong>sisted of r<strong>and</strong>omly selecting<br />
students in each district from each disability<br />
category to create populati<strong>on</strong> estimates using<br />
students sampled in each of the federal special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> disability categories in use during<br />
2001 (Javitz & Wagner, 1990; SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al,<br />
2000; Wagner & Davis, 2006).<br />
Participants<br />
Our analysis focused <strong>on</strong> a subset of students in<br />
NLTS2 data. To be included in analyses students<br />
met the following c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s: (a) received<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> services at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
level (e.g., grades 7 through 12)<br />
during the 2001–2002 academic year (i.e.,<br />
Wave 1), <strong>and</strong> (b) identified as having a primary<br />
disability of mild intellectual disability<br />
(MID) by school pers<strong>on</strong>nel. The authors <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
focused <strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e high incidence category—<br />
MID—as historically African American students<br />
are believed to be overrepresented in<br />
this category nati<strong>on</strong>ally (Harry & Klingner,<br />
2006).<br />
A weighted sample of 58,766 students met<br />
these criteria (see Table 1 for participants’<br />
gender, grade level, <strong>and</strong> income informati<strong>on</strong>).<br />
Of the weighted sample of students included<br />
in this investigati<strong>on</strong>, African American<br />
students represented 47.0% of the MID category<br />
while Caucasian students represented<br />
52.1%. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, n<strong>on</strong>-African American<br />
students, which included Caucasian as well as<br />
Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Isl<strong>and</strong>, American Indiana/Alaska<br />
Native, Other/Multiple accounted<br />
for 53.0% of the MID category. The<br />
category of n<strong>on</strong>-African American students included<br />
Caucasian students due to limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with NLTS2 data in which categories with unweighted<br />
numbers lower than two cannot be<br />
reported.<br />
Measures<br />
Of the six data collecti<strong>on</strong> mechanisms used in<br />
NLTS2 (parent/youth interview, student assessment,<br />
school characteristic survey, school<br />
program survey, transcripts, <strong>and</strong> general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teacher survey), this analysis used data<br />
from the parent/youth interview <strong>and</strong> school<br />
program survey (SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.). The<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level / 33
TABLE 1<br />
Characteristics of Students in Mild Intellectual<br />
Disability Category as a Percent<br />
Characteristic (n 58,766)<br />
Gender<br />
African American Male 32.8 (5.4)<br />
African American Female 14.2 (4.0)<br />
N<strong>on</strong>-African Male 24.8 (0.6)<br />
N<strong>on</strong>-African Female 28.2 (2.8)<br />
Caucasian American Male 24.8 (0.6)<br />
Caucasian American Female 27.3 (1.9)<br />
Income Range, African American<br />
Less than $25,000 36.4 (6.1)<br />
$25,001–50,000 5.7 (5.4)<br />
$50,001–75,000 –<br />
Greater than $75,000 –<br />
Income Range, N<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American<br />
Less than $25,000 21.4 (3.6)<br />
$25,001–50,000 20.6 (1.9)<br />
$50,001–75,000 2.7 (0.5)<br />
Greater than $75,000 2.6 (0.7)<br />
Income Range, Caucasian<br />
Less than $25,000 20.7 (3.1)<br />
$25,001–50,000 20.4 (1.6)<br />
$50,001–75,000 2.7 (0.5)<br />
Greater than $75,000 2.6 (0.7)<br />
Grade Level<br />
Eighth 30.5 (8.5)<br />
Ninth 18.5 (5.4)<br />
Tenth 21.5 (4.6)<br />
Eleventh 23.0 (5.7)<br />
Twelfth 5.0 (2.7)<br />
Note: N<strong>on</strong>-African American included Caucasian,<br />
Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Isl<strong>and</strong>er, American Indian/<br />
Alaska Native, <strong>and</strong> Other/Multiple. All unweighted<br />
values below two were not reported. Not all resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
provided an answer to questi<strong>on</strong>s regarding<br />
household income <strong>and</strong> grade level. Income range<br />
percentages for African Americans in the MID category<br />
represents 89.6% of the total African American<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>. Income range percentages for n<strong>on</strong>-<br />
African Americans in the MID category represents<br />
89.3% of the total n<strong>on</strong>-African American populati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Income range percentages for Caucasians in<br />
the MID category represents 89.1% of the total<br />
Caucasian populati<strong>on</strong>. Grade level percentages for<br />
students in the MID category represents 98.3% of<br />
the total student populati<strong>on</strong>. St<strong>and</strong>ard error values<br />
are in parentheses.<br />
parent/youth interview—completed by each<br />
student’s parent/guardian—obtained informati<strong>on</strong><br />
about student <strong>and</strong> family characteris-<br />
tics (e.g., ethnicity, household income), n<strong>on</strong>school<br />
activities (e.g., hobbies, organized<br />
activities, Special Olympics), <strong>and</strong> activities after<br />
high school (e.g., post-sec<strong>on</strong>dary school,<br />
employment) (SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.). The<br />
school program survey, completed by the pers<strong>on</strong><br />
who best knew the student’s school program,<br />
provided informati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>cerning the<br />
student’s special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> vocati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
courses taken <strong>and</strong> their performance in these<br />
classes <strong>and</strong> behavior performance in school<br />
(i.e., suspensi<strong>on</strong>, expulsi<strong>on</strong>, attendance) (SRI<br />
Internati<strong>on</strong>al, n.d.). From the surveys, we focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> data regarding students (e.g., primary<br />
disability, ethnicity, <strong>and</strong> gender) as well<br />
as demographic informati<strong>on</strong> about students’<br />
households (e.g., parent/guardian household<br />
income).<br />
Procedure<br />
Within the larger NLTS2 project, the authors<br />
identified relevant variables from the school<br />
program survey <strong>and</strong> the parent/youth survey<br />
in Wave 1. These variables included students’:<br />
primary disability (npr1D2b), grade level<br />
(npr1A1), ethnicity (np1A3), gender (np1A1)<br />
<strong>and</strong> household income (income_range). We<br />
eliminated all n<strong>on</strong>-relevant variables <strong>and</strong> cases<br />
in both databases to leave <strong>on</strong>ly students who<br />
had a primary disability of MID. We then<br />
merged the school program survey <strong>and</strong> parent/youth<br />
interview by cases.<br />
In the c<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong> of the final database for<br />
analysis, some original NLTS2 variables were<br />
used; however, some categorical variables were<br />
recoded. The variable regarding student ethnicity<br />
(np1A3) originally included six separate categories<br />
(e.g., Caucasian, African American,<br />
Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Isl<strong>and</strong>er, American Indian/Alaska<br />
Native, <strong>and</strong> Other/Multiple) <strong>and</strong><br />
we c<strong>on</strong>densed it into three: African American,<br />
Caucasian, <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-African American (i.e., Hispanic,<br />
Asian/Pacific Isl<strong>and</strong>, American Indiana/<br />
Alaska Native, Other/Multiple, <strong>and</strong> Caucasian).<br />
Another manipulated variable addressed students’<br />
household income <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sisted of 16<br />
separate categories. This variable was c<strong>on</strong>densed<br />
into four categories (e.g., less than $25,000;<br />
$25,001 to 50,000; $50,001 to 75,000; <strong>and</strong><br />
greater than $75,000) by separating the categories<br />
into four quartiles.<br />
34 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Data Analysis<br />
Using the complex samples opti<strong>on</strong> in SPSS to<br />
represent weighted nati<strong>on</strong>al populati<strong>on</strong> estimates,<br />
descriptive analyses were run to obtain<br />
frequency data regarding participants’ ethnicity,<br />
household income, gender, <strong>and</strong> grade<br />
level. Weights were provided in the original<br />
NLTS2 databases <strong>and</strong> allowed for the estimates<br />
to represent populati<strong>on</strong> characteristics<br />
(see Javitz & Wagner, 2003; Wagner, Kutash,<br />
Duchnowski, & Epstein, 2005 for additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
informati<strong>on</strong> relative to weighting the data).<br />
Risk index, relative risk ratio, <strong>and</strong> compositi<strong>on</strong><br />
index approaches were used to examine the<br />
representativeness of participants in targeted<br />
categories. Finally, logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted to identify whether ethnicity<br />
impacted the likelihood of participants having<br />
a primary disability of MID.<br />
Risk index <strong>and</strong> relative risk ratio. Risk index<br />
(RI) <strong>and</strong> relative risk ratio (RR) approaches<br />
were used to answer research questi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong>e<br />
<strong>and</strong> two regarding African American students’<br />
risk of being identified compared to n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American <strong>and</strong> Caucasian students<br />
(Skiba et al., 2008). “Risk” indicates the likelihood<br />
of a student from a target group being<br />
identified with a disability, or in this case the<br />
particular disability category of MID (Skiba et<br />
al., 2008; Westat, 2005). According to Westat,<br />
RI is computed by dividing the number of<br />
students from an ethnic group (e.g., African<br />
American) in a category (i.e., MID) by the<br />
total number of students from an ethnic<br />
group (e.g., African American), <strong>and</strong> then multiplying<br />
by 100. In order to obtain the best<br />
measure of disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality, a relative risk<br />
ratio (RR) must be computed which is d<strong>on</strong>e<br />
by dividing the RI for the target group (African<br />
American) by the RI for the comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
group (Caucasian or n<strong>on</strong>-African American)<br />
(Westat, 2005). For example, the RI for the<br />
African American group divided by the RI for<br />
the Caucasian group will provide a RR for the<br />
African American group. A RR of 1.0 indicates<br />
no difference between target <strong>and</strong> comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
groups, while a RR greater than 1.0 indicates<br />
risk for the target group is greater than risk of<br />
the comparis<strong>on</strong> group (i.e., target group is<br />
overrepresented). A RR less than 1.0 indicates<br />
risk for the target group is less than the risk<br />
for the comparis<strong>on</strong> group (Skiba et al., 2008).<br />
Compositi<strong>on</strong> index. To answer research<br />
questi<strong>on</strong> three regarding the extent to which<br />
African American students are overrepresented<br />
or underrepresented, a compositi<strong>on</strong><br />
index (CI) was used as an alternate approach<br />
to measure the proporti<strong>on</strong> of African American<br />
students in MID category compared to<br />
their representati<strong>on</strong> in the school-aged populati<strong>on</strong><br />
(Skiba et al., 2008). The CI was computed<br />
by dividing the number of students<br />
from an ethnic group (e.g., African American)<br />
in a category (e.g., MID) by the total<br />
number of students in that category (Westat,<br />
2005). This percentage was compared to the<br />
ethnic group’s representati<strong>on</strong> in the schoolaged<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>. For the comparis<strong>on</strong> of representativeness<br />
of African American students<br />
in the school-aged populati<strong>on</strong>, we used the<br />
Comm<strong>on</strong> Core of Data (CCD). CCD is the<br />
primary database <strong>on</strong> elementary <strong>and</strong> sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> in the United States (Oswald et<br />
al., 1999). In 2001, African American students<br />
represented 7.42% of the school-aged populati<strong>on</strong><br />
in grades 7 through 12 in all schools (i.e.,<br />
public, private, <strong>and</strong> special) (U.S. Department<br />
of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Institute of Educati<strong>on</strong> Sciences,<br />
n.d.). Using the suggested 10% c<strong>on</strong>fidence<br />
interval around African American school-aged<br />
students (Chinn & Hughes, 1987), enrollment<br />
rates less than 6.68% would signify underrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
while rates exceeding 8.16%<br />
would signify overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> of the African<br />
American group.<br />
Logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses. To answer research<br />
questi<strong>on</strong> four regarding whether ethnicity<br />
predicted the likelihood of students having<br />
MID, logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses were<br />
c<strong>on</strong>ducted using SPSS. Researchers chose to<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly examine ethnicity because they felt it was<br />
the str<strong>on</strong>gest <strong>and</strong> most significant predictor<br />
variable to examine when attempting to underst<strong>and</strong><br />
whether overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> occurred<br />
for African American students at the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary level as previous researchers suggested<br />
African American students are at high<br />
risk of receiving a disability label (Harry &<br />
Klingner, 2006). Logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> was most<br />
appropriate because it required the use of a<br />
binary outcome variable (i.e., MID vs. not<br />
MID) <strong>and</strong> predictor variables that could be<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinuous or categorical in nature (Huck,<br />
2008). Two separate logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted (i.e., African Americans<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level / 35
compared to Caucasians <strong>and</strong> African Americans<br />
compared to n<strong>on</strong>-African Americans)<br />
due to limitati<strong>on</strong>s with NLTS2 database, as the<br />
ethnicity variable did not allow participants to<br />
be simultaneously coded into two categories<br />
(i.e., both Caucasian <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-African American).<br />
The outcome variable differed (MID vs.<br />
not MID), but the predictor variable (ethnicity)<br />
was the same for each logistic regressi<strong>on</strong><br />
analysis. The effect of ethnicity <strong>on</strong> the odds of<br />
students having a primary disability of MID<br />
was estimated.<br />
Results<br />
Risk Index (RI) <strong>and</strong> Relative Risk Ratio (RR)<br />
Risk indices were calculated for African American<br />
(RI 10.4%), Caucasian (RI 3.3%),<br />
<strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-African American (RI 2.7%) students.<br />
The RR for the African American<br />
group <strong>and</strong> Caucasian comparis<strong>on</strong> group was<br />
3.15; in other words, African American students<br />
were 3.15 times more likely to have a<br />
primary disability of MID compared to Caucasian<br />
students. Similarly, the RR for the African<br />
American group <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-African American<br />
group was 3.85; suggesting African American<br />
students were 3.85 times more likely to have a<br />
primary disability of MID compared to n<strong>on</strong>-<br />
African American students.<br />
Compositi<strong>on</strong> Index (CI)<br />
Using NLTS2 data, African American students<br />
represented 47.0% of students with a primary<br />
disability of MID. The number of African<br />
American students enrolled in all schools in<br />
grades seven through twelve was 7.42% (U.S.<br />
Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Institute of Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Sciences, n.d.), indicating African Amer-<br />
TABLE 2<br />
Summary of Logistic Regressi<strong>on</strong> Analyses<br />
ican students were overrepresented in the category<br />
of MID.<br />
Logistic Regressi<strong>on</strong> Analysis<br />
The results of logistic regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses revealed<br />
ethnicity significantly predicted<br />
whether students had a primary disability of<br />
MID. The odds ratio indicated African American<br />
students were 4.36 times more likely of<br />
having a primary disability of MID compared<br />
to n<strong>on</strong>-African Americans <strong>and</strong> 9.10 times<br />
more likely compared to Caucasian students<br />
(see Table 2 for a summary of logistic regressi<strong>on</strong><br />
results).<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
This study examined the NLTS2 to determine<br />
the representativeness of sec<strong>on</strong>dary-aged African<br />
American students identified as having<br />
MID as their primary disability as well as analyzed<br />
data to examine whether ethnicity predicted<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary students’ likelihood of having<br />
a primary disability of MID. Findings<br />
determined African American students were<br />
overrepresented in MID. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, ethnicity<br />
predicted students having a primary disability<br />
of MID.<br />
Throughout all analyses a c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> was<br />
found between sec<strong>on</strong>dary African American<br />
students <strong>and</strong> the category of MID. The logistic<br />
regressi<strong>on</strong> analyses indicate African American<br />
students are more likely to have a primary<br />
disability of MID compared to n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American students <strong>and</strong> Caucasian students.<br />
Using the CI, African American students were<br />
grossly overrepresented at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level<br />
compared to their representati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
school-aged populati<strong>on</strong> (47.0% vs. 7.42%).<br />
Results of RR support the overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
Predictor B SE(B) exp(B) p<br />
African American vs. Caucasian a<br />
African American vs. N<strong>on</strong>-African American a<br />
2.209* 0.585 9.107 0.003<br />
1.1474* 0.354 4.366 0.000<br />
Note: exp (B) exp<strong>on</strong>entiated B, a the estimated parameter was set to zero because this is the reference<br />
category. p 0.05<br />
36 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
finding (i.e., 10.4% for African Americans vs.<br />
3.3% for Caucasians <strong>and</strong> 2.7% for n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
Americans). Findings from this study suggest<br />
disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality in the MID category c<strong>on</strong>tinues<br />
to be a problem for African American<br />
students despite decades of research <strong>and</strong> attenti<strong>on</strong><br />
(Artiles, Kozleski, Trent, Osher, & Ortiz,<br />
2010; D<strong>on</strong>ovan & Cross, 2002; Dunn,<br />
1968).<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality in the MID category is<br />
problematic if these students are not receiving<br />
what they need in terms of educati<strong>on</strong>al programming<br />
(Nietupski et al., 2001). Special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
can be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a protective or a<br />
risk factor (D<strong>on</strong>ovan & Cross, 2002). African<br />
American students placed in the MID disability<br />
category may actually be receiving educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
support necessary to help them succeed<br />
in high school; however, researchers document<br />
this is frequently not the case. The efficacy<br />
of special educati<strong>on</strong> services has been<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tested for many years due to the problematic<br />
outcomes of the special educati<strong>on</strong> system<br />
(e.g., achievement level, dropout rate, poor<br />
postschool outcomes) (Artiles & Bal, 2008;<br />
Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>, 1994; Polloway et al.,<br />
2010).<br />
C<strong>on</strong>cern also exists that African Americans<br />
with MID receive low-quality instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
experience more segregated educati<strong>on</strong> settings<br />
than Caucasians with MID (Polloway et<br />
al., 2010). Students placed in segregated settings<br />
may be denied access to the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum <strong>and</strong> receiving services<br />
that do not meet their learning needs, which<br />
can further exacerbate poor postschool outcomes,<br />
such as decreased opportunities for<br />
employment, as well as in-school success<br />
(Hosp & Reschly, 2002; McDermott et al.,<br />
2006; Nietupski et al., 2001; Polloway et al.,<br />
2010; Reid & Knight, 2006; Skiba et al., 2006a;<br />
Waitoller et al., 2010). The negative postschool<br />
outcomes associated with African<br />
American students with MID (e.g., school<br />
completi<strong>on</strong>, postschool ec<strong>on</strong>omic <strong>and</strong> occupati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
attainment, access to college)—both<br />
those correctly <strong>and</strong> wr<strong>on</strong>gly identified, indicate<br />
a need for an increased commitment to<br />
successful school completi<strong>on</strong> for these students<br />
(Artiles & Bal, 2008; Polloway et al.,<br />
2010). Particular attenti<strong>on</strong> should be given to<br />
methods to improve African American students<br />
with MID postschool success, such as<br />
access to meaningful employment <strong>and</strong> postsec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>. One such strategy is the<br />
use of a functi<strong>on</strong>al curriculum as it has the<br />
potential to improve students with MID in<br />
school success as well as postschool outcomes<br />
(Bouck, 2004; Bouck & Flanagan, 2010).<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Implicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Findings from this study highlight the issue of<br />
overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g African American students—particularly<br />
when c<strong>on</strong>sidering students with MID, a<br />
problem still existing over 40 years after Dunn<br />
(1968) raised the issue (Artiles et al., 2010;<br />
Waitoller et al., 2010). One potential soluti<strong>on</strong><br />
to the issue of disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality is training<br />
school professi<strong>on</strong>als to be culturally competent<br />
(Cartledge & Kourea, 2008). Schools<br />
have become increasingly diverse, but the<br />
same cannot be said for teachers (e.g., Caucasian<br />
women of Anglo-European origin) (Case<br />
& Hemmings, 2005). Many school professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
lack knowledge about the cultural experience<br />
of African Americans students (Cartledge<br />
& Kourea, 2008). Training school<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als to be culturally competent<br />
would permit them to be better equipped to<br />
work with a broad range of students from<br />
different cultures with varying disabilities. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally,<br />
training school professi<strong>on</strong>als to be<br />
culturally competent could result in fewer inappropriate<br />
referrals of African American students<br />
to special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong>, c<strong>on</strong>sequently,<br />
reduce their overrepresentati<strong>on</strong> (Artiles,<br />
Harry, Reschly, & Chinn, 2002; Valles, 1998).<br />
Another potential soluti<strong>on</strong> is re-evaluating<br />
the assessment <strong>and</strong> identificati<strong>on</strong> process. The<br />
assessment <strong>and</strong> identificati<strong>on</strong> process has<br />
been the focus of many researchers as this<br />
process may possibly c<strong>on</strong>tribute to the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate<br />
number of African American students<br />
in special educati<strong>on</strong> (Skiba et al.,<br />
2006b). Often, in the identificati<strong>on</strong> process,<br />
tests used for assessments are typically st<strong>and</strong>ardized<br />
<strong>on</strong> Caucasian Americans <strong>and</strong> reflect<br />
that particular cultural knowledge base (Artiles<br />
& Trent, 1994; Harry & Anders<strong>on</strong>, 1994;<br />
Harry & Klingner, 2006). One way to circumvent<br />
this issue is to implement assessments<br />
that focus more closely <strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
classroom practice, such as performancebased<br />
measures or curriculum-based measures<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level / 37
(D<strong>on</strong>ovan & Cross, 2002). By implementing<br />
assessments that are more academically meaningful,<br />
the potential bias experienced by those<br />
unfamiliar with st<strong>and</strong>ardized assessments will<br />
be reduced <strong>and</strong> may result in the determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
of fewer students eligible for special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
services (D<strong>on</strong>ovan & Cross, 2002).<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Future Directi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
A few limitati<strong>on</strong>s are identified in this study.<br />
One limitati<strong>on</strong> is the number of logistic regressi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Due to limitati<strong>on</strong>s with NLTS2 data,<br />
we were unable to c<strong>on</strong>duct <strong>on</strong>e single logistic<br />
regressi<strong>on</strong> comparing all ethnic groups. Thus,<br />
there is some redundancy in the two logistic<br />
regressi<strong>on</strong>s because they are comparing similar<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>s (i.e., Caucasian <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-African<br />
American—which included Caucasians).<br />
Future research should examine the identificati<strong>on</strong><br />
of other racial/ethnic groups (i.e., n<strong>on</strong>-<br />
African American) as there is the potential for<br />
these groups to be over/under-represented as<br />
well. This would also remove the issue of redundancy<br />
in the logistic regressi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong><br />
strengthen the findings of the study.<br />
Another limitati<strong>on</strong> is the use of ethnicity as<br />
the <strong>on</strong>ly predictor variable. Although research<br />
suggests ethnicity predicts disability (e.g., Artiles<br />
& Trent, 1994; Chinn & Hughes, 1987;<br />
Skiba et al., 2006a; Zhang & Katsiyannis,<br />
2002), previous research also suggests correlati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
between income <strong>and</strong> ethnicity <strong>and</strong> their<br />
effect of predicting disability (Artiles, 2003;<br />
Artiles & Trent, 1994; Gottlieb et al., 1994).<br />
Future research should examine a range of<br />
factors that may impact disability identificati<strong>on</strong><br />
(e.g., academic achievement, parental<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>al status, socio-ec<strong>on</strong>omic status, suspensi<strong>on</strong><br />
rates, postschool outcomes) as further<br />
analysis of these variables may strengthen<br />
the results of the study.<br />
Additi<strong>on</strong>al research is needed regarding<br />
disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level c<strong>on</strong>sidering<br />
students with MID as well as other<br />
high incidence disabilities categories, such as<br />
emoti<strong>on</strong>al/behavior disorders. There is a lack<br />
of research addressing disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality issues<br />
at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level; most studies focus<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> students at the elementary level<br />
(Hosp & Reschly, 2004; Oswald et al., 1999).<br />
Future research should l<strong>on</strong>gitudinally examine<br />
the school experiences of students identi-<br />
fied with MID beginning at the elementary<br />
level <strong>and</strong> follow these students into the sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
level. A l<strong>on</strong>gitudinal study would provide<br />
evidence of the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality issues<br />
that exist at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level. Moreover,<br />
this type of study would provide some insight<br />
into how disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality initiates at the elementary<br />
level <strong>and</strong> culminates at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
level.<br />
References<br />
Artiles, A. J. (2003). Special educati<strong>on</strong>’s changing<br />
identity: Paradoxes <strong>and</strong> dilemmas in views of culture<br />
<strong>and</strong> space. Harvard Educati<strong>on</strong>al Review, 73,<br />
164–202.<br />
Artiles, A. J., & Bal, A. (2008). The next generati<strong>on</strong><br />
of disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality research: Toward a comparative<br />
model in the study of equity in ability differences.<br />
The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 42, 4–14.<br />
Doi: 10.1177/0022466907313603<br />
Artiles, A. J., Harry, B., Reschly, D. J., & Chinn, P. C.<br />
(2002). Over-identificati<strong>on</strong> of students of color in<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong>: A critical overview. Multicultural<br />
Perspectives, 4, 3–10.<br />
Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E. B., Trent, S. C., Osher, D.,<br />
& Ortiz, A. (2010). Justifying <strong>and</strong> explaining disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality,<br />
1968–2008: A critique of underlying<br />
views of culture. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 76,<br />
279–299.<br />
Artiles, A. J., & Trent, S. C. (1994). Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
of minority students in special educati<strong>on</strong>: A<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinuing debate. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
27, 410–437.<br />
Bouck, E. C. (2004). State of curriculum for sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
students with mild mental retardati<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 39,<br />
169–176.<br />
Bouck, E. C., & Flanagan, S. M. (2010). Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
curriculum evidenced-based educati<strong>on</strong>?: C<strong>on</strong>sidering<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary students with mild intellectual<br />
disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 45, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>7–499.<br />
Cartledge, G., & Kourea, L. (2008). Culturally resp<strong>on</strong>sive<br />
classrooms for culturally diverse students<br />
with <strong>and</strong> at risk for disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
74, 351–371.<br />
Case, K. A., & Hemmings, A. (2005). Distancing<br />
strategies: White women preservice teachers <strong>and</strong><br />
antiracist curriculum. Urban Educati<strong>on</strong>, 40, 606–<br />
626. doi:10.1177/0042085905281396<br />
Chinn, P. C., & Hughes, S. (1987). Representati<strong>on</strong><br />
of minority students in special educati<strong>on</strong> classes.<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 8, 41–46.<br />
De Valenzuela, J. S., Copel<strong>and</strong>, S. R., Huaqing Qi,<br />
C., & Park, M. (2006). Examining educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
equity: Revisiting the disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate represen-<br />
38 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
tati<strong>on</strong> of minority students in special educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 72, 425–441.<br />
D<strong>on</strong>ovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (Eds.). (2002). Minority<br />
students in special <strong>and</strong> gifted educati<strong>on</strong>. Washingt<strong>on</strong>,<br />
DC: Nati<strong>on</strong>al Academies Press.<br />
Dunn, L. M. (1968). Special educati<strong>on</strong> for the<br />
mildly retarded: Is much of it justifiable? Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 35, 5–22.<br />
Edgar, F. (1987). Sec<strong>on</strong>dary programs in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>: Are many of them justifiable? Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 53, 555–561.<br />
Elhoweris, H., Mutua, K., Alsheikh, N., & Holloway,<br />
P. (2005). Effect of children’s ethnicity <strong>on</strong> teachers’<br />
referral <strong>and</strong> recommendati<strong>on</strong> decisi<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
gifted <strong>and</strong> talented programs. Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, 26, 25–31.<br />
Gaumer-Ericks<strong>on</strong>, A. S., Kleinhammer-Tramill, J., &<br />
Thurlow, M. L. (2007). An analysis of the relati<strong>on</strong>ship<br />
between high school exit exams <strong>and</strong> diploma<br />
opti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> the impact <strong>on</strong> students with disabilities.<br />
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18, 117–128.<br />
Gottlieb, J., Atler, M., Gottlieb, B.W., & Wishner, J.<br />
(1994). Special educati<strong>on</strong> in urban America: It’s<br />
not justifiable for many. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
27, 453–465.<br />
Harry, B., & Anders<strong>on</strong>, M.G. (1994). The disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate<br />
placement of African American males in<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> programs: A critique of the process.<br />
The Journal of Negro Educati<strong>on</strong>, 63, 602–619.<br />
Harry, B., & Klingner, J. (2006). Why are so many<br />
minority students in special educati<strong>on</strong>? Underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
race <strong>and</strong> disability in schools. New York,<br />
NY: Teachers College Press.<br />
Hosp, J. L., & Reschly, D. J. (2002). Predictors of<br />
restrictiveness of placement for African American<br />
<strong>and</strong> Caucasian students. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 68,<br />
225–238.<br />
Hosp, J. L., & Reschly, D. J. (2004). Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate<br />
representati<strong>on</strong> of minority students in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>: Academic, demographic <strong>and</strong> ec<strong>on</strong>omic<br />
predictors. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 70, 185–<br />
199.<br />
Huck, S. W. (2008). Reading statistics <strong>and</strong> research (5 th<br />
ed.). Bost<strong>on</strong>, MA: Allyn & Bac<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Javitz, H., & Wagner, M. (2003). Analysis of the<br />
potential basis in the sample of local educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
agencies (LEAs) in the Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal<br />
Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study 2 (NLTS2) sample. Retrieved<br />
from http://www.nlts2.org/studymeth/nlts2_<br />
analysis_bias_sample.pdf<br />
Javitz, H. S., & Wagner, M. (1990). The Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study of special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
students: Report <strong>on</strong> sample design <strong>and</strong> limitati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
wave 1 (1987). Menlo Park, CA: SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al.<br />
MacMillan, D. L., & Reschly, D. J. (1998). Overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
of minority students: The case for<br />
greater specificity or rec<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> of the vari-<br />
ables examined. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
32, 15–24.<br />
McDermott, R., Goldman, S., & Varenne, H. (2006).<br />
The cultural work of learning disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Researcher, 35, 12–17.<br />
Nietupski, J. A., McQuillen, T., Duncan-Berg, D.,<br />
Daugherty, V., & Hamre-Nietupski, S. M. (2001).<br />
Preparing students with mild disabilities for careers<br />
in technology: A process <strong>and</strong> recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
from Iowa’s high school high tech program.<br />
Journal of Vocati<strong>on</strong>al Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong>, 16, 179–187.<br />
Oswald, D. P., Coutinho, M. J., Best, A. M., & Singh,<br />
N. N. (1999). Ethnic representati<strong>on</strong> in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>: The influence of school-related ec<strong>on</strong>omic<br />
<strong>and</strong> demographic variables. The Journal of<br />
Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 32, 194–206.<br />
Polloway, E. A., Lubin, J., Smith, J. D., & Patt<strong>on</strong>, J. R.<br />
(2010). Mild intellectual disabilities: Legacies <strong>and</strong><br />
trends in c<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>and</strong> educati<strong>on</strong>al practices. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 45, 54–68.<br />
Reid, K., & Knight, M. G. (2006). Disability justifies<br />
exclusi<strong>on</strong> of minority students: A critical history<br />
grounded in disability studies. Educati<strong>on</strong>al Researcher,<br />
35, 18–23.<br />
Skiba, R. J., Pol<strong>on</strong>i-Straudinger, L., Gallini, S., Simm<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
A. B., & Feggins-Aziz, R. (2006a). Disparate<br />
access: The disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality of African American<br />
students with disabilities across educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ments. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 72, 411–424.<br />
Skiba, R. J., Simm<strong>on</strong>s, A. B., Ritter, S., Gibb, A. C.,<br />
Rausch, M. K., Cuadrado, J., & Chung, C. G.<br />
(2008). Achieving equity in special educati<strong>on</strong>:<br />
History, status <strong>and</strong> current challenges. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 74, 264–288.<br />
Skiba, R. J., Simm<strong>on</strong>s, A. B., Ritter, S., Kohler, K.,<br />
Henders<strong>on</strong>, M., & Wu, T. (2006b). The c<strong>on</strong>text of<br />
minority disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality: Practiti<strong>on</strong>er perspectives<br />
<strong>on</strong> special educati<strong>on</strong> referral. Teachers College<br />
Record, 108, 1424–1459.<br />
SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al. (February 25, 2000). The Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2 (NLTS2) Sampling<br />
Plan. Menlo Park, CA: SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al.<br />
SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al. (n.d.). The Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal<br />
Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2. http://www.nlts2.org/<br />
U.S. Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Institute of Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Sciences. (n.d.). Comm<strong>on</strong> core of data. http://<br />
nces.ed.gov/surveys/SurveyGroups.asp?group1<br />
Valles, E. C. (1998). The disproporti<strong>on</strong>ate representati<strong>on</strong><br />
of minority students in special educati<strong>on</strong>:<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>ding to the problem. The Journal of Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, 32, 52–54.<br />
Waitoller, F. R., Artiles, A. J., & Cheney, D. A.<br />
(2010). The miner’s canary: A review of overrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
research <strong>and</strong> explanati<strong>on</strong>s. The Journal<br />
of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 44, 29–49. doi: 10.1177/<br />
0022466908329226<br />
Wagner, M., & Davis, M. (2006). How are we pre-<br />
Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality at the Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Level / 39
paring students with emoti<strong>on</strong>al disturbances for<br />
the transiti<strong>on</strong> to young adulthood? Journal of Emoti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
<strong>and</strong> Behavioral Disorders, 14, 86–98.<br />
Wagner, M., Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Epstein,<br />
M. H. (2005). The Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Elementary<br />
L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Study <strong>and</strong> the Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study: Study designs <strong>and</strong><br />
implicati<strong>on</strong>s for children <strong>and</strong> youth with emoti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
disturbance. Journal of Emoti<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Behavioral<br />
Disorders, 13(1), 23–41. doi: 10.1177/<br />
10634266050130010301<br />
Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., &<br />
Garza, N. (2006). An overview of findings from wave<br />
2 of the Nati<strong>on</strong>al L<strong>on</strong>gitudinal Transiti<strong>on</strong> Study-2<br />
(NLTS2). (NCSER 2006–3004). Menlo Park, CA:<br />
SRI Internati<strong>on</strong>al.<br />
Westat. (2005). Methods for assessing racial/ethnic disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality<br />
in special educati<strong>on</strong>: A technical assis-<br />
tance guide. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: U.S. Department of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, Office of Special Programs. https://<br />
www.ideadata.org/docs/ Disproporti<strong>on</strong>ality%<br />
20Technical %20Assistance%20Guide.pdf<br />
Ysseldyke, J. E., V<strong>and</strong>erwood, M. L., & Shriner, J.<br />
(1997). Changes over the past decade in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> referral to placement probability: An<br />
incredibly reliable practice. Assessment for Effective<br />
Interventi<strong>on</strong>, 23, 193–201. Doi: 10.1177/<br />
153450849702300102<br />
Zhang, D., & Katsiyannis, A. (2002). Minority representati<strong>on</strong><br />
in special educati<strong>on</strong>: A persistent<br />
challenge. Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 23, 180–<br />
187.<br />
Received: 9 November 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 16 January 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 6 March 2012<br />
40 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 41–<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Teaching Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Language Skills to<br />
Students with <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorders <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> Using Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
Margaret M. Flores, Cynthia Nels<strong>on</strong>, Vanessa Hint<strong>on</strong>, T<strong>on</strong>i M. Franklin,<br />
Shaunita D. Strozier, LaT<strong>on</strong>ya Terry, <strong>and</strong> Susan Franklin<br />
Auburn University<br />
Abstract: There is limited research dem<strong>on</strong>strating Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> (DI) as an effective reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> for students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities (DD). Previous<br />
research has shown that DI, when porti<strong>on</strong>s of the program were implemented, resulted in increased skills (Flores<br />
& Ganz, 2007; Flores & Ganz, 2009). The purpose of this pilot study was to implement DI comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
programs without modificati<strong>on</strong>, using whole less<strong>on</strong>s. Eighteen elementary students with ASD or DD participated<br />
in the study <strong>and</strong> data were collected using curriculum-based assessments. One-way analyses of variance<br />
indicated that there were significant differences in students’ skills over time. Results <strong>and</strong> their implicati<strong>on</strong>s will<br />
be discussed.<br />
Individuals with developmental disabilities<br />
(DD), including students with autism spectrum<br />
disorders (ASD) are diverse in their<br />
characteristics <strong>and</strong> often display deficits in<br />
their ability to use <strong>and</strong> underst<strong>and</strong> language.<br />
Students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD need educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programming designed to meet their individual<br />
needs. However, recent legislative requirements<br />
of No Child Left Behind (2002) <strong>and</strong> the<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Improvement Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Act (2004) m<strong>and</strong>ate that students with<br />
disabilities (including students with ASD <strong>and</strong><br />
DD) participate in the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
<strong>and</strong> receive high quality instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
such that they make adequate progress toward<br />
grade level st<strong>and</strong>ards, especially in the areas of<br />
reading <strong>and</strong> mathematics. Reviews of the literature<br />
with regard to academic instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
for individuals with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD have shown<br />
that interventi<strong>on</strong>s are limited (Browder,<br />
Wakeman, Spo<strong>on</strong>er, Ahlgrim-Delzell, & Algozzine,<br />
2006; Browder, Spo<strong>on</strong>er, Ahlgrim-<br />
Delzell, Harris, & Wakeman, 2008). However,<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Margaret M. Flores, Dept. Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong>, Counseling, 2084 Haley<br />
Center, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.<br />
Email: mmf0010@auburn.edu<br />
research has shown that systematic reading is a<br />
realistic goal for students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD<br />
regardless of their cognitive functi<strong>on</strong>ing<br />
(Whal<strong>on</strong>, Otaiba, & Delano, 2009).<br />
Access to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
includes reading <strong>and</strong> reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong>;<br />
however there is less extensive literature that<br />
includes students with DD <strong>and</strong> ASD (Chiang &<br />
Lin, 2007). According to O’C<strong>on</strong>ner <strong>and</strong> Klein<br />
(2004), reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
ASD <strong>and</strong> DD has been underemphasized. Research<br />
has provided ample informati<strong>on</strong> regarding<br />
effective instructi<strong>on</strong>al methods for teaching<br />
reading in the general educati<strong>on</strong> setting (Shippen,<br />
Houchins, & Stevent<strong>on</strong>, 2010). Of the various<br />
reading programs cited in the literature,<br />
research has shown Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> (DI)<br />
(Carnine, Silbert, Kameenui, & Tarver, 2004;<br />
Engelman & Carnine, 1991) to be an effective<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> for students at-risk for academic<br />
failure (Carls<strong>on</strong> & Francis, 2002; Foorman,<br />
Francis, Fletcher, & Schatschneider, 1998; Frederick,<br />
Keel, & Neel, 2002; Grossen, 2004; Shippen,<br />
Houchins, Stevent<strong>on</strong>, & Sartor, 2005), students<br />
with learning disabilities (Torgesen et al.,<br />
2001), as well as students with cognitive deficits<br />
(Bradford, Shippen, Alberto, Houchins, &<br />
Flores, 2006; Flores, Shippen, Alberto, & Crowe,<br />
2004).<br />
Newly emerging reading research involving<br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> / 41
DI instructi<strong>on</strong>al approaches with individuals<br />
with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD has shown that this may be<br />
a promising instructi<strong>on</strong>al method for teaching<br />
language <strong>and</strong> reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong>. Flores<br />
<strong>and</strong> Ganz (2007) investigated the effects of a<br />
DI program, Corrective Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong> A<br />
Thinking Basics (Engelmann, Haddox, Hanner,<br />
& Osborn, 2002), <strong>on</strong> the reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
skills of four individuals with DD <strong>and</strong><br />
ASD. The researchers provided instructi<strong>on</strong> using<br />
three str<strong>and</strong>s of the program, statement<br />
inferences, using facts, <strong>and</strong> analogies. Results<br />
indicated that a functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> existed<br />
between DI <strong>and</strong> reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
skills, as all students met criteria for mastery<br />
across each of the three skill areas.<br />
Flores <strong>and</strong> Ganz (2009) extended the line<br />
of research, investigating the effects of Corrective<br />
Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong> A Thinking Basics<br />
(Engelmann et al., 2002) <strong>on</strong> the reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
skills of three individuals with<br />
ASD <strong>and</strong> DD. Within this study, the researchers<br />
taught three different instructi<strong>on</strong>al str<strong>and</strong>s<br />
of the program, picture analogies, deducti<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> inducti<strong>on</strong>s. Using a multiple probe across<br />
behaviors design, the authors dem<strong>on</strong>strated a<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> between the DI program<br />
<strong>and</strong> reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong> as all participants<br />
met the criteri<strong>on</strong> in each of the three areas.<br />
In another study, Ganz <strong>and</strong> Flores (2009)<br />
investigated the effects of Language for Learning<br />
(Engelmann, & Osborn, 1999) <strong>on</strong> the oral<br />
language skills for three participants with<br />
ASD. The researchers taught students how to<br />
identify the materials of which objects are<br />
made, utilizing a single subject changing criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
design. Results indicated a functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
relati<strong>on</strong> existed between the program <strong>and</strong> language<br />
acquisiti<strong>on</strong>; the students met criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
with replicati<strong>on</strong>s over three changes in criteri<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In a study by Zayac (2009), the author<br />
found that the DI program, Reading Mastery<br />
Plus (Engelmann, 2002), was effective in<br />
teaching children with DD (including children<br />
with ASD) letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
blending, segmenting, <strong>and</strong> word reading.<br />
Unlike other DI research for this<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>, the program was implemented<br />
without modificati<strong>on</strong>. A functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong><br />
could not be determined due to the use of an<br />
A–B design. However, the author c<strong>on</strong>cluded<br />
that individuals with DD can acquire beginning<br />
reading skills using DI.<br />
Research in the area of DI reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with ASD <strong>and</strong><br />
DD is limited. Of the existing research, single<br />
subject designs have been employed to show a<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> between DI <strong>and</strong> improved<br />
comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> lanaguage skills. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
porti<strong>on</strong>s of DI programs (Flores & Ganz,<br />
2007; Ganz & Flores, 2009; Flores & Ganz,<br />
2009) have been shown to be effective. The<br />
line of research regarding DI reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> language interventi<strong>on</strong>s for students<br />
with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD is missing investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
of a comprehensive implementati<strong>on</strong> of a<br />
DI program, meaning whole less<strong>on</strong> presentati<strong>on</strong><br />
over time. Therefore, the purpose of this<br />
pilot study was to investigate the efficacy of DI<br />
comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> language programs for<br />
students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD by implementing<br />
the programs as they were designed within<br />
classroom settings.<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
Eighteen male students in grades <strong>on</strong>e through<br />
seven participated in the study. The students<br />
were chosen to participate based <strong>on</strong> their performance<br />
<strong>on</strong> the program placement tests.<br />
The researchers administered the placement<br />
for the Corrective Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong> A<br />
Thinking Basics program (CR) (Engelmann et<br />
al., 2002) to all students. Eleven students<br />
placed within that program, beginning with<br />
the first less<strong>on</strong>. However, seven students’<br />
placement scores indicated that a beginning<br />
language program such as the Language for<br />
Learning program (LL) (Engelmann, & Osborn,<br />
1999) would be appropriate. The LL<br />
placement test was administered to these students<br />
<strong>and</strong> their scores indicated that it was an<br />
appropriate program. Therefore, two subgroups<br />
were formed.<br />
The group of students who received instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
using CR was comprised of students ages<br />
eight to thirteen in grades two through seven.<br />
All of the students were eligible for special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> services, seven under the category<br />
of ASD <strong>and</strong> four under the category of multiple<br />
disabilities (intellectual disability <strong>and</strong><br />
other health impairment or intellectual dis-<br />
42 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ability <strong>and</strong> orthopedic impairment). The students’<br />
intellectual functi<strong>on</strong>ing was assessed using<br />
the Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al Performance Scale<br />
Revised (Roid & Miller, 2002) <strong>and</strong> their intellectual<br />
abilities (IQ) ranged from significantly<br />
below the average range to within the average<br />
range. The students’ language performance<br />
was measured using the Test of Language Development:<br />
Intermediate, 4 th Editi<strong>on</strong> (Hammill &<br />
Newcomer, 2008a) or Test of Language Development:<br />
Primary 4 th Editi<strong>on</strong> (Hammill & Newcomer,<br />
2008b). The students’ overall language st<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
scores ranged from significantly below the average<br />
range to within the average range.<br />
The group of students who received instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
using LL included seven students, ages<br />
seven <strong>and</strong> nine in grades <strong>on</strong>e through four.<br />
All of the students were eligible for special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> services, three under the category<br />
of developmental delay <strong>and</strong> four under the<br />
category of ASD. The students’ intellectual<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing was assessed using the Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Performance Scale Revised (Roid<br />
& Miller, 2002) <strong>and</strong> their intellectual abilities<br />
(IQ) ranged from significantly below average<br />
to within the average range. Based <strong>on</strong> their<br />
age, the students’ language performance was<br />
measured using the Test of Language Development:<br />
Intermediate, 4 th Editi<strong>on</strong> (Hammill & Newcomer,<br />
2008a) or Test of Language Development:<br />
Primary 4 th Editi<strong>on</strong> (Hammill & Newcomer,<br />
2008b). The students’ overall language st<strong>and</strong>ard<br />
scores were significantly below the average<br />
range. See Table 1 for a summary of participant<br />
characteristics.<br />
Setting<br />
The study took place in a university-sp<strong>on</strong>sored<br />
summer program, created for the provisi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
extended school year services for students<br />
with disabilities. Extended school year services<br />
were indicated in the individualized educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programs (IEPs) of all students in attendance.<br />
Staff in the classrooms c<strong>on</strong>sisted of two<br />
graduate students (who held teaching certificates<br />
in special educati<strong>on</strong>) <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e undergraduate<br />
student, each majoring in special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>. Classroom structure <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programs were tailored to students’<br />
needs as stated in their IEPs <strong>and</strong> statements of<br />
extended school year needs. These included<br />
strategies such as small group direct instruc-<br />
ti<strong>on</strong> in academic areas (reading, written expressi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> mathematics), incidental teaching,<br />
social skills instructi<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> the use of<br />
visual supports. The current study took place<br />
during reading instructi<strong>on</strong> within each classroom.<br />
DI comprehensi<strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> lasted<br />
for approximately thirty minutes each day. Instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
was provided by certified teachers<br />
enrolled in a Master’s program in special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
who received professi<strong>on</strong>al development<br />
in the implementati<strong>on</strong> of DI within two<br />
of their required university courses. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>on</strong>e day of professi<strong>on</strong>al development was<br />
devoted to program delivery prior to the start<br />
of the program. Prior to program implementati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
each instructor dem<strong>on</strong>strated proficiency<br />
in program implementati<strong>on</strong> using a<br />
fidelity checklist (March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, Lignugaris-Kraft,<br />
Pettigrew, & Leishman, 1995).<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong>al Procedures<br />
Classroom instructors administered the CR<br />
placement test prior to beginning instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Based <strong>on</strong> placement test performance, students<br />
were grouped homogeneously for instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Students, who did not place into the<br />
CR program, were given the LL placement<br />
test. Based <strong>on</strong> students’ performance, instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
began with the less<strong>on</strong> prescribed by the<br />
program. Seven students received instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
through LL, beginning at less<strong>on</strong> forty-<strong>on</strong>e.<br />
The instructi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>tent included the following:<br />
(a) differentiati<strong>on</strong> of whole <strong>and</strong> part; (b)<br />
opposites, such as full/empty <strong>and</strong> big/small; (c)<br />
use of the prepositi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong>, over, <strong>and</strong> in fr<strong>on</strong>t;<br />
(d) use of pr<strong>on</strong>ouns when describing acti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
or pictures; <strong>and</strong> (e) general informati<strong>on</strong> such<br />
as stating the days of the week. Eleven students<br />
received instructi<strong>on</strong> through CR, beginning at<br />
less<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e. Instructi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>tent included the<br />
following: (a) appropriate use of the terms all,<br />
some, <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>e; (b) classificati<strong>on</strong> of objects; (c)<br />
deductive reas<strong>on</strong>ing using the terms all, every,<br />
d<strong>on</strong>’t; no, <strong>and</strong> some; (d) statement inferences;<br />
(e) using facts to provide evidence; <strong>and</strong> (f)<br />
general informati<strong>on</strong> such as stating the<br />
m<strong>on</strong>ths of the year <strong>and</strong> the seas<strong>on</strong>s in a year.<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong>al groups varied in size from two<br />
to four students, based <strong>on</strong> classroom enrollment<br />
<strong>and</strong> placement test performance. Instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
occurred during regularly scheduled<br />
reading instructi<strong>on</strong>al time, for approximately<br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> / 43
TABLE 1<br />
Participant Demographics<br />
Language for Learning Group<br />
Age 7 years 6<br />
Disability Category<br />
9 years 1<br />
autism spectrum disorder 4<br />
Cognitive Ability (IQ)<br />
developmental delay 3<br />
a<br />
above 85 1<br />
71–85 2<br />
55–70 3<br />
Language Performance<br />
below 55 1<br />
b<br />
55–70 2<br />
Corrective Reading Thinking Basics Group<br />
Age<br />
below 55 5<br />
8–9 years 3<br />
10–11 years 5<br />
Disability Category<br />
12–13 years 3<br />
autism spectrum disorder 7<br />
Cognitive Ability<br />
multiple disabilities 4<br />
a<br />
above 100 2<br />
86–100 1<br />
71–85 3<br />
55–70 3<br />
Language Performance<br />
below 55 2<br />
b<br />
above 100 1<br />
86–100 0<br />
71–85 0<br />
55–70 6<br />
below 55 4<br />
a<br />
St<strong>and</strong>ard score using Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al Performance Scale Revised<br />
b th<br />
Spoken Language (total) st<strong>and</strong>ard score using Test of Language Development: Primary 4 Ed. or Test of<br />
Language Development: Intermediate, 4 th Ed.<br />
thirty minutes per day, five days per week. The<br />
instructors followed the programs’ prescribed<br />
scripts for the particular behavior or skill. This<br />
included modeling the particular skill for the<br />
students, leading, as the students dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
the skill or behavior, <strong>and</strong> asking the<br />
students to perform the behavior independently<br />
without the instructor. The students<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ded to questi<strong>on</strong>s chorally as a group.<br />
The instructor followed program procedures<br />
for ensuring that the students resp<strong>on</strong>ded together.<br />
Errors in resp<strong>on</strong>ses were corrected im-<br />
mediately through the following: (a) modeling<br />
the correct resp<strong>on</strong>se; (b) leading the<br />
students in the correct resp<strong>on</strong>se; (c) <strong>and</strong> asking<br />
the students to resp<strong>on</strong>d independently.<br />
The program included instances when the students<br />
were asked questi<strong>on</strong>s individually <strong>and</strong><br />
these procedures were followed as well.<br />
Assessment Procedures<br />
The students’ placement test performance<br />
served as the first performance assessment.<br />
44 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Each student’s placement test was analyzed<br />
based <strong>on</strong> the number of items correct, representing<br />
the c<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>and</strong> skills included in the<br />
twenty instructi<strong>on</strong>al less<strong>on</strong>s that would follow.<br />
For example, the LL placement test included<br />
items which asked the student to name the<br />
days of the week <strong>and</strong> this skill was included<br />
within the instructi<strong>on</strong>al less<strong>on</strong>s forty-<strong>on</strong>e<br />
through sixty, the less<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong>e might expect a<br />
typical student to encounter over twenty days<br />
of instructi<strong>on</strong>. The sec<strong>on</strong>d performance measure<br />
was administered after two weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
It c<strong>on</strong>sisted of curriculum-based assessments<br />
which were the mastery tests<br />
included within the LL program after every<br />
tenth less<strong>on</strong>. The third performance measure<br />
was administered after four weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> it was the following appropriate mastery<br />
test from the program. The students in<br />
the LL group took the mastery tests located<br />
after less<strong>on</strong>s fifty <strong>and</strong> sixty. Assessments were<br />
administered to students <strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e, before<br />
daily instructi<strong>on</strong>, in order to more accurately<br />
assess the students’ learning. Student performance<br />
was reported as the percent of items<br />
correct.<br />
The same procedures were followed for students<br />
who received instructi<strong>on</strong> from the CR<br />
program. The first performance measure was<br />
the placement test. Each student’s placement<br />
test was analyzed based <strong>on</strong> the number of<br />
items correct, representing the c<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>and</strong><br />
skills included in the first twenty instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
less<strong>on</strong>s. Each student’s performance was reported<br />
in terms of percent of instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
items correct. The CR program includes mastery<br />
tests after less<strong>on</strong> twenty. Therefore, for<br />
the sec<strong>on</strong>d performance measure, it was not<br />
appropriate to administer the first mastery test<br />
after two weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong> since students<br />
could have <strong>on</strong>ly completed less<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong>e<br />
through ten or fewer, if repetiti<strong>on</strong> was necessary.<br />
A curriculum-based assessment was created<br />
by the first author using the same format<br />
as the program mastery test; however, items<br />
assessed the skills taught in less<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong>e<br />
through ten. The sec<strong>on</strong>d performance measure<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sisted of the mastery test included in<br />
the CR program without modificati<strong>on</strong> (located<br />
in the program after less<strong>on</strong> twenty).<br />
Performance measures were administered<br />
<strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e, at the beginning of a less<strong>on</strong>, prior<br />
to instructi<strong>on</strong>. Student performance was reported<br />
as the percent of items correct.<br />
Treatment Integrity/Inter-observer Agreement<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong> was carried out according to a<br />
checklist of teacher behaviors (March<strong>and</strong>-<br />
Martella et al., 1995). These behaviors corresp<strong>on</strong>ded<br />
to the procedures <strong>and</strong> behaviors prescribed<br />
in the Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> program.<br />
Once per week, <strong>on</strong>e of the researchers observed<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>. The fidelity of treatment<br />
was 92% across instructi<strong>on</strong>al groups. Treatment<br />
fidelity for instructi<strong>on</strong>al groups ranged<br />
from 62% to 100%. Approximately 30% of the<br />
curriculum-based assessments were checked<br />
for inter-observer agreement. This was calculated<br />
as the total number of agreements divided<br />
by the total number of disagreements<br />
<strong>and</strong> agreements, multiplied by 100. Interobserver<br />
agreement for instructi<strong>on</strong>al probes<br />
was 100%.<br />
Results<br />
Because the sample sizes were small, the researchers<br />
checked assumpti<strong>on</strong>s for normality,<br />
linearity, <strong>and</strong> variability prior to analysis. For<br />
each sub-group, a <strong>on</strong>e-way within subjects<br />
analysis of variance ANOVA statistical procedure<br />
was c<strong>on</strong>ducted with the factor being time<br />
<strong>and</strong> the dependent variable being the percent<br />
correct <strong>on</strong> each curriculum-based assessment.<br />
The progress measures for students receiving<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> using CR were analyzed separately<br />
from students who received instructi<strong>on</strong> using<br />
LL because the c<strong>on</strong>tent within the curriculum-based<br />
measures were different. The<br />
means <strong>and</strong> st<strong>and</strong>ards deviati<strong>on</strong>s for curriculum-based<br />
assessments are presented in Table<br />
2. For the CR group, the results for the<br />
ANOVA indicated a significant time effect,<br />
Wilk’s 0.075, F(2, 9) 55.37, p .01,<br />
multivariate 2 .93. Follow-up polynomial<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trasts indicated a significant linear effect<br />
with means increasing over time, F(1, 10) <br />
149.28, p .01, partial 2 .94. For the LL<br />
group, the results for the ANOVA indicated a<br />
significant time effect, Wilk’s .014, F(2, 5)<br />
173.1, p .01, multivariate 2 .99. Follow<br />
up polynomial c<strong>on</strong>trasts indicated a significant<br />
linear effect with means increasing over<br />
time, F(1, 6) 569.38, p .01, partial 2 <br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> / 45
TABLE 2<br />
Means <strong>and</strong> St<strong>and</strong>ard Deviati<strong>on</strong>s for Curriculum-based Measures<br />
.99. These results suggest that the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
programs made a statistically significant<br />
difference in students’ growth in skill over<br />
time.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
The purpose of this study was to extend the<br />
line of research regarding DI language <strong>and</strong><br />
comprehensi<strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
ASD <strong>and</strong> DD by implementing a pilot study in<br />
which students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD received<br />
more comprehensive instructi<strong>on</strong> than in previous<br />
research. The researchers implemented<br />
programs as they were designed, addressing<br />
multiple skills by teaching whole less<strong>on</strong>s. Eighteen<br />
students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD participated<br />
in either Language for Learning (Engelmann, &<br />
Osborn, 1999) or Corrective Reading Comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
A Thinking Basics (Engelmann et al.,<br />
2002) for four weeks during an extended<br />
school year program. Their performance was<br />
measured over time using curriculum-based<br />
assessments included in the programs or developed<br />
based <strong>on</strong> the programs.<br />
Results indicate that DI programs had a<br />
str<strong>on</strong>g effect <strong>on</strong> students’ learning ( 2 .94<br />
<strong>and</strong> 2 .99). This extends prior research in<br />
which single case research designs indicated<br />
that there was a functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> between<br />
DI <strong>and</strong> increased language skills by investigating<br />
specific instructi<strong>on</strong>al str<strong>and</strong>s within DI<br />
programs (Flores & Ganz, 2007; Flores &<br />
Ganz, 2009; Ganz & Flores, 2009). In c<strong>on</strong>trast<br />
to these previous studies, the current study<br />
provided a more realistic implementati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
DI programs. The programs were implemented<br />
by classroom teachers without modi-<br />
ficati<strong>on</strong> of the programs’ c<strong>on</strong>tent organizati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Previous research dem<strong>on</strong>strated that students<br />
with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD could successfully<br />
participate in DI, including its unique instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
formats such as frequent questi<strong>on</strong>ing,<br />
choral <strong>and</strong> individual resp<strong>on</strong>ding, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
presentati<strong>on</strong> of multiple skills within <strong>on</strong>e less<strong>on</strong><br />
(Flores & Ganz, 2007; Flores & Ganz,<br />
2009; Ganz & Flores, 2009). Within the current<br />
study, students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD were<br />
able to participate in all porti<strong>on</strong>s of the less<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>and</strong> successfully move from <strong>on</strong>e less<strong>on</strong> to<br />
the next, replicating previous research. The<br />
current findings extended previous research<br />
from the use of porti<strong>on</strong>s of programs to presentati<strong>on</strong><br />
of the programs as prescribed, without<br />
modificati<strong>on</strong>. This study extended this investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
by exposing students to less<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
which they learned multiple skills (more than<br />
presented in previous research) <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
that students could participate appropriately<br />
<strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong> between different formats<br />
within each less<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Implicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Mean St<strong>and</strong>ard Deviati<strong>on</strong><br />
Language for Learning Group<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 1 (prior to instructi<strong>on</strong>) 3.29 5.96<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 2 (after 2 weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong>) 56.00 8.93<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 3 (after 4 weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong>) 65.00 6.83<br />
Corrective Reading Thinking Basics Group<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 1 (prior to instructi<strong>on</strong>) 6.36 10.73<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 2 (after 2 weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong>) 65.09 21.84<br />
Percent Correct Assessment 3 (after 4 weeks of instructi<strong>on</strong>) 77.45 20.02<br />
The results of this study have implicati<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al design <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tent for students<br />
with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD. This study further dem<strong>on</strong>strates<br />
that students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD can<br />
benefit from group instructi<strong>on</strong>. One-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in the form of discrete trial teaching<br />
represents the largest body of interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
research for this populati<strong>on</strong> (Nati<strong>on</strong>al Research<br />
Council, 2001). However, students in<br />
the current study successfully participated in<br />
DI which required sustained attenti<strong>on</strong>, fre-<br />
46 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
quent resp<strong>on</strong>ding, <strong>and</strong> choral resp<strong>on</strong>ses in a<br />
group format. This is significant since group<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> may provide for greater efficiency<br />
in meeting students’ needs in diverse classrooms.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, providing instructi<strong>on</strong> to<br />
students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD in a group format<br />
may also better prepare them for participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in group situati<strong>on</strong>s within general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classrooms.<br />
The majority of the students dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
below average performance in both language<br />
<strong>and</strong> cognitive ability (IQ). Four out of eighteen<br />
students’ IQs were within the average<br />
range <strong>and</strong> the remaining students’ IQs ranged<br />
from 51 to 83. The students’ language skills<br />
were significantly below average as well. One<br />
participant’s language st<strong>and</strong>ard score was<br />
within the average range (104). The remaining<br />
students’ language st<strong>and</strong>ard scores ranged<br />
from 44 to 61, with an average of 57. There is<br />
a limited body of reading research that includes<br />
students with ASD <strong>and</strong> DD who have<br />
significant cognitive <strong>and</strong> language deficits<br />
(Bradford et al., 2006; Flores & Ganz, 2007;<br />
Flores & Ganz, 2009; Flores et al., 2004). This<br />
study extended the research for that populati<strong>on</strong><br />
by showing that students made progress<br />
after participating in comprehensive implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of DI programs.<br />
Future Research<br />
The current pilot study was limited in the<br />
amount of time available for program implementati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Although students made progress<br />
<strong>and</strong> statistically significant gains, it is not<br />
known how a comprehensive implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of DI comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> language instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
over the course of a school year would<br />
impact student performance. Future research<br />
is needed to assess the effects of a full-scale<br />
implementati<strong>on</strong>. The setting was another limitati<strong>on</strong><br />
since it was c<strong>on</strong>ducted within a university-sp<strong>on</strong>sored<br />
program with teachers who had<br />
received preparati<strong>on</strong> for DI implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
with their coursework. This type of preparati<strong>on</strong><br />
may not be similar to the professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
development received by typical classroom<br />
teachers. It is not known whether similar results<br />
would have been obtained if the implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
site were a typical public school.<br />
Future research should investigate the results<br />
of DI when instructi<strong>on</strong> is delivered within typ-<br />
ical classroom settings by teachers who receive<br />
typical professi<strong>on</strong>al development.<br />
Although the current study extended the<br />
line of DI research to include a larger group<br />
of students, using a different research design,<br />
additi<strong>on</strong>al research is needed. Before this type<br />
of instructi<strong>on</strong> can be recommended as an evidence-based<br />
practice, larger groups of students<br />
must participate. In additi<strong>on</strong>, DI comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> language instructi<strong>on</strong> should<br />
be compared to other instructi<strong>on</strong>al formats or<br />
strategies. It is not known whether DI resulted<br />
in learning that would have been different if<br />
the same c<strong>on</strong>tent were delivered in <strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong><strong>on</strong>e<br />
formats or through discrete trial teaching.<br />
Furthermore, it is not known whether DI resulted<br />
in gains different than may have been<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated by other explicit methods that<br />
research has shown effective for students with<br />
high incidence disabilities. Therefore, future<br />
research should include comparis<strong>on</strong> between<br />
DI <strong>and</strong> other research-based methods as well<br />
as more sophisticated research designs <strong>and</strong><br />
analyses.<br />
References<br />
Bradford, S., Shippen, M. E., Alberto, P. A.,<br />
Houchins, D. E., & Flores, M. M. (2006). Using<br />
systematic instructi<strong>on</strong> to teach decoding skills to<br />
middle school students with moderate intellectual<br />
disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 41, 332–342.<br />
Browder, D. H., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L.,<br />
Harris, A. A., & Wakeman, S. (2008). A metaanalysis<br />
<strong>on</strong> teaching mathematics to students with<br />
significant cognitive disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
74, 407–432.<br />
Browder, D. H., Wakeman, S. Y., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell,<br />
L., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Research<br />
<strong>on</strong> reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for individuals with significant<br />
cognitive disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 72,<br />
392–408.<br />
Carls<strong>on</strong>, C., & Francis, D. (2002). Increasing the<br />
reading achievement of at-risk children through<br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong>: Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of the Rodeo Institute<br />
for Teacher Excellence (RITE). Journal of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> for Children Placed at Risk, 7, 141–166.<br />
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kameenui, E. J., & Tarver,<br />
S. G. (2004). Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> Reading (4th ed.).<br />
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pears<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Chiang, H., & Lin, Y. (2007). Reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for individuals with autism spectrum<br />
disorders: A review of the literature. Focus <strong>on</strong><br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> / 47
<strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 22,<br />
259–267.<br />
Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1991). Theory of instructi<strong>on</strong>:<br />
Principles <strong>and</strong> applicati<strong>on</strong>s (revised editi<strong>on</strong>).<br />
Eugene, OR: ADI Press.<br />
Engelmann, S. (2002). Reading Mastery Plus, Columbus,<br />
OH: SRA McGraw-Hill.<br />
Engelmann, S., & Osborn, J. (1999). Language for<br />
Learning. Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-Hill.<br />
Engelmann, S., Haddox, P., Hanner, S., & Osborn,<br />
J. (2002). Corrective reading thinking basics: Comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
A. Columbus, OH: SRA McGraw-Hill.<br />
Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. (2007). Effectiveness of<br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> for teaching statement inference,<br />
use of facts, <strong>and</strong> analogies to students with<br />
developmental disabilities <strong>and</strong> reading delays. Focus<br />
<strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
22, 244–251.<br />
Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. (2009). Effects of Direct<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong> of students<br />
with autism <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
44, 39–53.<br />
Flores, M. M., Shippen, M. E., Alberto, P. A., &<br />
Crowe, A. (2004). Teaching letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dence<br />
to students with moderate intellectual<br />
disabilities. Journal of Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong>, 4, 173–188.<br />
Foorman, B., Francis, D., Fletcher, J., & Schatschneider,<br />
C. (1998). The role of instructi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
learning to read: Preventing reading failure in<br />
children at-risk. Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychology,<br />
90, 37–55.<br />
Fredrick, L. D., Keel, M. C., & Neel, J. H. (2002).<br />
Making the most of instructi<strong>on</strong>al time: Teaching<br />
reading at an accelerated pace to students at risk.<br />
Journal of Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong>, 2, 57–63.<br />
Ganz, J., & Flores, M. (2009). The effectiveness of<br />
Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> for teaching language to children<br />
with <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorders: Identifying<br />
materials. Journal of <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
Disorders, 39, 75–83.<br />
Grossen, B. (2004). Success of a Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
model at a sec<strong>on</strong>dary level school with high-risk<br />
students. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 20, 161–<br />
178.<br />
Hammill, D. D., & Newcomer, P. L. (2008a). Test of<br />
language development-intermediate, 4 th ed. San Ant<strong>on</strong>io,<br />
TX: Pears<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Hammill, D. D., & Newcomer, P. L. (2008b). Test of<br />
language development-primary, 4 th ed. San Ant<strong>on</strong>io,<br />
TX: Pears<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Improvement Acts<br />
of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108–446, 118 Stat. 2647<br />
(2004) (amending 20 U.S.C.§§ 1440 et seq.).<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N., Lignugaris-Kraft, B., Pettigrew,<br />
T., & Leishman, R. (1995). Direct instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
supervisi<strong>on</strong> system. Logan UT: Utah State University.<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al Research Council. Educating children with<br />
autism. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: Nati<strong>on</strong>al Academy Press,<br />
2001.<br />
O’C<strong>on</strong>nor, I. M., & Klein, P. D. (2004). Explorati<strong>on</strong><br />
of strategies for facilitating the reading comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
of high-functi<strong>on</strong>ing students with autism<br />
spectrum disorders. Journal of <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
Disorders, 34, 115–127.<br />
Roid, G. H., & Miller, L. J. (2002). Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Performance Scale-Revised. Wood-Dale, IL: Stoelting<br />
Co.<br />
Shippen, M. E., Houchins, D. E., Stevent<strong>on</strong>, C., &<br />
Sartor, D. L. (2005). A comparis<strong>on</strong> of two direct<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> reading programs for urban middle<br />
school students. Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
26(3), 175–182.<br />
Shippen, M. E., Houchins, D. E., & Stevent<strong>on</strong>, C.<br />
(2010). Reading assessment <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> for<br />
students at risk. In R. Colarusso & C. O’Rourke,<br />
(Eds.) Special Educati<strong>on</strong> for All Teachers (5 th ed.).<br />
Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.<br />
Torgesen, J., Alex<strong>and</strong>er, A., Wagner, R., Rashotte,<br />
C., Voeller, K., & C<strong>on</strong>way, T. (2001). Intensive<br />
remedial instructi<strong>on</strong> for children with severe<br />
reading disabilities: Immediate <strong>and</strong> l<strong>on</strong>g-term<br />
outcomes from two instructi<strong>on</strong>al approaches.<br />
Journal of Learning <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 34, 33–58.<br />
U. S. Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>. (2002). No Child Left<br />
Behind: A desktop reference. Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: Author.<br />
Whal<strong>on</strong>, K., Otaiba, S., & Delano, M. (2009). Evidenced-based<br />
reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for individuals<br />
with autism spectrum disorders. Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 24, 3–16.<br />
Zayac, R. (2009). Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> reading: Effects<br />
of the Reading Mastery Plus–Level K curriculum<br />
<strong>on</strong> preschool children with developmental delays.<br />
Auburn University Theses <strong>and</strong> Dissertati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Received: 11 October 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 21 December 2011<br />
Final Acceptance: 15 February 2012<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g> / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 49–66<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics: Teaching<br />
Word-Analysis Skills to Students with Moderate<br />
Intellectual Disability<br />
Laura D. Fredrick, Dawn H. Davis, Paul A. Alberto, <strong>and</strong> Rebecca E. Waugh<br />
Georgia State University<br />
Abstract: Reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with MoID is typically limited to sight-word instructi<strong>on</strong>. We developed a<br />
2-part, ph<strong>on</strong>etic instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence based up<strong>on</strong> Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> teaching methodology to teach students with<br />
MoID word-analysis skills that generalize to untaught words encountered in their envir<strong>on</strong>ment. Elementary <strong>and</strong><br />
middle-school students with MoID learned word-analysis skills using simultaneous prompting procedures to explicitly<br />
teach verbal imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, retrieval of learned letter-sounds to a predetermined<br />
rate of automaticity, <strong>and</strong> blending with telescoping. After dem<strong>on</strong>strating mastery of the word-analysis skills the<br />
students generalized taught blending skills to untaught CVC words; functi<strong>on</strong>al, community words; <strong>and</strong> envir<strong>on</strong>mental,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases. A changing-criteri<strong>on</strong> design embedded within a multiple baseline across sound <strong>and</strong><br />
word sets was implemented for 3 elementary <strong>and</strong> 2 middle-school students diagnosed with MoID. Students reached<br />
mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> for each phase of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, <strong>and</strong> a functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> was<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated between the instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence <strong>and</strong> students’ acquisiti<strong>on</strong> of word-analysis skills.<br />
Students with moderate intellectual disability<br />
(MoID) who receive ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong> are<br />
provided the opportunity to learn generalizable<br />
word-analysis skills that increase the probability<br />
of decoding a novel, untaught word<br />
encountered in their envir<strong>on</strong>ment. Wordanalysis<br />
skills are c<strong>on</strong>sidered an academic<br />
form of literacy <strong>and</strong> include ph<strong>on</strong>ological<br />
awareness, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
blending—saying each sound in a word slowly<br />
without stopping between sounds, <strong>and</strong> telescoping—saying<br />
the sounds quickly to read<br />
the word (Carnine, Silbert, Kame’ennui, &<br />
Tarver, 2004; Foorman, Francis, Shaywitz,<br />
Shaywitz, & Fletcher, 1997). For students with<br />
MoID, these generalizable word-analysis skills<br />
also can be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a functi<strong>on</strong>al form of<br />
The research reported here was supported by the<br />
Institute of Educati<strong>on</strong> Sciences, U.S. Department of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, through Grant #R324A070144 to Georgia<br />
State University. The opini<strong>on</strong>s expressed are those of<br />
the authors <strong>and</strong> do not represent views of the U.S.<br />
Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>. Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning<br />
this article should be addressed to Laura Fredrick,<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychology & Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, Georgia<br />
State University, P.O. Box 3979, Atlanta, GA 30302-<br />
3979. E-mail: lfredrick@gsu.edu<br />
literacy because mastery of word-analysis skills<br />
allows greater access to community resources<br />
thereby increasing functi<strong>on</strong>al independence.<br />
Until recently, however, ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
seldom was provided for students with MoID.<br />
Joseph <strong>and</strong> Seery (2004) reviewed all forms<br />
of literacy instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with all levels<br />
of intellectual disability <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly found<br />
seven studies in which ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong> was<br />
provided, <strong>and</strong> of those studies, <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e participant<br />
was diagnosed with MoID. Browder,<br />
Wakeman, Spo<strong>on</strong>er, Ahlgrim-Delzell, <strong>and</strong><br />
Algozzine (2006) reported that almost 90% of<br />
published research studies examining reading<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with moderate to severe<br />
disabilities (MSD) focused <strong>on</strong> acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of functi<strong>on</strong>al sight words. Sight-word instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
has been <strong>and</strong> remains the dominant form<br />
of literacy instructi<strong>on</strong> to increase the functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
independence of students with MoID.<br />
The reas<strong>on</strong> that educators rely <strong>on</strong> sightword<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with MoID is<br />
possibly because of the difficulty these students<br />
have with ph<strong>on</strong>ological coding hindering<br />
their acquisiti<strong>on</strong> of ph<strong>on</strong>etic reading<br />
(C<strong>on</strong>ners, Atwell, Rosenquist, & Sligh, 2001).<br />
However, students with severe reading disabilities<br />
who were thought to be unable to learn<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 49
ph<strong>on</strong>etic skills have been shown to benefit<br />
from systematic instructi<strong>on</strong> in ph<strong>on</strong>emic<br />
awareness <strong>and</strong> decoding (Torgesen et al.,<br />
2001). Similarly, students with intellectual disability<br />
may have difficulty in these areas due<br />
to lack of instructi<strong>on</strong> in ph<strong>on</strong>etic skills (Stanovich,<br />
1985). A small body of research over the<br />
last 3 decades suggests that with effective instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
students with MoID can learn generalizable<br />
word-analysis skills (Allor, Mathes,<br />
Roberts, J<strong>on</strong>es, & Champlin, 2010; Bracey,<br />
Maggs, & Morath, 1975; Browder, Ahlgrim-<br />
Delzell, Courtade, Gibbs, & Flowers, 2008;<br />
Cossu, Rossini, & Marshall, 1993; Davis,<br />
Fredrick, Alberto, & Gagné, 2010; Davis et al.,<br />
2013; Hoogeveen, Smeets, & Lanci<strong>on</strong>i, 1989;<br />
Katims, 1996; Nietupski, Williams, & York,<br />
1979; Waugh, Fredrick, & Alberto, 2009).<br />
Bracey et al. (1975) dem<strong>on</strong>strated l<strong>on</strong>g ago<br />
that children with MoID can learn ph<strong>on</strong>etic<br />
decoding skills. Through the use of a Direct<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong> (DI) program, Distar Reading (Engelmann<br />
& Bruner, 1969), students learned<br />
letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, blended sounds<br />
into words, <strong>and</strong> spelled words using their<br />
sounds. Results in another early study by<br />
Nietupski et al. (1979), revealed that students<br />
with MoID could learn letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences<br />
through explicit instructi<strong>on</strong> although<br />
not specifically a DI program.<br />
These early findings are supported in more<br />
recent research. Working with middle-school<br />
students, Bradford, Shippen, Alberto,<br />
Houchins, <strong>and</strong> Flores (2006) dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
that students with MoID are capable of learning<br />
word-analysis skills including (a) lettersound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, (b) sounding out<br />
words, (c) blending sounds, (d) decoding irregularly<br />
spelled words, <strong>and</strong> (e) reading sentences<br />
<strong>and</strong> short passages at approximately a<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d-grade level. In <strong>on</strong>ly 6 m<strong>on</strong>ths, these<br />
middle-school students learned ph<strong>on</strong>etic decoding<br />
skills through the use of the DI Corrective<br />
Reading Program (Engelmann, Becker,<br />
Hanner, & Johns<strong>on</strong>, 1980), substantiating<br />
findings by C<strong>on</strong>ners (1992) <strong>and</strong> Katims<br />
(2000).<br />
Working with elementary-school students<br />
with MoID, Flores, Shippen, Alberto, <strong>and</strong><br />
Crowe (2004) used systematic <strong>and</strong> explicit instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
to teach ph<strong>on</strong>etic decoding by incorporating<br />
modified sequences <strong>and</strong> formats of<br />
the DI program, Corrective Reading: Word-Attack<br />
Basics, Decoding A (Engelmann, Carnine, &<br />
Johns<strong>on</strong>, 1988). All five of the students<br />
learned letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, blending,<br />
<strong>and</strong> sounding out. All but <strong>on</strong>e student<br />
mastered the four sounds taught <strong>and</strong> were<br />
able to blend the sounds slowly <strong>on</strong> both instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
<strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong> words; however,<br />
they struggled with telescoping. Only<br />
<strong>on</strong>e student was able to telescope novel c<strong>on</strong>s<strong>on</strong>ant-vowel-c<strong>on</strong>s<strong>on</strong>ant<br />
(CVC) words.<br />
More recently, researchers dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
the effectiveness of time delay <strong>and</strong> simultaneous<br />
prompting procedures (Cohen, Heller,<br />
Alberto, & Fredrick, 2008; Waugh et al., 2009)<br />
for students with intellectual disability. Cohen<br />
et al. used time delay procedures with five<br />
participants--three with IQs in the milddelayed<br />
range <strong>and</strong> two with IQs in the moderate<br />
range. All five students learned decoding<br />
skills with <strong>on</strong>e of the student’s whose IQ<br />
was in the moderate range acquiring mastery<br />
the fastest. Through the use of simultaneous<br />
prompting procedures Waugh et al. found<br />
that three students with MoID learned lettersound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences <strong>and</strong> applied blending<br />
skills to previously-learned sight words; although,<br />
not without difficulty in some areas.<br />
One student was unable to generalize the<br />
blending skill to novel, untaught words, while<br />
two students generalized blending to <strong>on</strong>e untaught<br />
word but could not telescope.<br />
Students with MoID can learn word-analysis<br />
skills when teachers use time delay (Cohen et<br />
al., 2008) <strong>and</strong> simultaneous prompting procedures<br />
(Waugh et al., 2009) based <strong>on</strong> Direct<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong> teaching strategies. However,<br />
some students have dem<strong>on</strong>strated difficulty in<br />
the areas of blending, telescoping, <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
(Flores et al., 2004; Waugh et al.,<br />
2009). Difficulty with blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
could result from a lack of automatic<br />
retrieval of learned letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences.<br />
Automaticity with letter sounds is necessary<br />
for word reading to occur (LaBerge &<br />
Samuels, 1974), <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sistent practice is necessary<br />
for automaticity to develop (Shiffr<strong>on</strong> &<br />
Schneider, 1977). Shiffr<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Schneider<br />
found that automaticity did not develop when<br />
tasks were inc<strong>on</strong>sistent; moreover, the degree<br />
of automaticity depended up<strong>on</strong> the amount of<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistency. Cohen, Dunbar, <strong>and</strong> McClell<strong>and</strong><br />
(1990) found that the most important mechanism<br />
underlying automaticity is the strength-<br />
50 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ening of c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong>s between stimuli <strong>and</strong> resp<strong>on</strong>ses.<br />
Practice makes these c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
str<strong>on</strong>ger <strong>and</strong> performances are subsequently<br />
faster <strong>and</strong> less effortful. Taken together, these<br />
findings str<strong>on</strong>gly support incorporating formal,<br />
systematic development of automaticity<br />
within reading instructi<strong>on</strong>. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, it is<br />
likely that <strong>on</strong>ce blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
skills are acquired students will need extensive<br />
practice before these skills generalize.<br />
We designed an instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence to<br />
provide many opportunities for students to<br />
learn verbal imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, master lettersound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, become automatic<br />
with letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences to maximize<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>ological informati<strong>on</strong> processing efficiency,<br />
practice blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping,<br />
<strong>and</strong> then generalize these skills to novel, untaught<br />
words. The instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence is<br />
based <strong>on</strong> DI teaching strategies such that it<br />
teaches comp<strong>on</strong>ents of word-analysis skills to<br />
mastery/automaticity (Carnine et al., 2004).<br />
To address automatic retrieval of letter<br />
sounds, we included a comp<strong>on</strong>ent not found<br />
in DI programs. That is, students practiced<br />
naming learned letter sounds to an individual<br />
mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> that was determined by each<br />
student’s rate of naming speed dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
<strong>on</strong> the Rapid Object Naming (RON) subtest<br />
of the Comprehensive Test of Ph<strong>on</strong>ological<br />
Processing (CTOPP; Wagner, Torgesen, &<br />
Rashotte, 1999). Blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
sounds into words was not attempted until<br />
each student reached his or her individualized<br />
automaticity rate for taught letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences.<br />
This study was part of a larger Institute of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al Sciences (IES) research project<br />
to develop a comprehensive <strong>and</strong> integrated<br />
literacy curriculum (ILC) for students with<br />
moderate to severe disabilities (Alberto &<br />
Fredrick, 2007). The ILC includes three comp<strong>on</strong>ents.<br />
The Visual-Literacy Comp<strong>on</strong>ent provides<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in picture <strong>and</strong> logo reading<br />
while the Sight-Word Comp<strong>on</strong>ent provides instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
in reading <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>on</strong>strating comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
of individual sight words <strong>and</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>nected text (Alberto, Waugh, & Fredrick,<br />
2010). The research reported here is based<br />
<strong>on</strong> the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the ILC which<br />
was c<strong>on</strong>ducted to determine the effectiveness<br />
of the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent in teaching wordanalysis<br />
skills to individuals with MoID.<br />
The Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent includes Initial<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. While both<br />
parts of the curriculum were designed to answer<br />
the research questi<strong>on</strong> through the use of<br />
the same instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence, each part<br />
differed in some important aspects. Initial<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics was introduced first to provide ample<br />
opportunities to develop initial emergentliteracy<br />
<strong>and</strong> ph<strong>on</strong>ological-awareness skills, to<br />
develop initial learning of instructi<strong>on</strong>al procedures,<br />
to teach a selecti<strong>on</strong> of individual lettersound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences to be blended <strong>and</strong><br />
telescoped into CVC words, <strong>and</strong> to provide<br />
many opportunities to generalize blending<br />
<strong>and</strong> telescoping skills to untaught, CVC words.<br />
That is, Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics was an opportunity for<br />
students to learn how to learn ph<strong>on</strong>ics. The<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d part of the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent, Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, was introduced to students after<br />
they mastered all phases of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. The<br />
purpose of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics was to build<br />
up<strong>on</strong> Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics by emphasizing instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
of comm<strong>on</strong>, functi<strong>on</strong>al community words<br />
<strong>and</strong> phrases. During Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics students<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinued to receive instructi<strong>on</strong> in prerequisite<br />
skills such as ph<strong>on</strong>ological awareness;<br />
they were taught a much larger selecti<strong>on</strong><br />
of individual letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences<br />
<strong>and</strong> letter-sound combinati<strong>on</strong>s; <strong>and</strong> they were<br />
taught to generalize blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
skills to more complex, functi<strong>on</strong>al words <strong>and</strong><br />
to functi<strong>on</strong>al, envir<strong>on</strong>mental-c<strong>on</strong>nected text.<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
Participants included five students with MoID<br />
<strong>and</strong> their classroom teachers. All students<br />
were between 7 <strong>and</strong> 14 years old with IQs in<br />
the 40–55 range. Students were identified by<br />
their classroom teachers based <strong>on</strong> the teacher’s<br />
report that the students communicated<br />
verbally, performed successfully in their current<br />
Edmark (Austin & Boekman, 1990) sightword<br />
reading program, <strong>and</strong> did not have any<br />
behaviors that would interfere with 15 minutes<br />
of c<strong>on</strong>tinuous instructi<strong>on</strong>. Parents or<br />
guardians provided permissi<strong>on</strong> for all students.<br />
The students were served in two different<br />
self-c<strong>on</strong>tained special educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms<br />
for students with MoID, in two<br />
different schools (<strong>on</strong>e elementary <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 51
middle), across two school districts. Two students<br />
were boys <strong>and</strong> three were girls; three<br />
students were African-American <strong>and</strong> two were<br />
Hispanic.<br />
The students’ classroom teachers provided<br />
all of the instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>ducted all of<br />
the data probes. The elementary students received<br />
1:1 teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s during Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
<strong>and</strong> the first two sound sets of Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, <strong>and</strong> small-group instructi<strong>on</strong> for the<br />
remaining sound <strong>and</strong> word sets of Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. The two middle-school students received<br />
group instructi<strong>on</strong> during both Initial<br />
<strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
Teacher Training<br />
Teachers were trained prior to beginning instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
with students. Doctoral students who<br />
were part of the research project presented<br />
the overall program to teachers <strong>and</strong> modeled<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al steps for them. Teachers practiced<br />
implementing the instructi<strong>on</strong>al procedures<br />
by role playing with the researchers<br />
until they followed program steps with 100%<br />
accuracy based <strong>on</strong> the procedural fidelity instrument<br />
developed for the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
of the ILC. Researchers provided <strong>on</strong>going<br />
feedback <strong>and</strong> answered teacher questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for a minimum of <strong>on</strong>e instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequence<br />
per week.<br />
Independent <strong>and</strong> Dependent Variables<br />
The independent variable (IV) was the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the ILC implemented with<br />
simultaneous prompting procedures. The dependent<br />
variables (DV) were the word-analysis<br />
skills that were taught in the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent—verbal<br />
imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, letter-sound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, automaticity, blending with<br />
telescoping, <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong>. Within the<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the ILC the Blending<br />
Phase included both blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
such that students practiced saying the<br />
sounds in a word slowly without stopping between<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> then saying the sounds<br />
quickly to read the word.<br />
For Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, a total of eight sounds<br />
were taught for the Sounds, Letter-Sound Corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Automaticity Phases, al<strong>on</strong>g<br />
with 14 blending words <strong>and</strong> 10 generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
words. For ease of learning, letter sounds were<br />
selected that had distinct auditory <strong>and</strong> visual<br />
characteristics. Words for Blending <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases were comm<strong>on</strong> CVC words<br />
made up of previously-mastered letter sounds.<br />
For Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, a total of 16 sounds<br />
(four of which were previously-mastered<br />
sounds from Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics per the cumulative<br />
design) <strong>and</strong> four sound combinati<strong>on</strong>s were<br />
presented for the Sounds, Letter-Sound Corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Automaticity Phases al<strong>on</strong>g<br />
with <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g> blending words, 15 functi<strong>on</strong>al generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
words, <strong>and</strong> 20 functi<strong>on</strong>al phrases. To<br />
select sounds <strong>and</strong> blending words for Sound<br />
Sets 1 through 4, we identified functi<strong>on</strong>al,<br />
community words such as “open” <strong>and</strong> “stairs.”<br />
The sounds from the functi<strong>on</strong>al words were<br />
taught in the Sounds, Letter-Sound Corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Automaticity Phases, <strong>and</strong> we<br />
chose words for Blending Phases that were<br />
comprised of those letter sounds. We used the<br />
originally-selected functi<strong>on</strong>al words as the untaught<br />
words to be blended within the Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases providing students the opportunity<br />
to generalize the skill of blending to<br />
novel, untaught words made up of previouslymastered<br />
letter sounds. For Word Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6<br />
we selected two- <strong>and</strong> three-word envir<strong>on</strong>mental,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases from lists of the<br />
most comm<strong>on</strong>ly-used functi<strong>on</strong>al, community<br />
phrases. For Word Set 5, we selected phrases<br />
that c<strong>on</strong>tained previously-mastered letter<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e previous generalizati<strong>on</strong> word<br />
from Sound Sets 1 through 4. Envir<strong>on</strong>mental,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases for Word Set 6 were<br />
selected that were comprised of previouslymastered<br />
letter sounds from Sound Sets 1<br />
through 4, yet all words within these phrases<br />
were novel words that the students had never<br />
been taught.<br />
Assessment<br />
Before instructi<strong>on</strong> began, the RON subtest of<br />
the CTOPP (Wagner et al., 1999) was administered<br />
as a measure of naming speed. Naming<br />
speed is typically measured by asking students<br />
to name, as quickly <strong>and</strong> accurately as possible,<br />
an array of stimuli such as objects, colors,<br />
letters, or digits that are pictured <strong>on</strong> a page.<br />
Many students with MoID do not know the<br />
names of letters, digits, or colors, so the RON<br />
subtest was selected for use because it utilizes<br />
52 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
pictures of everyday comm<strong>on</strong> objects such as<br />
ball, star, <strong>and</strong> chair.<br />
Prior to the <strong>on</strong>set of instructi<strong>on</strong>, in private<br />
testing areas of students’ schools, the RON<br />
subtest was administered individually by doctoral<br />
students. Raw scores were used because<br />
no st<strong>and</strong>ardized assessments have been developed<br />
to measure processing speed for this<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Design<br />
A multiple-baseline design across sound <strong>and</strong><br />
word sets with an embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
was used to determine the effectiveness<br />
of the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent. Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
stimuli were divided into three sound sets for<br />
a 3-tier, multiple-baseline design across sound<br />
sets. Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics stimuli were divided<br />
into four sound sets <strong>and</strong> two word sets for a<br />
6-tier, multiple-baseline design across sound<br />
<strong>and</strong> word sets.<br />
The embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong> occurred<br />
as the number of sounds <strong>and</strong> words<br />
accumulated across tiers of corresp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />
Sound, Letter-Sound, Blending, <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases of the multiple baseline design.<br />
As the number of sounds <strong>and</strong> words increased<br />
across tiers, each set included at least 20% of<br />
the previously-mastered stimuli. For example,<br />
Sound Set 1 of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics c<strong>on</strong>tained /a/<br />
/m/ /t/ /s/ <strong>and</strong> Sound Set 2 c<strong>on</strong>tained the<br />
same sounds plus the new sounds /i/ <strong>and</strong> /f/.<br />
Therefore Sound Set 2 c<strong>on</strong>tained all previously-mastered<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> new sounds to be<br />
learned making the entire set of sounds /a/<br />
/m/ /t/ /s/ /i/ /f/. In the same manner,<br />
Sound Set 3 c<strong>on</strong>tained all previous sounds<br />
from Sound Sets 1 <strong>and</strong> 2, plus two additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
sounds. Another example can be seen in<br />
Sound Set 1 of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics in which the<br />
blending words were /mat/ /sam/ /at/ <strong>and</strong><br />
/am/. Sound Set 2 blending words included<br />
the previously-mastered words from Sound Set<br />
1 plus the words /fit/ /tim/ <strong>and</strong> /it/ thereby<br />
forming cumulative groups of blending words<br />
across sound sets (tiers). The excepti<strong>on</strong> was<br />
for the Automaticity Phase in which all sounds<br />
were cumulative across all sound <strong>and</strong> word<br />
sets. The total number of sounds <strong>and</strong> words<br />
increased across sound <strong>and</strong> word sets.<br />
Each tier of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics included six c<strong>on</strong>secutive phases: a<br />
Baseline Phase <strong>and</strong> the five skill phases (verbal<br />
imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
automaticity of letter sounds, blending,<br />
<strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong>). After establishing<br />
stability within the Baseline Phase of each tier,<br />
each student reached mastery for a phase before<br />
beginning a subsequent phase. The mastery<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> for each Sound, Letter-Sound<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence, Blending, <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phase was 80% correct for two out of<br />
three c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s for group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> 100% correct for two c<strong>on</strong>secutive<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s for individual instructi<strong>on</strong>. The individualized<br />
mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> for all automaticity<br />
phases was 100% of each student’s RON<br />
pretest rate for two c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Phase<br />
sequences across Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics are presented in Table 1.<br />
Baseline data were collected for each student<br />
individually. All sounds <strong>and</strong> words to be<br />
taught were presented to each student prior<br />
to the <strong>on</strong>set of the study. Additi<strong>on</strong>al baseline<br />
probes were c<strong>on</strong>ducted for all sounds <strong>and</strong><br />
words to be taught immediately prior to the<br />
<strong>on</strong>set of the respective sound or word set. All<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> words were printed in 150 Comic<br />
Sans MS f<strong>on</strong>t <strong>on</strong> white 5 7 index cards.<br />
During the initial Baseline Phase <strong>and</strong> baseline<br />
probes, the teacher presented a sound or<br />
word card <strong>and</strong> asked the student to touch the<br />
card as a joint-attenti<strong>on</strong> prompt. Then the<br />
teacher said “What sound/word?” Correct <strong>and</strong><br />
incorrect resp<strong>on</strong>ses were recorded, but no<br />
feedback was provided.<br />
Daily Sequence for Initial <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
Simultaneous prompting procedures were<br />
used to teach verbal imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds,<br />
letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, <strong>and</strong> blending<br />
skills within the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the<br />
ILC. The daily sequence of activities c<strong>on</strong>sisted<br />
of priming activities, probes, <strong>and</strong> a teaching<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>. Learning was measured before each<br />
teaching sessi<strong>on</strong> through the use of probes,<br />
described below. The stimuli for probes <strong>and</strong><br />
teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s c<strong>on</strong>sisted of the sounds or<br />
words of the particular phase in which students<br />
were working towards mastery.<br />
Priming activities. The researchers wrote<br />
storybooks that included a c<strong>on</strong>trolled vocabulary<br />
(blending <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong> words) for<br />
respective sound sets, creating six storybooks<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 53
TABLE 1<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong>al Sequence for the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
Note. Phases were mastered sequentially for each of 3 sound sets in Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> for each of 4 sound sets<br />
<strong>and</strong> 2 word sets in Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
for elementary students <strong>and</strong> two for middleschool<br />
students. Researchers made sock puppets<br />
for some of the characters <strong>and</strong> provided<br />
objects from the stories so students could interact<br />
with the storybooks thereby increasing<br />
student interest, attenti<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> comprehensi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
The overall purpose of the storybooks<br />
was to develop emergent-literacy skills, ph<strong>on</strong>ological<br />
awareness, <strong>and</strong> comprehensi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
blending <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong> words; <strong>and</strong> to ensure<br />
that the words students were expected to<br />
blend existed in the students’ receptive vocabulary.<br />
Teachers developed these skills through<br />
shared-storybook reading (Whitehurst & L<strong>on</strong>igan,<br />
1998) <strong>and</strong> language-expansi<strong>on</strong> activities<br />
that included: modeling <strong>and</strong> having students<br />
track lines <strong>and</strong> words <strong>on</strong> pages, stressing<br />
a reading vocabulary, asking comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> asking students to predict <strong>and</strong><br />
retell stories. Magnetic letters also were used<br />
to promote ph<strong>on</strong>ological awareness through<br />
unstructured word-play activities. Teachers<br />
guided students in physical manipulati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
magnetic letters to dem<strong>on</strong>strate combining<br />
sounds into words <strong>and</strong> breaking words into<br />
sounds. Priming activities also included<br />
practice naming previously-mastered letter<br />
sounds. No data were collected <strong>on</strong> priming<br />
activities.<br />
Probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Teachers c<strong>on</strong>ducted <strong>on</strong>e<br />
probe sessi<strong>on</strong> in a 1:1 format for each participant<br />
prior to each instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong> using<br />
the same sound <strong>and</strong> word cards used in baseline<br />
<strong>and</strong> during instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>s. The<br />
data from these probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s are the data<br />
used to determine the effectiveness of the<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent. Teachers recorded the<br />
number of correct <strong>and</strong> incorrect resp<strong>on</strong>ses<br />
of each student <strong>on</strong> researcher-prepared, datacollecti<strong>on</strong><br />
sheets. As in baseline, a joint-atten-<br />
54 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ti<strong>on</strong> prompt was provided in all phases (e.g.,<br />
touch the card). Unlike the Baseline Phase, if<br />
students made an incorrect resp<strong>on</strong>se, the<br />
teacher provided the correct resp<strong>on</strong>se, <strong>and</strong> if<br />
students made a correct resp<strong>on</strong>se the teacher<br />
praised the student <strong>and</strong> repeated the correct<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>se. During the Sounds Phase the<br />
teacher asked the student to repeat sounds<br />
she modeled (e.g., Say /s/). During the Letter-<br />
Sound Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence Phase the teacher<br />
presented a letter-sound card, asked the student<br />
to touch the card <strong>and</strong> then asked what<br />
sound? During the Automaticity Phase, the<br />
teacher presented a sound sheet with six rows<br />
each c<strong>on</strong>taining seven previously-learned letters<br />
<strong>and</strong> asked students to say the sounds as<br />
quickly as you can. The teacher recorded the<br />
number of correct sounds students provided<br />
in 1 minute. During the Blending Phase, the<br />
teacher presented a word card, asked the student<br />
to touch the card, say each sound in the<br />
word while pointing to the sounds, <strong>and</strong> then<br />
say the word fast. Probes during the Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phase were c<strong>on</strong>ducted the same way as<br />
probes during the Blending Phase, except no<br />
corrective feedback was provided during the<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phase. Probes were always c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />
prior to teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s in order to<br />
assess what students retained from previous<br />
teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s; all correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses<br />
counted toward mastery for that particular<br />
phase.<br />
Teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s. After probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
teachers c<strong>on</strong>ducted a teaching sessi<strong>on</strong> using<br />
simultaneous prompting procedures, that we<br />
adapted by adding a lead step for ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
students, in either a 1:1 or small-group format.<br />
The elementary-school students received 1:1<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> the first two<br />
sound sets of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, <strong>and</strong> smallgroup<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for the remaining sound<br />
<strong>and</strong> word sets of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. The middle-school<br />
students received small-group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
for both Initial <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
No data were collected during these<br />
teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s because the c<strong>on</strong>trolling<br />
prompt was always provided before the students<br />
were asked to resp<strong>on</strong>d.<br />
During all teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s simultaneous<br />
prompting procedures that included a model,<br />
lead, test sequence were repeated until students<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ded correctly <strong>and</strong> independently.<br />
The teacher provided the c<strong>on</strong>trolling prompt<br />
simultaneously with the instructi<strong>on</strong>al cue <strong>and</strong><br />
then modeled for the students by providing<br />
the correct resp<strong>on</strong>se. Next, the teacher provided<br />
the c<strong>on</strong>trolling prompt simultaneously<br />
with the instructi<strong>on</strong>al cue <strong>and</strong> asked the students<br />
to resp<strong>on</strong>d with her as a lead step. Finally,<br />
the teacher provided the c<strong>on</strong>trolling<br />
prompt simultaneously with the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
cue <strong>and</strong> asked individual students to resp<strong>on</strong>d.<br />
During the Sounds Phase, verbal imitati<strong>on</strong><br />
of sounds was taught for the respective group<br />
of sounds within each sound set. The teacher<br />
modeled c<strong>on</strong>tinuous sounds (e.g., /m/, /s/)<br />
by saying them for 2 sec<strong>on</strong>ds <strong>and</strong> stop sounds<br />
(e.g., /t/, /b/) by saying them quickly without<br />
adding uh (e.g., tuh, buh). Students imitated<br />
each sound. During the Letter-Sound Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence<br />
Phase, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences<br />
were taught for the respective group<br />
of letter sounds within each sound set. The<br />
teacher held up a letter-sound card (the same<br />
<strong>on</strong>es used in baseline) <strong>and</strong> said Touch the card.<br />
This sound is ___ , what sound? following simultaneous<br />
prompting procedures of model,<br />
lead, test until the student resp<strong>on</strong>ded correctly<br />
<strong>and</strong> independently.<br />
During the Automaticity Phase automatic<br />
retrieval of learned letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences<br />
was taught for the respective group of<br />
letter sounds within each sound set. The authors<br />
created automaticity charts c<strong>on</strong>sisting of<br />
previously-mastered letter sounds in r<strong>and</strong>om<br />
order <strong>and</strong> in the same format as objects <strong>on</strong><br />
RON charts. Students practiced naming the<br />
sounds as fast as they could for 1 minute until<br />
their naming rate, measured as correct sounds<br />
per minute (CSPM), matched their individual<br />
RON pretest rate. Only after students reached<br />
this level of automaticity was the skill of blending<br />
introduced.<br />
During the Blending Phase for each sound<br />
<strong>and</strong> word set, students were taught to blend<br />
<strong>and</strong> telescope the previously-mastered letter<br />
sounds into words. Blending was operati<strong>on</strong>ally<br />
defined as holding each c<strong>on</strong>tinuous sound<br />
(e.g., /s/, /m/) in the blending word for<br />
2 sec<strong>on</strong>ds without stopping between sounds.<br />
This is called “saying the word slowly” <strong>and</strong> is<br />
a DI technique (Engelmann et al., 1988) used<br />
as an indicator that the student actually manipulated<br />
<strong>and</strong> blended sounds rather than<br />
having memorized the word as a sight word<br />
after seeing it in many teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s. After<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 55
lending the sounds, the student was asked<br />
to telescope, or to “say the word fast” in order<br />
to practice the correct pr<strong>on</strong>unciati<strong>on</strong> of the<br />
word. Teachers used simultaneous prompting<br />
procedures that included a model, lead, test<br />
sequence for students to practice saying the<br />
words slowly <strong>and</strong> saying the words fast until<br />
they resp<strong>on</strong>ded correctly <strong>and</strong> independently.<br />
After each correct blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>se students selected the corresp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />
object from an array of objects displayed <strong>on</strong><br />
the table. This motor dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
ensured that the students understood<br />
the meaning of the words they read.<br />
During the Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phase of Initial<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, students were presented with untaught<br />
c<strong>on</strong>s<strong>on</strong>ant-vowel-c<strong>on</strong>s<strong>on</strong>ant (CVC)<br />
words made up of previously-mastered sounds<br />
to test for generalizati<strong>on</strong> of blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping.<br />
During the Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phase of<br />
Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics students were presented<br />
with untaught, functi<strong>on</strong>al words made of previously-mastered<br />
sounds to test for generalizati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
There was no instructi<strong>on</strong> during the<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phase.<br />
Procedural Fidelity<br />
To measure procedural fidelity each week,<br />
teachers <strong>and</strong> the researchers used video cameras<br />
to record 20% of instructi<strong>on</strong>al sequences.<br />
The investigator viewed the tapes while comparing<br />
procedures to a behavior checklist.<br />
The total number of teacher behaviors observed<br />
during the sessi<strong>on</strong> was divided by the<br />
total number of teacher behaviors <strong>on</strong> the behavior<br />
checklist <strong>and</strong> multiplied by 100%. Procedural<br />
fidelity for teacher implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
ranged from 91% to 100% with a mean of<br />
96%.<br />
Interobserver Agreement<br />
The researcher observed probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong><br />
video while simultaneously recording correct<br />
<strong>and</strong> incorrect student resp<strong>on</strong>ses. Data were<br />
compared to data collected by the primary<br />
data collector, the teacher. Interobserver<br />
agreement was calculated using point-by-point<br />
agreement. The total number of agreements<br />
was divided by the total number of agreements<br />
plus disagreements <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>verted to a<br />
percent. Interobserver agreement was calcu-<br />
lated for 20% of probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> ranged<br />
from 93% to 100% with a mean of 95%.<br />
Social Validity<br />
Teachers were provided with a social validity<br />
rating scale to complete at the end of the<br />
study. They were asked to answer questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
pertaining to the usefulness of the study in<br />
determining appropriate instructi<strong>on</strong> for their<br />
students, ease of implementati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> relevance<br />
to curriculum development for students<br />
with MoID. They also were asked how important<br />
they felt ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong> was for their<br />
students, <strong>and</strong> how likely they would be to c<strong>on</strong>tinue<br />
to develop word-analysis skills <strong>and</strong> automaticity<br />
with their students. Teachers rated<br />
their resp<strong>on</strong>ses <strong>on</strong> a1to5Likert-type scale<br />
with 1 indicating str<strong>on</strong>gly disagree <strong>and</strong> 5 indicating<br />
str<strong>on</strong>gly agree for a maximum positive<br />
score of 25. Teachers’ scores ranged from 20<br />
to 25 with a mean of 23.<br />
Results<br />
Visual analysis was c<strong>on</strong>ducted for all five participants<br />
revealing a functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> between<br />
the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the ILC <strong>and</strong><br />
mastery of word-analysis skills as evidenced by<br />
a pattern of increase in correct resp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />
during interventi<strong>on</strong> phases replicated across<br />
sound <strong>and</strong> word sets. Due to space limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
graphic presentati<strong>on</strong> of data is provided for a<br />
sample of <strong>on</strong>e elementary student who received<br />
individual <strong>and</strong> group instructi<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong><br />
for the middle-school group of two participants<br />
who received group instructi<strong>on</strong>. The<br />
data for each sample are displayed in a 3-tier<br />
(Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics) <strong>and</strong> a 6-tier (Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics)<br />
multiple baseline design across sound<br />
<strong>and</strong> word sets with an embedded changing<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong>, depicting the number of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses<br />
<strong>on</strong> the left y-axis <strong>and</strong> the number of<br />
correct sounds per minute <strong>on</strong> the right y-axis.<br />
Dashed lines across each phase indicate the<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> for that phase <strong>and</strong> the numbers in<br />
parentheses indicate the actual number of<br />
correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses needed for mastery. Also,<br />
we have provided a table that includes the<br />
mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> for all Blending <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases as well as the number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
required to reach mastery for the elementary<br />
student <strong>and</strong> for the middle-school<br />
56 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 1. A multiple baseline design across sound sets with an embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong> design depicting<br />
the number of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses produced by <strong>on</strong>e elementary student during initial ph<strong>on</strong>ics. Open<br />
square data points depict automaticity rates <strong>and</strong> corresp<strong>on</strong>d with the sec<strong>on</strong>dary Y-axis.<br />
group of students, highlighting the change in<br />
rate of learning across sound <strong>and</strong> word sets.<br />
Taniesha represents the elementary students<br />
who received individual instructi<strong>on</strong> during<br />
Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics (see Figure 1). Taniesha<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated mastery of all phases of Initial<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics except the Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phase of<br />
Sound Set 1 (Tier 1). Her learning was replicated<br />
across subsequent tiers representing<br />
Sound Sets 2 <strong>and</strong> 3. Baseline data points of<br />
zero indicate that Taniesha did not know any<br />
sounds or blending words before instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
began <strong>and</strong> an increase in word-analysis skills<br />
did not occur until treatment was introduced<br />
in each phase. Baseline probes were c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />
immediately prior to the <strong>on</strong>set of each<br />
sound set to measure her most current knowledge<br />
of verbal imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, lettersound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences, <strong>and</strong> words for each<br />
respective tier. The baseline probes just prior<br />
to instructi<strong>on</strong> in each tier show that Taniesha<br />
retained previously-mastered sounds <strong>and</strong><br />
words that were included in subsequent sound<br />
sets. As seen in Table 2, during Sound Set 1<br />
Taniesha reached the mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> of 12<br />
correctly blended words in 14 sessi<strong>on</strong>s. In<br />
Sound Set 2 she reached the mastery criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
of 21 correctly blended words in 17 sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> in Sound Set 3 she reached the mastery<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> of 24 correctly blended words in 10<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During generalizati<strong>on</strong> Taniesha read<br />
zero novel words in Tier 1, 12 in Tier 2, <strong>and</strong> 18<br />
in Tier 3.<br />
Taniesha also represents the elementaryschool<br />
students who received instructi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. They received individual instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
for Sound Sets 1 <strong>and</strong> 2, during which<br />
mastery for each phase was 100% correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses<br />
for two c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s (Figure 2,<br />
Tiers 1 <strong>and</strong> 2). Students received group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
for Sound Set 3 <strong>and</strong> 4 <strong>and</strong> for Word<br />
Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6, during which mastery was a<br />
group average of 80% correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for<br />
two out of three c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Tanie-<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 57
TABLE 2<br />
Initial <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Blending Phases mastery criteria (number of words) al<strong>on</strong>g with number of<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s required to reach blending mastery, <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases mastery criteria (number of<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al words <strong>and</strong> envir<strong>on</strong>mental c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases) al<strong>on</strong>g with number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s required to<br />
reach generalizati<strong>on</strong> mastery for <strong>on</strong>e elementary-age student.<br />
Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics – Elementary Student Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics – Elementary Student<br />
Sound<br />
Set 1<br />
Sound<br />
Set 2<br />
Sound<br />
Set 3<br />
sha mastered all word-analysis skills in Sound<br />
Set 1 <strong>on</strong>ly after instructi<strong>on</strong> was introduced for<br />
each phase. This is replicated across Sound<br />
Sets2–4<strong>and</strong>Word Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6. Baseline data<br />
for Sound Sets 1 through 4 show that Taniesha<br />
knew a range of two to three items <strong>and</strong><br />
indicate that she retained the previously-mastered<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> words from Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
Baseline probes immediately prior to the <strong>on</strong>set<br />
of Sound Sets 2 through 4 also show that<br />
she retained previously-mastered items from<br />
previous Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics sound sets. Baseline<br />
data show that Taniesha did not know any<br />
of the functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases<br />
prior to beginning Word Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6. Table 2<br />
shows that during Sound Sets 1 through 4<br />
Taniesha dem<strong>on</strong>strated mastery of 16, 24, 27,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 29 blending words in 8, 12, 8, <strong>and</strong> 4<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s respectively. She correctly generalized<br />
the skills of blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping to<br />
6, 10, 16, <strong>and</strong> 24 novel, functi<strong>on</strong>al words in 5,<br />
4, 5, <strong>and</strong> 6 sessi<strong>on</strong>s respectively.<br />
During Word Set 5 of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics,<br />
Taniesha mastered 10 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nectedtext<br />
phrases (in which <strong>on</strong>e word was a previously-mastered<br />
generalizati<strong>on</strong> word) in 10 sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> during Word Set 6 she mastered 14<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases (in which<br />
all words were novel, untaught words) in eight<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During Word Set 5 Taniesha successfully<br />
generalized blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
skills to 14 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases<br />
(all novel, functi<strong>on</strong>al words) in 12 sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Sound<br />
Set 1<br />
Sound<br />
Set 2<br />
Sound<br />
Set 3<br />
Sound<br />
Set 4<br />
Word<br />
Set 5<br />
Word<br />
Set 6<br />
Blending Phases Blending Phases<br />
Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 12 21 24 Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 16 24 27 29 10 14<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
for Mastery 14 17 10 for Mastery 8 12 8 4 10 8<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases<br />
Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 3 12 18 Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 6 10 16 24 14 14<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
for Mastery N/A 10 8 for Mastery 5 4 5 6 12 9<br />
During Word Set 6, she successfully generalized<br />
these skills to 14 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nectedtext<br />
phrases in 9 sessi<strong>on</strong>s (See Table 2).<br />
Figure 3 displays average learning performance<br />
during Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics for a middleschool<br />
group of two students. For group instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> was 80% correct<br />
for two out of three c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
each phase. The group dem<strong>on</strong>strated mastery<br />
of all phases of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, <strong>and</strong> learning<br />
was replicated across subsequent tiers representing<br />
Sound Sets 2 <strong>and</strong> 3. Students knew a<br />
range of two to four items before instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
began for Sound Set 1. Increases in verbal<br />
imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
automaticity of letter-sounds, blending,<br />
<strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong> did not occur until<br />
treatment was introduced within each phase.<br />
Baseline probes were c<strong>on</strong>ducted immediately<br />
prior to the <strong>on</strong>set of each sound set <strong>and</strong> show<br />
that the students retained previously-mastered<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> words that were included in previous<br />
Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics sound sets per the cumulative<br />
design. As seen in Table 3, during<br />
Sound Sets 1 through 3 the students reached<br />
the mastery criteria of 6, 11, <strong>and</strong> 13 correctly<br />
blended words in 5, 3, <strong>and</strong> 8 sessi<strong>on</strong>s respectively.<br />
During Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases of Sound<br />
Sets 1 through 3, the students successfully generalized<br />
the skills of blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
to 2, 6, <strong>and</strong> 10 novel words in 2 to 3 sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Figure 4 depicts the learning performance<br />
during Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics for the middle-<br />
58 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 2. A multiple baseline design across sound sets with an embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong> design depicting<br />
the number of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses produced by <strong>on</strong>e elementary student during functi<strong>on</strong>al ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
Open square data points depict automaticity rates <strong>and</strong> corresp<strong>on</strong>d with the sec<strong>on</strong>dary Y-axis.<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 59
Figure 3. A multiple baseline design across sound sets with an embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong> design depicting<br />
the number of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses produced by <strong>on</strong>e middle school group of two students during initial<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>ics. Open square data points depict automaticity rates <strong>and</strong> corresp<strong>on</strong>d with the sec<strong>on</strong>dary Y-axis.<br />
school group of two students, whose mastery<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> was a group average of 80% correct<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses across two out of three c<strong>on</strong>secutive<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. The students mastered all phases of<br />
Tier 1, <strong>and</strong> mastery of all phases was replicated<br />
across each tier representing Sound Sets<br />
2, 3, <strong>and</strong> 4 <strong>and</strong> Word Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6. Initial<br />
baseline data for Sound Sets 1 through 4 show<br />
that the students knew a range of two to four<br />
items <strong>and</strong> indicate that students retained the<br />
previously-mastered sounds <strong>and</strong> words from<br />
Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. Baseline probes immediately<br />
prior to the <strong>on</strong>set of Sound Sets 2 through 4<br />
show also that students retained previouslymastered<br />
items from previous Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
sound sets. Students did not know any of<br />
the functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases prior<br />
to beginning Word Sets 5 <strong>and</strong> 6. During<br />
Sound Sets 1 through 4 students mastered<br />
blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping of 13, 19, 27, <strong>and</strong> 29<br />
words in 3, 5, 3, <strong>and</strong> 5 sessi<strong>on</strong>s, respectively.<br />
The students generalized these skills to 5, 8,<br />
16, <strong>and</strong> 24 novel, functi<strong>on</strong>al words in 2 to 3<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s (see Table 3).<br />
During Word Set 5 of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, the<br />
middle-school group mastered 10 functi<strong>on</strong>al,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases (in which <strong>on</strong>e word<br />
was a previously-mastered generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
word) in three sessi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> during Word Set<br />
6 they mastered 14 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text<br />
phrases (in which all words were novel, untaught<br />
words) in four sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During Word<br />
Set 5 they generalized blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
skills to 14 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text<br />
phrases (all novel, functi<strong>on</strong>al words) in three<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During Word Set 6, the students generalized<br />
these skills to 14 functi<strong>on</strong>al, c<strong>on</strong>nected-text<br />
phrases in five sessi<strong>on</strong>s (See Table 3).<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
This study supports <strong>and</strong> extends previous<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong>s of the effectiveness of simultaneous<br />
prompting procedures in teaching<br />
60 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 3<br />
Initial <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Blending Phases mastery criteria (number of words) al<strong>on</strong>g with number of<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s required to reach blending mastery, <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases mastery criteria (number of<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al words <strong>and</strong> envir<strong>on</strong>mental c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases) al<strong>on</strong>g with number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s required to<br />
reach generalizati<strong>on</strong> mastery for a group of two middle school students.<br />
Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics – Middle School Group Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics – Middle School Group<br />
Sound<br />
Set 1<br />
Sound<br />
Set 2<br />
Sound<br />
Set 3<br />
word-analysis skills to students with MoID<br />
(Waugh et al., 2009). All five students acquired<br />
word-analysis skills that included verbal<br />
imitati<strong>on</strong> of sounds, letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences,<br />
retrieval of letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dences<br />
to a level of automaticity, blending of<br />
the learned letter sounds to words by holding<br />
each sound for 2 sec<strong>on</strong>ds without stopping<br />
(“saying it slowly”) <strong>and</strong> producing each sound<br />
quickly without stopping (telescoping), <strong>and</strong><br />
generalizing the skill of blending to untaught<br />
words <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases. A clear rise<br />
to mastery is shown for all phases, as compared<br />
to baseline phases, for all students except<br />
Taniesha’s first opportunity to generalize<br />
the skill of blending to a novel word during<br />
Sound Set 1 of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics. We anticipated<br />
that students with MoID needed many more<br />
opportunities to generalize ph<strong>on</strong>etic skills to<br />
untaught words than have been provided in<br />
the past (Bracey et al., 1975; Bradford et al.,<br />
2006; Flores et al., 2004). Our cumulative data<br />
within the changing-criteri<strong>on</strong> across tiers<br />
buoyed this important aspect of the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
Comp<strong>on</strong>ent. Per the design, Taniesha was<br />
provided additi<strong>on</strong>al opportunities to practice<br />
<strong>and</strong> master precursor word-analysis skills before<br />
attempting to generalize the skills to untaught<br />
words. The next set of generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
words included the original generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
word (sat) plus three additi<strong>on</strong>al, untaught<br />
words (mat, at, am), <strong>and</strong> she was able to read<br />
all of them. In additi<strong>on</strong> to identifying <strong>and</strong><br />
Sound<br />
Set 1<br />
Sound<br />
Set 2<br />
Sound<br />
Set 3<br />
Sound<br />
Set 4<br />
Word<br />
Set 5<br />
Word<br />
Set 6<br />
Blending Phases Blending Phases<br />
Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 6 11 13 Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 13 19 27 29 10 14<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
for Mastery<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases<br />
5 3 8 for Mastery 3 5 3 5 3 4<br />
Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 2 6 10 Mastery Criteri<strong>on</strong> 5 8 16 24 14 14<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
# of Sessi<strong>on</strong>s Required<br />
for Mastery 2 2 3 for Mastery 2 2 2 3 3 5<br />
addressing blending <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong> as<br />
specific areas of difficulty, we have shown that<br />
repetiti<strong>on</strong> of systematically presented stimuli<br />
is an effective approach to successful learning<br />
of ph<strong>on</strong>etic skills for students with MoID. Historically,<br />
teachers may have “given up” before<br />
students received sufficient systematic repetiti<strong>on</strong><br />
to facilitate learning, leading to the generally<br />
accepted assumpti<strong>on</strong> that students with<br />
MoID cannot learn ph<strong>on</strong>ics.<br />
The use of cumulative stimuli within the<br />
design revealed another important finding.<br />
As the students progressed through sound sets<br />
of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics the<br />
number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s required to reach mastery<br />
often decreased even though the mastery criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
increased. Students began mastering<br />
more items in progressively fewer sessi<strong>on</strong>s. As<br />
seen in Table 2, during Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Taniesha<br />
reached the mastery criteria of 12, 21,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 24 correctly blended words in 14, 17, <strong>and</strong><br />
10 sessi<strong>on</strong>s, respectively. During Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases Taniesha did not read any novel<br />
words in Tier 1, but read12 in Tier 2, <strong>and</strong> 18<br />
in Tier 3.<br />
In Sound Set 1 of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Taniesha<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated mastery of 16 words in eight<br />
blending sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> generalized blending<br />
<strong>and</strong> telescoping to six novel, functi<strong>on</strong>al words<br />
in five sessi<strong>on</strong>s. In Sound Set 4, she correctly<br />
read 29 words in half as many sessi<strong>on</strong>s as she<br />
read 16 words in Sound Set 1, <strong>and</strong> she generalized<br />
blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping to 24 novel,<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 61
Figure 4. A multiple baseline design across sound sets with an embedded changing criteri<strong>on</strong> design depicting<br />
the average number of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses produced by <strong>on</strong>e middle school group of two students<br />
during functi<strong>on</strong>al ph<strong>on</strong>ics. Open square data points depict automaticity rates <strong>and</strong> corresp<strong>on</strong>d with<br />
the sec<strong>on</strong>dary Y-axis.<br />
62 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
functi<strong>on</strong>al words. During Word Set 5 of Functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, Taniesha mastered 10 c<strong>on</strong>nected-text<br />
phrases (in which <strong>on</strong>e word was a<br />
previously-mastered generalizati<strong>on</strong> word) in<br />
10 sessi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> during Word Set 6 she increased<br />
her mastery of c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases<br />
to 14 while decreasing the number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
required for mastery. During Word Set 5 Taniesha<br />
generalized blending <strong>and</strong> telescoping<br />
to 14 c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases (all words within<br />
phrases were novel functi<strong>on</strong>al words) in 12<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During Word Set 6, she generalized<br />
to 14 c<strong>on</strong>nected-text phrases <strong>and</strong> decreased<br />
the number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s to nine.<br />
As can be seen <strong>on</strong> Table 3, during Sound<br />
Set 1of Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics the middle-school group<br />
reached a mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> of six correctly<br />
blended words in <strong>on</strong>ly five sessi<strong>on</strong>s. By Sound<br />
Set 3 they reached a mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> of 13<br />
correctly blended words in eight sessi<strong>on</strong>s. For<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases, during Sound Set 1 the<br />
students reached a mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> of two<br />
correctly-blended words in two sessi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong><br />
by Sound Set 3 generalized to 10 untaught<br />
words in <strong>on</strong>ly three sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Although, the<br />
data do not show the same decrease in number<br />
of sessi<strong>on</strong>s to mastery as for Taniesha,<br />
students mastered progressively more items in<br />
approximately the same number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Also, they began mastering skills in fewer sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
than Taniesha (e.g., 14 vs. 5 sessi<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
mastery of the Blending Phase during Sound<br />
Set1ofInitial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics). The older students<br />
might have learned more quickly because they<br />
had better-developed attenti<strong>on</strong> skills, more<br />
prior practice with in-seat behavior, <strong>and</strong> more<br />
opportunities to interact with reading stimuli<br />
because of additi<strong>on</strong>al years in school.<br />
As the students acquired basic word-analysis<br />
skills, <strong>and</strong> then applied them to words <strong>and</strong><br />
phrases that increased in number <strong>and</strong> complexity,<br />
they dem<strong>on</strong>strated that word-analysis<br />
skills are strategy-based skills that <strong>on</strong>ce<br />
learned can be applied to many, unanticipated<br />
words in an individual’s envir<strong>on</strong>ment.<br />
This use of a strategy-based skill remains in<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trast to sight-word reading that requires<br />
the same amount of memory load for every<br />
word memorized, <strong>and</strong> does not prepare an<br />
individual to read untaught words that have<br />
a functi<strong>on</strong>al use in the individual’s envir<strong>on</strong>ment.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong> to the word-analysis skills tar-<br />
geted in this study, students developed prerequisite-reading<br />
skills for which we did not collect<br />
data. These prerequisite-reading skills<br />
developed during Automaticity Phases <strong>and</strong><br />
storybook-priming activities. When presented<br />
with an automaticity chart c<strong>on</strong>sisting of 42<br />
previously-mastered letter sounds, <strong>and</strong> asked<br />
to name the sounds as quickly as they could<br />
for <strong>on</strong>e minute, most of the students could<br />
not attend to individual stimuli <strong>on</strong> a page nor<br />
track left to right <strong>and</strong> from <strong>on</strong>e line to the<br />
next. To address this we alternated between<br />
red <strong>and</strong> black f<strong>on</strong>t for each line, <strong>and</strong> used<br />
h<strong>and</strong> over h<strong>and</strong> guidance until the students<br />
learned to attend to each stimulus <strong>on</strong> the<br />
page <strong>and</strong> to track independently. Not <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
were students increasing their ability to retrieve<br />
letter sounds quickly <strong>and</strong> accurately,<br />
they learned the emergent-literacy skill of<br />
tracking <strong>and</strong> improved their attenti<strong>on</strong> skills.<br />
The shared-storybook activities facilitated<br />
their learning of prerequisite-reading skills<br />
including, ph<strong>on</strong>ological awareness, emergent<br />
literacy, comprehensi<strong>on</strong>, language expansi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> vocabulary. The age-appropriate storybooks<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>ded with the curriculum <strong>and</strong><br />
as the students participated in the interactive<br />
reading we observed these skills begin to<br />
emerge. As the study progressed, students began<br />
to make predicti<strong>on</strong>s about events in the<br />
stories, identify sentences <strong>and</strong> words <strong>on</strong> pages,<br />
provide a motor dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of comprehensi<strong>on</strong><br />
of reading vocabulary, read individual<br />
sounds in CVC words, <strong>and</strong> practice saying<br />
CVC words slowly <strong>and</strong> quickly.<br />
Ph<strong>on</strong>ological awareness <strong>and</strong> emergent literacy<br />
are prerequisite skills for ph<strong>on</strong>etic-reading<br />
acquisiti<strong>on</strong> (Ehri, 2004; Share, Jorm, MacLean,<br />
& Matthews, 1984). Prior to participating in<br />
this study, our students had not been systematically<br />
taught these prerequisite skills because<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong> is seldom provided for<br />
children with MoID (Browder et al., 2006).<br />
Because sight-word instructi<strong>on</strong> is the most<br />
comm<strong>on</strong> method of reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for<br />
students with MoID, these prerequisite-reading<br />
skills are often not acquired, with the excepti<strong>on</strong><br />
of some emergent-literacy skills.<br />
When word-analysis skills have been taught<br />
(Bracey et al., 1975; Bradford et al., 2006;<br />
Flores et al., 2004) they have not included an<br />
automaticity requirement. Automaticity training<br />
was <strong>on</strong>e of the most unique aspects of the<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 63
Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent. Due to limited workingmemory<br />
capacity, we speculated that the students<br />
needed to learn to retrieve letter-sound<br />
corresp<strong>on</strong>dences to some level of automaticity<br />
before attempting to blend them into words.<br />
For the Automaticity Phase mastery criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
we selected each student’s rate <strong>on</strong> the RON<br />
subtest as the best reflecti<strong>on</strong> of the individual<br />
student’s ph<strong>on</strong>ological processing rate. All<br />
students blended successfully after first reaching<br />
mastery in Automaticity Phases suggesting<br />
that automaticity practice facilitated the skill<br />
of blending. However, we do not know if the<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> for automaticity that we selected is a<br />
necessary threshold for successful blending,<br />
or if the automaticity practice is sufficient with<br />
a less stringent criteri<strong>on</strong>.<br />
The Ph<strong>on</strong>ics Comp<strong>on</strong>ent included academic-literacy<br />
<strong>and</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al-literacy goals. Historically,<br />
the definiti<strong>on</strong> of literacy instructi<strong>on</strong> has<br />
been binary. Academic literacy has been<br />
viewed as the approach for typically-developing<br />
students <strong>and</strong> has involved ph<strong>on</strong>etic-decoding<br />
skills while functi<strong>on</strong>al literacy has been<br />
viewed as the approach for individuals with<br />
developmental delays <strong>and</strong> has included sightword<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> (Cegelka & Cegelka, 1970).<br />
We have shown that the two types of goals can<br />
be combined. With this alignment of goals,<br />
students with MoID can be taught ph<strong>on</strong>eticdecoding<br />
skills to promote optimal participati<strong>on</strong><br />
in their community. Typically-developing<br />
students are taught ph<strong>on</strong>ics as a method of<br />
obtaining informati<strong>on</strong> from c<strong>on</strong>nected-narrative<br />
text which includes sentences <strong>and</strong> passages.<br />
Students with MoID should be provided<br />
the same opportunity even if their full potential<br />
may be c<strong>on</strong>nected-envir<strong>on</strong>mental text<br />
which c<strong>on</strong>sists of functi<strong>on</strong>al words <strong>and</strong> short<br />
phrases.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Future Recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
One limitati<strong>on</strong> of this study is a change that we<br />
made to the changing-criteri<strong>on</strong> requirement.<br />
The elementary students began ph<strong>on</strong>ics instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
before the middle-school students.<br />
As originally designed the elementary students<br />
had three trials in each sessi<strong>on</strong>. Because<br />
of the increase in the number of sounds <strong>and</strong><br />
blending words in Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, the number<br />
of trials was reduced from three to two<br />
trials per sessi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> we applied this new cri-<br />
teri<strong>on</strong> to all future participants. By the time<br />
the middle-school students began Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
the criteri<strong>on</strong> had changed to two trials per<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>. The mastery criteri<strong>on</strong> for 1:1 instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
was 100% correct for two c<strong>on</strong>secutive<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> the criteri<strong>on</strong> for group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
was a group average of 80% correct across<br />
two out of three c<strong>on</strong>secutive sessi<strong>on</strong>s. The<br />
elementary-school students received 1:1 instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
throughout Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics <strong>and</strong> the<br />
first two sound sets of Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics, <strong>and</strong><br />
the middle-school students received group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
throughout the study.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>sidering our participants were from<br />
multiple schools in multiple districts, <strong>and</strong> at<br />
multiple age levels, we were not able to c<strong>on</strong>trol<br />
for their previous literacy experiences bey<strong>on</strong>d<br />
the Edmark program that all of the participants<br />
received prior to this research.<br />
Further, all students with MoID may not be<br />
equally successful. There were <strong>on</strong>ly three elementary-school<br />
students <strong>and</strong> two middleschool<br />
students who completed the Ph<strong>on</strong>ics<br />
Comp<strong>on</strong>ent limiting the external validity.<br />
We have not found the floor effect of cognitive<br />
ability for students who can learn to<br />
read ph<strong>on</strong>etically. Future research should include<br />
different students with MoID with varied<br />
previous literacy instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> cognitive<br />
abilities. It will be important to examine cognitive<br />
<strong>and</strong> language skills such as vocabulary<br />
level, processing speed, <strong>and</strong> working memory<br />
as possible predictors of ph<strong>on</strong>etic reading<br />
ability to better underst<strong>and</strong> what skills need to<br />
be developed to be successful in this program.<br />
Close inspecti<strong>on</strong> of underlying cognitive processing<br />
skills for reading can facilitate identificati<strong>on</strong><br />
of students who are prepared to learn<br />
to read ph<strong>on</strong>etically.<br />
Future research also should include a close<br />
examinati<strong>on</strong> of automaticity requirements<br />
for blending acquisiti<strong>on</strong>. In this study all students<br />
mastered Blending <strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Phases after mastering individual automaticity<br />
requirements. However, it is possible<br />
that students could have mastered Blending<br />
<strong>and</strong> Generalizati<strong>on</strong> Phases with lower levels of<br />
automaticity than what were required in this<br />
study.<br />
Finally, it would be helpful to collect data<br />
<strong>on</strong> the development of ph<strong>on</strong>ological-awareness<br />
skills. Anecdotally, we observed important<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>ological-awareness skill acquisiti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
64 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ut without systematic measurement <strong>and</strong> careful<br />
inclusi<strong>on</strong> of this in the design of our study,<br />
it is impossible to know the extent to which<br />
the shared-storybook activities impacted the<br />
development of ph<strong>on</strong>ological-awareness skills.<br />
References<br />
Alberto, P. A., & Fredrick, L. D. (2007). Integrated<br />
literacy for students with moderate to severe disabilities.<br />
Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC: U.S. Department of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, Institute of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Sciences (IES<br />
Grant #R324A070144).<br />
Alberto, P. A., Waugh, R. E., & Fredrick, L. D.<br />
(2010). Teaching the reading of c<strong>on</strong>nected text<br />
through sight-word instructi<strong>on</strong> to students with<br />
moderate intellectual disabilities. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 31, 1467–1474.<br />
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Roberts, J. K., J<strong>on</strong>es, F. G.,<br />
& Champlin, T. M. (2010). Teaching students<br />
with moderate intellectual disabilities to read: An<br />
experimental examinati<strong>on</strong> of a comprehensive<br />
reading interventi<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 45, 3–22.<br />
Austin, P., & Boekman, K. (1990). Edmark functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
word series. Redm<strong>on</strong>d, WA: PCI Educati<strong>on</strong>al Publishing.<br />
Bracey, S., Maggs, A., & Morath, P. (1975). The<br />
effects of a direct ph<strong>on</strong>ic approach in teaching<br />
reading with six moderately retarded children:<br />
Acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> mastery learning stages. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Child, 22, 83–90.<br />
Bradford, S., Shippen, M. E., Alberto, P. A.,<br />
Houchins, D. E., & Flores, M. (2006). Using systematic<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> to teach decoding skills to<br />
middle school students with moderate intellectual<br />
disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 41, 333–343.<br />
Browder, D., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Courtade, G.,<br />
Gibbs, S. L., & Flowers, C. (2008). Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
the effectiveness of an Early Literacy Program for<br />
students with significant developmental disabilities.<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 75, 33–52.<br />
Browder, D., Wakeman, S., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Ahlgrim-<br />
Delzell, L., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Research <strong>on</strong><br />
reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for individuals with significant<br />
cognitive disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 72,<br />
392–408.<br />
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame’ennui, E. J., &<br />
Tarver, S. G. (2004). Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong> reading (4 th<br />
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pears<strong>on</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Inc.<br />
Cegelka, P., & Cegelka, W. (1970). A review of research:<br />
Reading <strong>and</strong> the educable mentally h<strong>and</strong>icapped.<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 37, 187–200.<br />
Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClell<strong>and</strong>, J. L.<br />
(1990). On the c<strong>on</strong>trol of automatic processes:<br />
A parallel distributed processing account of the<br />
Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332–361.<br />
Cohen, E. T., Heller, K. W., Alberto, P., & Fredrick,<br />
L. D. (2008). Using a three-step decoding strategy<br />
with c<strong>on</strong>stant time delay to teach word reading to<br />
students with mild <strong>and</strong> moderate mental retardati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
23(2), 67–78.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>ners, F. A. (1992). Reading instructi<strong>on</strong> for students<br />
with moderate mental retardati<strong>on</strong>: Review<br />
<strong>and</strong> analysis of research. American Journal <strong>on</strong> Mental<br />
Retardati<strong>on</strong>, 96, 577–597.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>ners, F. A., Atwell, J. A., Rosenquist, C. J., &<br />
Sligh, A. C. (2001). Abilities underlying decoding<br />
differences in children with intellectual disability.<br />
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 292–<br />
299.<br />
Cossu, G., Rossini, F., & Marshall, J. C. (1993).<br />
When reading is acquired but ph<strong>on</strong>emic awareness<br />
is not: A study of literacy in Down’s syndrome.<br />
Cogniti<strong>on</strong>, 46, 129–138.<br />
Davis, D. H., Fredrick, L. D., Alberto, P. A., &<br />
Gagné, P. (2010). Naming speed, letter-sound automaticity,<br />
<strong>and</strong> acquiring blending skills am<strong>on</strong>g students<br />
with moderate intellectual disabilities. (Unpublished<br />
doctoral dissertati<strong>on</strong>). Georgia State University,<br />
Atlanta, Ga.<br />
Davis, D. H., Gagné, P., Fredrick, L. D., Alberto,<br />
P. A., Waugh, R. E., & Haardörfer, R. (2013).<br />
Augmenting visual analysis in single-case research<br />
with hierarchical linear modeling. Behavior Modificati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
37, 62–89.<br />
Ehri, L. C. (2004). Teaching ph<strong>on</strong>emic awareness<br />
<strong>and</strong> ph<strong>on</strong>ics: An explanati<strong>on</strong> of the Nati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Reading Panel meta-analysis. In P. McCardle & V.<br />
Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading<br />
research (pp. 153–186). Baltimore, MD: Paul H.<br />
Brookes.<br />
Engelmann, S., Becker, W., Hanner, S., & Johns<strong>on</strong>,<br />
G. (1980). Corrective reading program. Chicago, Il:<br />
Science Research Associates.<br />
Engelmann, S., & Bruner, E. C. (1969). Distar reading:<br />
An instructi<strong>on</strong>al system. Chicago, IL: Science<br />
Research Associates.<br />
Engelmann, S., Carnine, L., & Johns<strong>on</strong>, G. (1988).<br />
Corrective reading: Word-attack basics, Decoding A.<br />
Columbus, OH: MacMillian/MacGraw-Hill.<br />
Flores, M. M., Shippen, M. E., Alberto, P., & Crowe,<br />
L. (2004). Teaching letter-sound corresp<strong>on</strong>dence<br />
to students with moderate intellectual disabilities.<br />
Journal of Direct Instructi<strong>on</strong>, 4, 173–188.<br />
Foorman, B., Francis, D., Shaywitz, S., Shaywitz, B.,<br />
& Fletcher, J. (1997). The case for early reading<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>. In B. Blachman (Ed.), Foundati<strong>on</strong>s of<br />
reading acquisiti<strong>on</strong> (pp. 243–264). Hillsdale, NJ:<br />
Erlbaum.<br />
Hoogeveen, F. R., Smeets, P. M., & Lanci<strong>on</strong>i, G. E.<br />
(1989). Teaching moderately mentally retarded<br />
From Initial Ph<strong>on</strong>ics to Functi<strong>on</strong>al Ph<strong>on</strong>ics / 65
children basic reading skills. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 10, 1–18.<br />
Joseph, L., & Seery, M. E. (2004). Where is the<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>ics? A review of the literature <strong>on</strong> the use of<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>etic analysis with students with mental retardati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 25, 88–94.<br />
Katims, D. S. (1996). The emergence of literacy in<br />
elementary students with mild mental retardati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
11, 147–157.<br />
Katims, D. S. (2000). Literacy instructi<strong>on</strong> for people<br />
with mental retardati<strong>on</strong>: Historical highlights <strong>and</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>temporary analysis. Educati<strong>on</strong> & Training in<br />
Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> & <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 35,<br />
3–15.<br />
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a<br />
theory of automatic informati<strong>on</strong> processing in<br />
reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.<br />
Nietupski, J., Williams, W., & York, R. (1979).<br />
Teaching selected ph<strong>on</strong>ic word analysis reading<br />
skills to TMR labeled students. Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 11(4), 140–143.<br />
Share, D., Jorm, A., MacLean, R., & Matthews, R.<br />
(1984). Sources of individual differences in reading<br />
achievement. Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychology,<br />
76, 1309–1324.<br />
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). C<strong>on</strong>trolled<br />
<strong>and</strong> automatic human informati<strong>on</strong> processing:<br />
II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, <strong>and</strong><br />
a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.<br />
Stanovich, K. E. (1985). Cognitive determinants of<br />
reading in mentally retarded individuals. In N. R.<br />
Ellis & N. W. Bray (Eds.), Internati<strong>on</strong>al review of<br />
research in mental retardati<strong>on</strong>, Vol. 13 (pp. 181–214).<br />
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.<br />
Torgesen, J. K., Alex<strong>and</strong>er, A. W., Wagner, R. K.,<br />
Rashotte, C. A.,Voeller, K. K., & C<strong>on</strong>way, T.<br />
(2001). Intensive remedial instructi<strong>on</strong> for children<br />
with severe reading disabilities: Immediate<br />
<strong>and</strong> l<strong>on</strong>g-term outcomes from two instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
approaches. Journal of Learning <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 34, 33–<br />
58.<br />
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J., & Rashotte, C. A.<br />
(1999). CTOPP: Comprehensive Test of Ph<strong>on</strong>ological<br />
Processing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.<br />
Waugh, R. E., Fredrick, L. D., & Alberto, P. A.<br />
(2009). Using simultaneous prompting to teach<br />
sounds <strong>and</strong> blending skills to students with moderate<br />
intellectual disabilities. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 30, 1435–1447.<br />
Whitehurst, G., & L<strong>on</strong>igan, C. (1998). Child development<br />
<strong>and</strong> emergent literacy. Child Development,<br />
69, 8<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>–872.<br />
Received: 11 October 2011;<br />
Initial Acceptance: 10 December 2011;<br />
Final Acceptance: 10 March 2012<br />
66 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 67–75<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students with <strong>Autism</strong><br />
Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of the Literature<br />
Kyle D. Bennett<br />
Florida Internati<strong>on</strong>al University<br />
Charles Dukes<br />
Florida Atlantic University<br />
Abstract: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often struggle with features of adult life, including<br />
obtaining <strong>and</strong> maintaining gainful employment. Many factors seem to c<strong>on</strong>tribute to this issue, such as: (a)<br />
access to financial resources, (b) interacti<strong>on</strong> between the unique characteristics of ASD <strong>and</strong> employment settings,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (c) curriculum <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>al practices in sec<strong>on</strong>dary special educati<strong>on</strong> that may not focus specifically<br />
<strong>on</strong> the procurement of employment. An additi<strong>on</strong>al area that may be a factor is the paucity of research <strong>on</strong><br />
employment development for students with ASD while attending middle <strong>and</strong> high school programs. This article<br />
examined the research <strong>on</strong> teaching strategies used to develop employment skills am<strong>on</strong>g sec<strong>on</strong>dary students with<br />
ASD between the ages 14–22. Twelve studies were identified with a total of 55 participants with ASD. A<br />
summary of the articles meeting the inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria is provided al<strong>on</strong>g with recommendati<strong>on</strong>s for future<br />
research.<br />
Questi<strong>on</strong>s about how adolescents <strong>and</strong> adults<br />
with developmental disabilities can <strong>and</strong><br />
should be taught functi<strong>on</strong>al skills have been a<br />
focus in the literature since the introducti<strong>on</strong><br />
of the criteri<strong>on</strong> of ultimate functi<strong>on</strong>ing as a<br />
guiding principle in special educati<strong>on</strong> (Brown,<br />
Nietupski, & Hamre-Nietupski, 1976). What<br />
should be taught <strong>and</strong> how is a major c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong><br />
for any instructi<strong>on</strong>al program. The<br />
literature is replete with studies dem<strong>on</strong>strating<br />
the effectiveness of systematic instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
techniques used to teach a wide range of skills<br />
to adolescents with various disabilities (Test<br />
et al., 2009). Clearly, teaching employability<br />
<strong>and</strong> daily living skills, am<strong>on</strong>g others, has enjoyed<br />
some of this attenti<strong>on</strong> (Test et al., 2009).<br />
There does, however, seem to be a gap in the<br />
literature reporting <strong>on</strong> adolescents with ASD<br />
receiving direct instructi<strong>on</strong> in employment<br />
skills, or job skills, while in middle <strong>and</strong> high<br />
school. Most of the interventi<strong>on</strong> research <strong>on</strong><br />
individuals with ASD has focused <strong>on</strong> young<br />
children with very little attenti<strong>on</strong> given to<br />
adolescents (Gerhardt & Weiss, 2011), includ-<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Kyle D. Bennett, Florida Internati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
University, College of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Department<br />
of Teaching <strong>and</strong> Learning, 11200 S.W. 8th Street,<br />
Miami, FL 33199. E-mail: kyle.bennett@fiu.edu<br />
ing employment skills (Hendricks, 2010; Hendricks<br />
& Wehman, 2009).<br />
Recent prevalence data place the occurrence<br />
of ASD in the United States at an average<br />
rate of 1 in 110, representing a sizable<br />
increase over the last two decades (Centers for<br />
Disease C<strong>on</strong>trol <strong>and</strong> Preventi<strong>on</strong>, 2011). In<br />
their report to C<strong>on</strong>gress, the United States<br />
Department of Educati<strong>on</strong> (US-DOE, 2007) reported<br />
that the prevalence of ASD in the<br />
American school system increased by 410%<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g children ages 6–11 from 1996 to 2005.<br />
During that period, there was a 514% increase<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g students with ASD ages 14 <strong>and</strong> older,<br />
<strong>and</strong> there was a 317% increase am<strong>on</strong>g students<br />
with ASD ages 18–21 (US-DOE, 2007).<br />
This represents a substantial increase in the<br />
number of students with ASD requiring programming<br />
at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level <strong>and</strong> a formidable<br />
challenge for schools (Gerhardt &<br />
Weiss, 2011).<br />
C<strong>on</strong>comitant increases have been reported<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g adults with ASD seeking services.<br />
Cimera <strong>and</strong> Cowan (2009) reported a 121%<br />
increase in the number of adults with ASD<br />
requesting assistance from Vocati<strong>on</strong>al Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong><br />
(VR) between 2002–2006. This unprecedented<br />
increase in the number of individuals<br />
with ASD clearly leads to a need for<br />
more services, particularly as this populati<strong>on</strong><br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students / 67
egins to age. Unfortunately, post-school opti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
remain limited, <strong>and</strong> many adults with<br />
ASD struggle with features of adult life, particularly,<br />
employment. Indeed, the overall<br />
unemployment rate for people with disabilities<br />
is as high as 68% (Harris Interactive, as<br />
cited by The President’s Committee for People<br />
with Intellectual <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2009). It is<br />
estimated that this rate increases to 80% for<br />
those with intellectual disability (InD, The<br />
President’s Committee for People with Intellectual<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2009), <strong>and</strong> this rate may be<br />
even higher for those with ASD when c<strong>on</strong>sidering<br />
both unemployment <strong>and</strong> underemployment<br />
(Nati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Autism</strong> Society, as cited by<br />
Holmes, 2007). Moreover, the overall unemployment<br />
rate for people with disabilities has<br />
not changed very much over the last three<br />
decades, indicating a disturbing, yet stable<br />
trend (Harris Interactive, as cited by The President’s<br />
Committee for People with Intellectual<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2009).<br />
Supported employment (SE) is a service<br />
to help people with disabilities achieve gainful<br />
employment (Rusch & Hughes, 1989). Although<br />
SE was designed to improve the prospects<br />
of gainful employment for most individuals,<br />
in spite of need, it remains quite elusive<br />
for people with severe disabilities (Rusch &<br />
Braddock, 2004), including those with ASD<br />
deemed “too disabled” to benefit from SE<br />
or other assistance through VR (Cimera &<br />
Cowan, 2009; Lawer, Brusilovskiy, Salzer, &<br />
M<strong>and</strong>ell, 2009). For those individuals with<br />
ASD who do qualify for VR <strong>and</strong> SE services,<br />
the costs of the supports are higher than all<br />
other disability groups except for people with<br />
sensory impairments (e.g., visi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> hearing<br />
impairments, Cimera & Cowan 2009). Furthermore,<br />
when compared to other workers<br />
with disabilities receiving VR services, those<br />
with ASD tend to work fewer hours <strong>and</strong> earn a<br />
lower weekly wage (Cimera & Cowan, 2009).<br />
C<strong>on</strong>sidering the unemployment/underemployment<br />
rates, the higher costs associated<br />
with VR services, <strong>and</strong> that some individuals<br />
with ASD are c<strong>on</strong>sidered “too disabled” by VR<br />
to receive SE services, it seems clear that many<br />
individuals with ASD are exiting public school<br />
ill-prepared to obtain employment. Undeniably,<br />
post school outcomes for people with<br />
ASD <strong>and</strong> other disabilities are likely the functi<strong>on</strong><br />
of a multifaceted problem involving the<br />
unique characteristics of the individual (Gerhardt<br />
& Weiss, 2011), school practices (Getzel<br />
& deFur, 1997), adult service agency providers<br />
(Pars<strong>on</strong>s, Reid, Green & Browning, 1999;<br />
2001), <strong>and</strong> funders (Rusch & Braddock, 2004;<br />
Wehman, 2006), to name a few. The limited<br />
body of research available to guide educators’<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al practices does not make policy<br />
or practice any easier <strong>and</strong> may actually be an<br />
underlying c<strong>on</strong>tributing factor to the limited<br />
success now reported (Hendricks, 2010, Hendricks<br />
& Wehman, 2009).<br />
A closer examinati<strong>on</strong> of the supports offered<br />
to individuals with ASD, <strong>and</strong> specifically,<br />
the instructi<strong>on</strong>al supports <strong>and</strong> tactics<br />
used with sec<strong>on</strong>dary students, may help<br />
frame a complete underst<strong>and</strong>ing of how these<br />
students are prepared for employment <strong>on</strong>ce<br />
they exit school. Educator knowledge of<br />
evidenced-based tactics for use with transiti<strong>on</strong>aged<br />
students with ASD may even lead to the<br />
development of student skills that result in<br />
qualitatively different post-school outcomes<br />
for older adolescents <strong>and</strong> adults with ASD.<br />
Recently, Test et al. (2009) analyzed studies<br />
that investigated instructi<strong>on</strong>al tactics used to<br />
teach a variety of skills to transiti<strong>on</strong>-aged students<br />
with various disabilities. Included in the<br />
review were studies <strong>on</strong> employment <strong>and</strong> job<br />
skills. However, the studies reviewed were not<br />
exclusive to students with ASD, as many of the<br />
included participants experienced other disabilities.<br />
In another recent review of the literature,<br />
Hendricks (2010) reported studies focusing<br />
<strong>on</strong> factors related to employment for<br />
adults with ASD. Included in this article was<br />
a review of SE programs for adults with ASD,<br />
as well as a limited number of interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
studies targeting adults. Although a number<br />
of SE programs <strong>and</strong> promising studies were<br />
reviewed, there were limited studies with a<br />
central focus <strong>on</strong> specific instructi<strong>on</strong>al tactics<br />
that were used to teach adolescents with ASD.<br />
In another study, Hendricks <strong>and</strong> Wehman<br />
(2009) provided a comprehensive review of<br />
programming for students with ASD transiti<strong>on</strong>ing<br />
from school to post-school envir<strong>on</strong>ments.<br />
Many of the studies reviewed that were<br />
related to instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies focused <strong>on</strong><br />
topics such as behavior reducti<strong>on</strong> programming,<br />
language development, <strong>and</strong> literacy.<br />
Few of the studies included any discussi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
targeted job skill development. Thus, the pri-<br />
68 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
mary purpose of the current investigati<strong>on</strong> was<br />
to c<strong>on</strong>duct a systematic review of the literature<br />
<strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>al tactics used to teach employment<br />
skills to sec<strong>on</strong>dary students with ASD. A<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary purpose was to refine the scope of<br />
the literature reviews reported by Hendricks<br />
<strong>and</strong> Wehman (2009) <strong>and</strong> Hendricks (2010) by<br />
limiting the current review al<strong>on</strong>g three dimensi<strong>on</strong>s:<br />
(a) age of the participants, (b) employment<br />
skills as the goal, <strong>and</strong> (c) teaching<br />
strategies. In that vein, the following research<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s were posed:<br />
1. How many studies were reported in the<br />
peer-reviewed literature with a focus <strong>on</strong><br />
teaching employment skills to individuals<br />
with ASD between the ages of 14–22?<br />
2. What were the instructi<strong>on</strong>al tactics used<br />
to teach employment skills to sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
students with ASD between the ages of<br />
14–22?<br />
3. What was the efficacy of the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
tactics used to teach employment skills to<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary students with ASD between the<br />
ages of 14–22?<br />
Method<br />
Journal articles from the peer-reviewed literature<br />
from 1995–2010 with a focus <strong>on</strong> teaching<br />
employment skills to sec<strong>on</strong>dary students<br />
(ages 14–22 years) with ASD were reviewed.<br />
For this review, autism spectrum disorder included<br />
autistic disorder, Asperger Syndrome,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Pervasive <strong>Developmental</strong> Disorder-Not<br />
Otherwise Specified. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally for this review,<br />
employment skills included job specific<br />
skills <strong>and</strong> social skills that are likely to benefit<br />
<strong>on</strong>e’s employment status. H<strong>and</strong> searches<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted in the following journals: <strong>Autism</strong>,<br />
Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals,<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, Focus <strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.<br />
Electr<strong>on</strong>ic databases were also searched including,<br />
ERIC, Educati<strong>on</strong> Full Text, EBSCO,<br />
PsychINFO, <strong>and</strong> PsychArticles. Keywords for<br />
the database search included the word “autism”<br />
paired with each of the following: Vocati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>, employment instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dary educati<strong>on</strong>, vocati<strong>on</strong>al educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
employment, <strong>and</strong> employability. Finally, a<br />
bibliographic search of the research reports<br />
meeting the inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria <strong>and</strong> relevant<br />
reviews of the literature <strong>on</strong> the topic was c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />
(Wolery & Lane, 2010).<br />
Publicati<strong>on</strong>s selected for review met the following<br />
criteria. First, two-thirds of the participants<br />
had to be between the ages of 14–22.<br />
The two-thirds ratio was selected to capture<br />
studies with sec<strong>on</strong>dary special educati<strong>on</strong> programming<br />
as a central focus, <strong>and</strong> to eliminate<br />
studies comprised of a majority of younger<br />
students (e.g., preschool <strong>and</strong> elementary) as<br />
well as adult participants who completed their<br />
schooling. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, this age range was selected<br />
because it represents the period when<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> planning <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong> should occur.<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, 50% of the participants had to<br />
have a diagnosis of ASD. This criteri<strong>on</strong> was<br />
chosen so that studies reviewed had at least a<br />
balanced representati<strong>on</strong> of individuals with<br />
ASD in their participant pool. Third, the independent<br />
variable had to be an interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
designed to improve the participants’ employment<br />
skills. Fourth, the dependent variable<br />
had to be job related skills or social skills<br />
related to employment, exclusive of reducing<br />
problem behavior. Studies that focused <strong>on</strong><br />
preference assessments to increase work performance<br />
were also included in the review.<br />
Finally, studies had to be published in the<br />
peer-reviewed literature between 1995–2010.<br />
Results<br />
Twelve studies met the inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria.<br />
Overall, each study focused <strong>on</strong> some aspect of<br />
employment instructi<strong>on</strong> for adolescents <strong>and</strong><br />
young adults with ASD. At least 50% of all the<br />
participants in the studies reviewed had a diagnosis<br />
<strong>on</strong> the autism spectrum, <strong>and</strong> twothirds<br />
of the participants were between the<br />
ages 14–22, with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of the study by<br />
Agran et al. (2005). In that study, 2 of the 6<br />
participants were identified as having ASD<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e was in the process of being diagnosed<br />
with ASD. The total participants with ASD<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g all reviewed studies was n 55 (see<br />
Table 1).<br />
In resp<strong>on</strong>se to research questi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e, there<br />
were very few studies that met the inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
criteria. One study met the criteria from 1995<br />
to 2004. However, 11 studies met the inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
criteria from 2005–2010, with an increasing<br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students / 69
TABLE 1<br />
Articles <strong>and</strong> Participant Characteristics<br />
Author(s) (year) # of Participants with ASD Age of Participants<br />
Agran, Sinclair, Alper, Cavin,<br />
Wehmeyer, & Hughes (2005)<br />
Allen, Wallace, Greene, Bowen,<br />
& Burke (2010)<br />
Allen, Wallace, Renes, Bowen,<br />
& Burke (2010)<br />
Burke, Andersen, Bowen, Howard,<br />
& Allen (2010)<br />
trend during this period. Notwithst<strong>and</strong>ing this<br />
publicati<strong>on</strong> increase over the last few years,<br />
there remains a paucity of literature examining<br />
employment skill development am<strong>on</strong>g<br />
adolescents with ASD (see Figure 1).<br />
In resp<strong>on</strong>se to research questi<strong>on</strong> two, all the<br />
studies examined various tactics to increase<br />
independent completi<strong>on</strong> of employment tasks<br />
or behaviors related to employment. The studies<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted in vocati<strong>on</strong>al classrooms,<br />
academic classrooms, n<strong>on</strong>-classroom school<br />
settings, stores, homes, <strong>and</strong> other community<br />
settings (see Table 2). Four of the studies<br />
investigated self-management strategies to enhance<br />
task completi<strong>on</strong>. These studies taught<br />
self-management using comp<strong>on</strong>ent strategies<br />
of Behavior Skills Training (BST) (e.g., instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
modeling, practice, <strong>and</strong> feedback).<br />
They also used ancillary materials to facilitate<br />
self-management, including token systems,<br />
picture prompts, <strong>and</strong> Pers<strong>on</strong>al Digital Assistants<br />
(PDAs). Six studies explored the effects<br />
of video modeling (either singularly, as part<br />
of an interventi<strong>on</strong> package, or as part of a<br />
2 with ASD; 1 being<br />
evaluated for ASD; 3 InD<br />
13–15 yrs. (66% above 14 years old)<br />
3 with ASD 17–22<br />
4 with ASD 16–25 (75% between 14–22)<br />
Study 1: 3 with ASD<br />
Study 2: 3 with ASD<br />
comparis<strong>on</strong> of tactics) <strong>on</strong> skill development/<br />
enhancement. An additi<strong>on</strong>al study examined<br />
BST with <strong>and</strong> without a text message cueing<br />
system, as well as the reverse. The remaining<br />
study investigated the effects of high v. low<br />
preferred items <strong>on</strong> task completi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In resp<strong>on</strong>se to research questi<strong>on</strong> three,<br />
many of the studies reported positive effects<br />
resulting from the interventi<strong>on</strong>, or detailed<br />
more effective strategies for those studies<br />
comparing instructi<strong>on</strong> tactics. Two studies<br />
presented a more modest appraisal of the effects<br />
of the interventi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> employment skills<br />
(Allen, Wallace, Renes, Bowen, & Burke,<br />
2010; Copel<strong>and</strong> & Hughes, 2000). Finally, several<br />
studies reported details regarding various<br />
degrees of generalizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong>/or maintenance<br />
of the targeted skills (see Table 2).<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
Study 1: 20–27 (66% below 22 years<br />
of age)<br />
Study 2: 18–20<br />
Cihak & Schrader (2008) 4 with ASD 16–21<br />
Copel<strong>and</strong> & Hughes (2000) 1 with ASD/InD; 1 with InD 15–16<br />
Ganz & Sigafoos (2005) 1 with ASD; 1 with InD <strong>and</strong><br />
Other Health Impaired<br />
19–20<br />
Gentry, Wallace, Kvarfordt,<br />
22 with ASD 14 <strong>and</strong> older (all high school<br />
& Lynch (2010)<br />
students)<br />
Graff, Gibs<strong>on</strong>, & Galiatsatos<br />
2 with ASD, 1 with a<br />
14–15<br />
(2006)<br />
chromosomal disorder, &<br />
1 with Attenti<strong>on</strong> Deficit/<br />
Hyperactivity Disorder<br />
Mechling, Gast, & Seid (2009) 3 with ASD 16–17<br />
Mechling & Gustafs<strong>on</strong> (2008) 6 with ASD 15–21<br />
Van Laarhoven, Van Laarhoven- 1 with ASD; 1 with Down Both were 18<br />
Myers, & Zurita (2007)<br />
Syndrome<br />
The purpose of the current study was to examine<br />
the extant literature <strong>on</strong> teaching employment<br />
skills to individuals with ASD be-<br />
70 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 1. Frequency of publicati<strong>on</strong>s meeting inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria by year (1995–2010).<br />
tween the ages of 14–22. The primary finding<br />
from this inquiry was that there is a significant<br />
gap in the literature pertaining to this topic<br />
as <strong>on</strong>ly 12 studies were identified that met the<br />
search criteria. Although not specifically focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> teaching employment skills to students<br />
of this age group, other researchers reported<br />
similar findings in their reviews of<br />
the literature <strong>on</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong> planning <strong>and</strong> employment<br />
outcomes for individuals with ASD<br />
(e.g., Hendricks, 2010; Hendricks & Wehman,<br />
2009).<br />
Recent educati<strong>on</strong> legislati<strong>on</strong> requires instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
strategies <strong>and</strong> interventi<strong>on</strong>s to be<br />
evidenced-based. What c<strong>on</strong>stitutes an evidencebased<br />
practice has generated debate <strong>and</strong> resulted<br />
in the development of guidelines for<br />
determining the quality <strong>and</strong> scope of research<br />
investigating a given instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategy<br />
(Odom et al., 2005). Although the purpose of<br />
this paper was not to evaluate whether the individual<br />
studies reviewed c<strong>on</strong>stituted evidencebased<br />
practices, we c<strong>on</strong>tend that the amount<br />
of studies available addressing employment<br />
skill development to be limited in scope al<strong>on</strong>g<br />
several dimensi<strong>on</strong>s laid out by Horner et al.<br />
(2005) <strong>and</strong> Kratochwill et al. (2010). First,<br />
there was a limited amount of studies addressing<br />
job specific skill instructi<strong>on</strong>. Sec<strong>on</strong>d, no<br />
studies were identified that targeted social<br />
skills needed for employment. Deficits in social<br />
skills are a core aspect of the disability<br />
(American Psychiatric Associati<strong>on</strong>, 2000), <strong>and</strong><br />
many have declared that difficulties in this<br />
area are a major barrier to meaningful community<br />
inclusi<strong>on</strong>, including obtaining gainful<br />
employment (Gerhardt & Weiss, 2011; Hendricks,<br />
2010; Hendricks & Wehman, 2009;<br />
Targett & Wehman, 2009). Clearly, additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
studies examining strategies to improve social<br />
skills for employment for adolescents <strong>and</strong><br />
adults with ASD are desperately needed. Next,<br />
there were too few participants with ASD at<br />
the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level included in the current<br />
literature base <strong>on</strong> employment development.<br />
Many studies were excluded from the investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
because there was a lack of participants<br />
with ASD, as well as a lack of students between<br />
14–22 years old. Finally, there were too<br />
few research teams producing research <strong>on</strong><br />
this topic. Indeed, three of the 12 studies were<br />
by the same team investigating similar tactics<br />
(see Table 2). An increase in research productivity<br />
is clearly needed so that educators become<br />
better informed about practices to<br />
adopt in their sec<strong>on</strong>dary special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classrooms.<br />
Undoubtedly, much of the current literature<br />
<strong>on</strong> the educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> treatment of individuals<br />
with ASD has centered <strong>on</strong> young chil-<br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students / 71
TABLE 2<br />
Characteristics of Selected Studies<br />
Author(s) (year) Interventi<strong>on</strong> Skills Taught Setting<br />
Agran, Sinclair, Alper,<br />
Cavin, Wehmeyer, &<br />
Hughes (2005)<br />
Allen, Wallace, Greene,<br />
Bowen, & Burke<br />
(2010)<br />
Allen, Wallace, Renes,<br />
Bowen, & Burke<br />
(2010)<br />
Burke, Andersen, Bowen,<br />
Howard, & Allen<br />
(2010)<br />
Self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring taught<br />
via behavior skills<br />
training<br />
Video Modeling<br />
(al<strong>on</strong>e)<br />
Video Modeling<br />
(al<strong>on</strong>e)<br />
Study 1: BST <strong>and</strong><br />
PDA cueing system<br />
(when needed)<br />
Study 2: PDA cueing<br />
system <strong>and</strong> BST<br />
(when needed)<br />
Cihak & Schrader (2008) Video self-modeling<br />
vs. video adult<br />
modeling<br />
Copel<strong>and</strong> & Hughes Self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring via<br />
(2000)<br />
picture prompts<br />
Ganz & Sigafoos (2005) Self-management via<br />
using a token<br />
system<br />
Gentry, Wallace,<br />
Kvarfordt, & Lynch<br />
(2010)<br />
Graff, Gibs<strong>on</strong>, &<br />
Galiatsatos (2006)<br />
Mechling, Gast, & Seid<br />
(2009)<br />
Mechling & Gustafs<strong>on</strong><br />
(2008)<br />
Van Laarhoven,<br />
Van Laarhoven-Myers,<br />
& Zurita (2007)<br />
Self-management via<br />
using PDAs<br />
Used preference<br />
assessments <strong>and</strong><br />
reinforcer<br />
assessment to<br />
evaluate the effects<br />
of high preferred v<br />
low preferred items<br />
<strong>on</strong> task completi<strong>on</strong><br />
Video, auditory, &<br />
picture prompts <strong>on</strong><br />
PDA<br />
Static picture prompts<br />
v. video modeling<br />
Video modeling<br />
package c<strong>on</strong>sisting<br />
of video rehearsal,<br />
video feedback, <strong>and</strong><br />
error correcti<strong>on</strong><br />
dren (Gerhardt & Weiss, 2011; Hendricks,<br />
2010). Although the present investigati<strong>on</strong> reveals<br />
that some instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies that<br />
were effective with younger students can be<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong>/or<br />
Maintenance<br />
Following Directi<strong>on</strong>s Multiple classrooms Maintenance<br />
Perform in<br />
Air-Inflated<br />
Mascots<br />
Perform in<br />
Air-Inflated<br />
Mascots<br />
Perform in<br />
Air-Inflated<br />
Mascots<br />
Vocati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> prevocati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
tasks<br />
Store Both<br />
Store Maintenance<br />
Warehouse Study 1: Both<br />
Faculty work room<br />
<strong>and</strong> classroom<br />
Study 2: Both<br />
Maintenance<br />
Vocati<strong>on</strong>al task Faculty dining No<br />
completi<strong>on</strong> room & Hotel<br />
Task completi<strong>on</strong> Classroom Generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
for student<br />
noted<br />
with ASD<br />
anecdotally<br />
Manage tasks Home <strong>and</strong><br />
Community<br />
Both<br />
Task completi<strong>on</strong> Classroom No<br />
Cooking Classroom Maintenance<br />
Cooking Classroom No<br />
Vocati<strong>on</strong>al skills Restaurants Maintenance<br />
effective with older students, knowledge of the<br />
parameters of using these <strong>and</strong> other instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
tactics with adolescents is relatively unknown.<br />
The applicati<strong>on</strong> of these strategies<br />
72 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
may require different approaches when applied<br />
with older students. Pertinent questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
such as (a) the density of instructi<strong>on</strong> for sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
vs. elementary students, (b) the applicati<strong>on</strong><br />
of strategies to community-based settings,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (c) implementing employment<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in community settings with potentially<br />
decreased support represent just a few<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s with limited answers regarding employment<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with ASD.<br />
This issue becomes particularly important<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidering recent years have seen a burge<strong>on</strong>ing<br />
growth of students with ASD at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
level (US-DOE, 2007), as well as associated<br />
increases reported in agencies serving<br />
adults who completed school (Cimera &<br />
Cowan, 2009; Lawer et al., 2009). This trend is<br />
likely to c<strong>on</strong>tinue c<strong>on</strong>sidering the increasing<br />
elementary populati<strong>on</strong> reported by the US<br />
DOE. The results from the current study do<br />
not bode well with these prevalence data, <strong>and</strong><br />
the brevity of research <strong>on</strong> sec<strong>on</strong>dary special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> programming applied to students<br />
with ASD could be a c<strong>on</strong>tributor to the poor<br />
employment outcomes experienced by these<br />
individuals now <strong>and</strong> in the future.<br />
Similar arguments can be made regarding<br />
the applicati<strong>on</strong> of instructi<strong>on</strong>al tactics used<br />
with students with other disabilities. Unquesti<strong>on</strong>ably,<br />
a number of studies <strong>on</strong> employment<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> related transiti<strong>on</strong> practices<br />
have been reported in the literature (Test et<br />
al., 2009). Nevertheless, the characteristics of<br />
students with ASD are different from other<br />
disabilities <strong>and</strong> they can present unique challenges.<br />
Tactics used with other students may<br />
prove to be applicable to students with ASD;<br />
however, this remains an empirical questi<strong>on</strong><br />
yet to be answered.<br />
Despite the scarcity of research <strong>on</strong> employment<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> for students with ASD,<br />
several studies were reviewed that may c<strong>on</strong>tribute<br />
to preparing sec<strong>on</strong>dary students with<br />
ASD for employment. Many of the studies<br />
reviewed examined tactics to increase independent<br />
employment skills through selfmanagement<br />
packages or video modeling<br />
with favorable results. Some studies included<br />
features of both self-management <strong>and</strong> video<br />
modeling (e.g., Mechling, Gast, & Seid, 2009).<br />
Others compared the type of model (self v.<br />
another adult) used in the video, showing<br />
both to be effective, but self-modeling possibly<br />
more efficient for some participants (Cihak &<br />
Schrader, 2008). Still other studies al<strong>on</strong>g this<br />
line compared static picture prompts to video<br />
modeling, highlighting that the video-based<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> may be more effective for some<br />
adolescents with ASD (Mechling & Gustafs<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2008). In additi<strong>on</strong> to the studies <strong>on</strong> selfmanagement<br />
<strong>and</strong> video modeling, an interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
package comprised of Behavior Skills<br />
Training (BST) <strong>and</strong> text message cueing was<br />
used in another study with encouraging results<br />
(Burke, Andersen, Bowen, Howard, &<br />
Allen, 2010). Finally, Graff, Gibs<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> Galiatsatos<br />
(2006) provided an illustrati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
highly preferred items being more effective<br />
than less preferred items as a maintaining<br />
variable of task completi<strong>on</strong>. This finding is<br />
encouraging <strong>and</strong> has been dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
with varying populati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> tasks (e.g.,<br />
Carr, Nicols<strong>on</strong>, & Higbee, 2000; DeLe<strong>on</strong> et<br />
al., 2001). Together, these studies represent a<br />
budding literature base for teaching, or enhancing,<br />
employment skills for students with<br />
ASD.<br />
The current findings should be interpreted<br />
in the c<strong>on</strong>text of the following limitati<strong>on</strong>s. It is<br />
possible that our search criteria were too narrow.<br />
Again, this review included studies composed<br />
of at least half of the participants being<br />
identified with ASD, <strong>and</strong> 66% of the participants<br />
between the ages of 14–22. Perhaps additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies would have<br />
been located had different ratios of participant<br />
diagnoses been used, as well as different<br />
age ranges. Indeed, there were studies that<br />
explored these issues with participant groups<br />
composed of less than 50% of individuals with<br />
ASD (e.g., Riffel et al., 2005) <strong>and</strong> individuals<br />
outside the age range criteria of the current<br />
study (e.g., Lattimore, Pars<strong>on</strong>s, & Reid, 2006).<br />
Importantly, however, the diagnostic ratio <strong>and</strong><br />
age ranges used in this study were deemed<br />
germane to this literature review <strong>on</strong> developing<br />
employment skills specifically for students<br />
with ASD involved in sec<strong>on</strong>dary <strong>and</strong> transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
programming. The journals selected for the<br />
h<strong>and</strong> search, the keywords used for the database<br />
search, <strong>and</strong> the databases searched may<br />
have limited the findings, as well. It is possible<br />
that other studies exist that fell outside these<br />
search criteria, <strong>and</strong> future investigators may<br />
locate additi<strong>on</strong>al studies not identified in this<br />
review by modifying the search criteria.<br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students / 73
For reas<strong>on</strong>s yet to be fully explained there is<br />
an increase in the student populati<strong>on</strong> of children<br />
with ASD served by public schools at all<br />
grade levels (US-DOE, 2007). Using the prevalence<br />
data provided by the US DOE <strong>on</strong> children<br />
with ASD between the ages of 6–11, we<br />
can expect to see c<strong>on</strong>tinuing growth of the<br />
student populati<strong>on</strong> at the sec<strong>on</strong>dary level <strong>and</strong><br />
bey<strong>on</strong>d. Therefore, it behooves our field, <strong>and</strong><br />
the children <strong>and</strong> adolescents we serve, to begin<br />
rigorous lines of research exploring the<br />
most effective means of preparing them for<br />
employment.<br />
References<br />
Agran, M., Sinclair, T., Alper, S., Cavin, M.,<br />
Wehmeyer, M., & Hughes, C. (2005). Using selfm<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />
to increase following-directi<strong>on</strong> skills<br />
of students with moderate to severe disabilities in<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 40, 3–13.<br />
Allen, K. D., Wallace, D. P., Greene, D. J., Bowen,<br />
S. L., & Burke, R. V. (2010). Community-based<br />
vocati<strong>on</strong>al instructi<strong>on</strong> using videotaped modeling<br />
for young adults with autism spectrum disorders<br />
performing in air-inflated mascots. Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 25, 186–<br />
192. doi: 10.1177/1088357610377318<br />
Allen, K. D., Wallace, D. P., Renes, D., Bowen, S. L.,<br />
& Burke, R. V. (2010). Use of video modeling to<br />
teaching vocati<strong>on</strong>al skills to adolescents <strong>and</strong><br />
young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Treatment of Children, 33, 339–349.<br />
American Psychiatric Associati<strong>on</strong>. (2000). Diagnostic<br />
<strong>and</strong> Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Ed.,<br />
text revisi<strong>on</strong>). Washingt<strong>on</strong>, D.C.: American Psychiatric<br />
Associati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Brown, L., Nietupski, J., & Hamre-Nietupski, S.<br />
(1976). Criteri<strong>on</strong> of ultimate functi<strong>on</strong>ing. In<br />
M. A. Thomas (Ed.), Hey, d<strong>on</strong>’t forget about me!<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>’s investment in the severely, profoundly, multiply<br />
h<strong>and</strong>icapped (pp. 2–15). Rest<strong>on</strong>, VA: Council<br />
for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children.<br />
Burke, R. V., Andersen, M. N., Bowen, S. L., Howard,<br />
M. R., & Allen, K. D. (2010). Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
two instructi<strong>on</strong> methods to increase employment<br />
opti<strong>on</strong>s for young adults with autism spectrum<br />
disorders. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 31,<br />
1223–1233. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2010.07.023<br />
Carr, J. E., Nichols<strong>on</strong>, A. C., & Higbee, T. S. (2000).<br />
Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of a brief multiple-stimulus preference<br />
assessment in a naturalistic c<strong>on</strong>text. Journal<br />
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 353–357.<br />
Centers for Disease C<strong>on</strong>trol <strong>and</strong> Preventi<strong>on</strong> (2011,<br />
March 25). <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorders (ASDs). Retrieved<br />
September 5, 2011, from Centers for Dis-<br />
ease C<strong>on</strong>trol <strong>and</strong> Preventi<strong>on</strong>: http://www.cdc.<br />
gov/ncbddd/autism/index.html<br />
Cihak, D. F., & Schrader, L. (2008). Does the model<br />
matter? Comparing video self-modeling <strong>and</strong><br />
video adult modeling for task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
maintenance by adolescents with autism spectrum<br />
disorders. Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology<br />
, 23(3), 9–20.<br />
Cimera, R. E., & Cowan, R. C. (2009). The costs of<br />
services <strong>and</strong> employment outcomes achieved by<br />
adults with autism in the US. <strong>Autism</strong>, 13, 285–302.<br />
doi: 10.1177/1362361309103791<br />
Copel<strong>and</strong>, S. R., & Hughes, C. (2000). Acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of a picture prompt strategy to increase independent<br />
performance. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in<br />
Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
35, 294–305.<br />
DeLe<strong>on</strong>, I. G., Fisher, W. W., Rodriguez-Catter, V.,<br />
Maglieri, K., Herman, K., & Marhefka, J. (2001).<br />
Examinati<strong>on</strong> of relative reinforcement effects of<br />
stimuli identified through pretreatment <strong>and</strong> daily<br />
brief preference assessments. Journal of Applied<br />
Behavior Analysis, 34, 463–473.<br />
Ganz, J. B., & Sigafoos, J. (2005). Self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring:<br />
Are young adults with MR <strong>and</strong> autism able to<br />
utilize cognitive strategies independently? Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 40,<br />
24–33.<br />
Gentry, T., Wallace, J., Kvarfordt, C., & Lynch, K. B.<br />
(2010). Pers<strong>on</strong>al digital assistants as cognitive aids<br />
for high school students with autism: Results of a<br />
community-based trial. Journal of Vocati<strong>on</strong>al Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
32, 101–107. doi: 10.3233/JVR-2010-0499<br />
Gerhardt, P. F., & Weiss, M. J. (2011). Behavior<br />
analytic interventi<strong>on</strong>s for adults with autism spectrum<br />
disorders. In E. A. Mayville, & J. A. Mulick<br />
(Eds.), Behavioral foundati<strong>on</strong>s of effective autism<br />
treatment (pp. 217–232). Cornwall-<strong>on</strong>-Huds<strong>on</strong>,<br />
NY: Sloan Publishing, LLC.<br />
Getzel, E. E., & deFur, S. (1997). Transiti<strong>on</strong> planning<br />
for students with significant disabilities:<br />
Implicati<strong>on</strong>s for student-centered planning. Focus<br />
<strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 12,<br />
39–<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />
Graff, R. B., Gibs<strong>on</strong>, L., & Galiatsatos, G. T. (2006).<br />
The impact of high- <strong>and</strong> low-preference stimuli<br />
<strong>on</strong> vocati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> academic performances of<br />
youths with severe disabilities. Journal of Applied<br />
Behavior Analysis, 39, 131–135. doi: 10.1901/jaba.<br />
2006.32-05<br />
Hendricks, D. (2010). Employment <strong>and</strong> adults with<br />
autism spectrum disorders: Challenges <strong>and</strong> strategies<br />
for success. Journal of Vocati<strong>on</strong>al Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
32, 125–134. doi: 10.3233/JVR-2010-0502<br />
Hendricks, D. R., & Wehman, P. (2009). Transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
from school to adulthood for youth with autism<br />
spectrum disorder: Review <strong>and</strong> recommendati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
74 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
24, 77–88. doi: 10.1177/1088357608329827<br />
Holmes, D. (2007). When the school bus stops coming:<br />
The employment dilemma for adults with<br />
autism. <strong>Autism</strong> Advocate, 1, 16–21.<br />
Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G.,<br />
Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of singlesubject<br />
research design to identify evidence-based<br />
practice in special educati<strong>on</strong>. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
71, 165–179.<br />
Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H.,<br />
Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M.<br />
(2010, June 1). What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved<br />
September 25, 2011, from What Works<br />
Clearinghouse: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/<br />
wwc_scd.pdf<br />
Lattimore, L. P., Pars<strong>on</strong>s, M. B., & Reid, D. H.<br />
(2006). Enhancing job-site training of supported<br />
workers with autism: A reemphasis <strong>on</strong> simulati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 91–102.<br />
doi: 10.1901/jaba.2006.154-04<br />
Lawer, L., Brusilovskiy, E., Salzer, M. S., & M<strong>and</strong>ell,<br />
D. S. (2009). Use of vocati<strong>on</strong>al rehabilitative services<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g adults with autism. Journal of <strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> Disorders, 39, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>7–494. doi: 10.<br />
1007/s10803-008-0649-4<br />
Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L., Seid, N. H. (2009).<br />
Using a pers<strong>on</strong>al digital assistant to increase independent<br />
task completi<strong>on</strong> by students with autism<br />
spectrum disorder. Journal of <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
Disorders, 39, 1420–1434. doi: 10.1007/<br />
s10803-009-0761-0<br />
Mechling, L. C., & Gustafs<strong>on</strong>, M. R. (2008). Comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
of static picture <strong>and</strong> video prompting <strong>on</strong><br />
the performance of cooking-related tasks by students<br />
with autism. Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology,<br />
23(3), 31–45.<br />
Odom, S. L., Grantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner,<br />
R. H., Thomps<strong>on</strong>, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005).<br />
Research in special educati<strong>on</strong>: Scientific methods<br />
<strong>and</strong> evidence-based practices. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
71, 137–1<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />
Pars<strong>on</strong>s, M. B., Reid, D. H., Green, C. W., & Browning,<br />
L. B. (1999). Reducing individualized job<br />
coach assistance provided to pers<strong>on</strong>s with multiple<br />
severe disabilities in supported work. Journal of<br />
the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe H<strong>and</strong>icaps, 24,<br />
292–297.<br />
Pars<strong>on</strong>s, M. B., Reid, D. H., Green, C. W., & Browning,<br />
L. B. (2001). Reducing job coach assistance<br />
for supported workers with severe multiple disabilities:<br />
An alternative off-site/<strong>on</strong>-site model. Research<br />
in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 21, 151–164.<br />
Riffel, L. A., Wehmeyer, M. L., Turnbull, A. P.,<br />
Lattimore, J., Davies, D., Stock, S., & Fisher, S.<br />
(2005). Promoting independent performance of<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong>-related tasks using a palmtop PC-based<br />
self-directed visual <strong>and</strong> auditory prompting system.<br />
Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology, 20(2),<br />
5–14.<br />
Rusch, F. R., & Braddock, D. (2004). Adult day<br />
programs versus supported employment (1988–<br />
2002): Spending <strong>and</strong> service practices of mental<br />
retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> developmental disability state<br />
agencies. Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 29, 237–242.<br />
Rusch, F. R., & Hughes, C. (1989). Overview of<br />
supported employment. Journal of Applied Behavior<br />
Analysis, 22, 351–363.<br />
Targett, P. S., & Wehman, P. (2009). Integrated<br />
employment. In P. Wehman, M. Datlow-Smith,<br />
& C. Schall (Eds.), <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> the transiti<strong>on</strong> to<br />
adulthood: Success bey<strong>on</strong>d the classroom (pp. 163–<br />
188). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.<br />
Test, D. W., Fowler, C. H., Richter, S. M., White, J.,<br />
Mazzotti, V., Walker, A. R.,& Kortering, L. (2009).<br />
Evidence-based practices in sec<strong>on</strong>dary transiti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Career Development for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 32,<br />
115–128. doi: 10.1177/0885728809336859<br />
The President’s Committee for People with Intellectual<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>. (2009). Dignity through employment:<br />
2009 Report to the President. Washingt<strong>on</strong>,<br />
D.C.: U.S. Department of Health <strong>and</strong> Human<br />
Services.<br />
United States Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>. (2007).<br />
Twenty-Ninth Annual Report to C<strong>on</strong>gress <strong>on</strong> the Implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of the Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Act (Vol. 2). Retrieved from http://<br />
www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2007/<br />
parts-b-c/index.html<br />
Van Laarhoven, T., Van Laarhoven-Myers, T., &<br />
Zurita, L. M. (2007). The effectiveness of using a<br />
pocket PC as a video modeling <strong>and</strong> feedback<br />
device for individuals with developmental disabilities<br />
in vocati<strong>on</strong>al settings. Assistive Technology Outcomes<br />
<strong>and</strong> Benefits, 4(1), 28–45.<br />
Wehman, P. (2006). Integrated employment: If not<br />
now, when? If not us, who? Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for<br />
Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 31, 122–126.<br />
Wolery, M., & Lane, K. L. (2010). Writing tasks:<br />
Literature reviews, research proposals, <strong>and</strong> final<br />
reports. In D. Gast (Ed.), Single subject research<br />
methodology in behavioral sciences (pp. 57–90). New<br />
York, NY: Routledge.<br />
Received: 2 November 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 6 January 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 1 April 2012<br />
Employment Instructi<strong>on</strong> for Sec<strong>on</strong>dary Students / 75
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 76–87<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Research <strong>on</strong> Curriculum for Students with Moderate <strong>and</strong><br />
Severe Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review<br />
Jordan Shurr<br />
Central Michigan University<br />
Emily C. Bouck<br />
Purdue University<br />
Abstract: Curriculum c<strong>on</strong>tent is an essential comp<strong>on</strong>ent of the field of special educati<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities. This study updates the twenty-year curriculum c<strong>on</strong>tent review by Nietupski,<br />
Hamre-Nietupski, Curtin, <strong>and</strong> Shrikanth (1997) <strong>and</strong> provides an overview of the last 15 years of research <strong>on</strong><br />
this topic. A h<strong>and</strong> search of ten relevant journals within the field was c<strong>on</strong>ducted to identify <strong>and</strong> categorize the<br />
research <strong>on</strong> curriculum c<strong>on</strong>tent for students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability. Results indicate a<br />
very low percentage of the research literature focused <strong>on</strong> curriculum c<strong>on</strong>tent for this populati<strong>on</strong>. Curricular<br />
articles published in the past fifteen years primarily focused <strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills, with a recent increase in<br />
cognitive academics. The articles c<strong>on</strong>sist mainly of quantitative methods <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-data based studies. Over half<br />
did not clearly list the educati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>text of focus. Implicati<strong>on</strong>s of these findings for the educati<strong>on</strong> of students<br />
with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability <strong>and</strong> directi<strong>on</strong>s for future research are discussed.<br />
Curriculum has been described as the c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
of instructi<strong>on</strong> (Williams, Brown, & Certo,<br />
1975) as well as a “defined course of study”<br />
(Browder, 2001, p. 2). Curriculum, a foundati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent of educati<strong>on</strong>, can be simply<br />
referred to as the “what” of teaching or the<br />
knowledge <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>cepts driving pedagogy<br />
<strong>and</strong> assessment in instructi<strong>on</strong>. However, curriculum<br />
in public educati<strong>on</strong> does not exist<br />
absent of c<strong>on</strong>troversy (Giroux, 1994). Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
of curriculum can lend itself to c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong> the intent of educati<strong>on</strong> (e.g., job<br />
creati<strong>on</strong>, citizenship; see Beane, 1998) or the<br />
role of science as a knowledge base (e.g., evoluti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
climate change; see Aguillard, 1999).<br />
Curricular research has played a significant<br />
role in the identity <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tinual formati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
the field of special educati<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability<br />
(Dym<strong>on</strong>d & Orelove, 2001; Nietupski, Hamre-<br />
Nietupski, Curtin, & Shrikanth, 1997).<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Jordan Shurr, Department of<br />
Counseling <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 321 Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Human Services Building, Central Michigan<br />
University, Mt. Pleasant, MI <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>859. Email:<br />
shurr1jc@cmich.edu<br />
Curriculum in the Research Literature<br />
Dym<strong>on</strong>d <strong>and</strong> Orelove (2001) summarized the<br />
history of special educati<strong>on</strong> for students with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability.<br />
The curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent of the 1970’s was dominated<br />
by the idea of developmental stages<br />
followed by an emphasis in the mid 1970’s<br />
toward functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills <strong>and</strong> the criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
of ultimate functi<strong>on</strong>ing (Brown, Nietupski,<br />
& Hamre-Nietupski, 1976). In the 1980’s an<br />
ecological approach to curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
(Brown et al., 1979) dominated the research<br />
literature followed by an emphasis <strong>on</strong> social<br />
inclusi<strong>on</strong> as a curricular element. More recently,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cepts such as self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
(Wehmeyer & Schalock, 2001) <strong>and</strong> emphasis<br />
<strong>on</strong> the adopti<strong>on</strong> of the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
(Agran, Alper, & Wehmeyer, 2002;<br />
Browder et al., 2007; Cushing, Clark, Carter,<br />
& Kennedy, 2005) have guided the research<br />
<strong>and</strong> services for this populati<strong>on</strong> of students.<br />
During this time, Nietupski et al. (1997)<br />
completed a review of the literature <strong>on</strong> curricular<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent for students with moderate <strong>and</strong><br />
severe intellectual disability. Nietupski et al.<br />
presented the trends in curricular research in<br />
terms of quantity, focus, <strong>and</strong> research methodology.<br />
The authors reported a low <strong>and</strong> declining<br />
number of curricular-focused articles<br />
over the twenty-year span of 1976–1996. Their<br />
76 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
esults in terms of research focus coincided<br />
with the curricular practice timeline presented<br />
by Dym<strong>on</strong>d <strong>and</strong> Orelove: nearly half (44%) of<br />
the curricular articles during the time frame<br />
focused <strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills c<strong>on</strong>tent. However,<br />
research <strong>on</strong> inclusive practices experienced<br />
an increase from the beginning to the<br />
end of the twenty-year span, <strong>and</strong> by the end<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills <strong>and</strong> inclusi<strong>on</strong> were the<br />
primary topics of curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent. In terms<br />
of methodology, the researchers found quantitative<br />
methods <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-data based studies<br />
dominated the curricular literature of the<br />
time with very little examples of qualitative<br />
methodology. From the beginning (1976–<br />
1980) to the end (1991–1995) of the study,<br />
quantitative methodology increased from<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>% to 69% <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-data based (i.e. positi<strong>on</strong><br />
papers, theoretical papers, <strong>and</strong> program descripti<strong>on</strong>s)<br />
literature experienced a significant<br />
decline from 52% to 27%. The review by<br />
Nietupski et al (1997) highlighted the future<br />
directi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> needs within curricular research,<br />
namely greater emphasis <strong>on</strong> overall<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent in the research, more variety in research<br />
methodology, <strong>and</strong> an increase in research<br />
incorporating multiple skills together.<br />
Legislative Influence <strong>on</strong> Curricular Research<br />
Curriculum does not exist in a vacuum—even<br />
for students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability (Bouck 2008; Milner, 2003).<br />
Aside from shifting philosophies, curriculum,<br />
practice, <strong>and</strong> research are influenced by a<br />
range of factors including federal legislati<strong>on</strong><br />
(i.e., The Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Improvement<br />
Act [IDEA], 2004). IDEA (2004,<br />
§ 601 [c] [5] [A]) required that students eligible<br />
for special educati<strong>on</strong> services “have access<br />
to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum in<br />
the regular classroom, to the maximum extent<br />
possible, in order to meet developmental<br />
goals.” The intenti<strong>on</strong> of access to the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum, although questi<strong>on</strong>ed<br />
by some (Ayres, Lowrey, Douglas, & Sievers,<br />
2011), was to facilitate high expectati<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
students with disabilities <strong>and</strong> help elevate the<br />
poor post-school outcomes of students, including<br />
those with the most severe intellectual<br />
disability (IDEA, 2004). Despite dispute<br />
of the terms or c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s of sufficient access<br />
(Halle & Dym<strong>on</strong>d, 2008) <strong>and</strong> what c<strong>on</strong>stitutes<br />
the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum (Spo<strong>on</strong>er,<br />
Dym<strong>on</strong>d, Smith, & Kennedy, 2006), an abundance<br />
of research is focused <strong>on</strong> providing<br />
general curriculum access for students with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability<br />
(Agran et al., 2002; Browder et al., 2007; Cushing<br />
et al., 2005; Fisher & Frey, 2001; Spo<strong>on</strong>er<br />
et al., 2006; Wehmeyer, Lattin, & Agran,<br />
2001). Within the shifting philosophy in the<br />
field <strong>and</strong> legislati<strong>on</strong> is the mounting tensi<strong>on</strong><br />
between an emphasis <strong>on</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
from the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum <strong>and</strong><br />
that of functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills (Alwell & Cobb,<br />
2009; Ayres et al., 2011; Spo<strong>on</strong>er et al., 2006).<br />
The evident divisi<strong>on</strong> draws attenti<strong>on</strong> to the<br />
potential for an emphasis <strong>on</strong> academic c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
to overshadow functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills <strong>and</strong><br />
vice versa (Ayres et al., 2011).<br />
Regardless of the debate or its outcome,<br />
curricular research related to the educati<strong>on</strong><br />
of students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability is important <strong>and</strong> needed.<br />
First <strong>and</strong> foremost, curricular research guides<br />
practice—or in other words, the educati<strong>on</strong><br />
which students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability receive (Browder, 2001).<br />
The curriculum students are provided can<br />
impact their assessment in school as well as<br />
post school outcomes school (e.g., access to<br />
vocati<strong>on</strong>al experiences <strong>and</strong> skill development,<br />
skills in independent living; Ayres et al.,<br />
2011; Browder, 2001; Downing, 2006; Kearns<br />
et al., 2010; Kleinert, Browder, & Towles-Reeves,<br />
2009). Further, curriculum can <strong>and</strong> should<br />
impact teacher preparati<strong>on</strong> (Browder, 1997,<br />
Ryndak, Clark, C<strong>on</strong>roy, & Stuart, 2001).<br />
Hence, there is a significant value in having a<br />
pulse <strong>on</strong> curriculum related literature for this<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In light of the significance of the findings<br />
from the past review (Nietupski et al., 1997),<br />
current legislati<strong>on</strong> (IDEA, 2004; NCLB, 2002)<br />
affecting special educati<strong>on</strong>, as well as the current<br />
tensi<strong>on</strong>s in directi<strong>on</strong> of curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
for this populati<strong>on</strong> (Ayres et al., 2011), an<br />
updated review of the recent trends in curricular<br />
research is in order. The purpose of this<br />
systematic review is to examine the last fifteen<br />
years of curricular research for students with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability.<br />
Specific questi<strong>on</strong>s in the present investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
included: (a) how was curricular research represented<br />
in the overall research of the ten key<br />
Curricular Review / 77
journals?, (b) what was the curricular foci of<br />
the past fifteen years?, (c) what methods<br />
were used to c<strong>on</strong>duct curricular research?,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (d) which educati<strong>on</strong>al envir<strong>on</strong>ments were<br />
highlighted in the curricular research?<br />
Method<br />
Using ten key journals significant to the field,<br />
this systematic review applied a structured approach<br />
to identify <strong>and</strong> describe the research<br />
literature relative to curriculum c<strong>on</strong>tent for<br />
students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability. Each journal was examined for articles<br />
with a focus <strong>on</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent for this<br />
populati<strong>on</strong> of students. The identified articles<br />
where then systematically categorized by focus,<br />
research methodology, <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>text <strong>and</strong><br />
finally checked for inter-rater reliability.<br />
Journals Reviewed<br />
Journals were selected for their emphasis <strong>on</strong><br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> inclusi<strong>on</strong> of research<br />
specifically related to students with moderate<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability. All journals<br />
are referred to by their current title as of 2011.<br />
All issues under previous names are implied<br />
by the use of the current journal title. The six<br />
journals reviewed by Nietupski et al. (1997)<br />
were retained in this present study due to<br />
their c<strong>on</strong>tinued applicability within the field<br />
of special educati<strong>on</strong> for this populati<strong>on</strong>: Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, Intellectual <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, The Journal<br />
of Applied Behavior Analysis, Research <strong>and</strong><br />
Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, <strong>and</strong><br />
The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>. Four additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
journals were included in this review to reflect<br />
the breadth of research for this populati<strong>on</strong> in<br />
broadly focused special educati<strong>on</strong> journals<br />
(i.e., Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children <strong>and</strong> Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>) <strong>and</strong> specific disability-focused<br />
journals including students with intellectual<br />
disability (i.e., Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> <strong>and</strong> Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>).<br />
Procedure<br />
Each journal was reviewed over the 15-year<br />
time span of 1996 through 2010. Specifically,<br />
each article within each issue of each journal<br />
was screened against the predetermined inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> exclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria. To do so, the first<br />
author read each article’s abstract for meeting<br />
the inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria, <strong>and</strong>, if necessary, the<br />
entire text to make a determinati<strong>on</strong>. To assure<br />
adherence to the criteria, inter-rater reliability<br />
was c<strong>on</strong>ducted with regards to the inclusi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
articles.<br />
Articles were excluded if they were (a) an<br />
editorial, reader comment, introducti<strong>on</strong> to<br />
special topics, annotated bibliography, interview,<br />
or special feature <strong>on</strong> a historical figure<br />
or (b) primarily focused <strong>on</strong> behavior management<br />
or interventi<strong>on</strong>, pedagogy, or technology<br />
applicati<strong>on</strong>s. Articles were included if they<br />
(a) focused <strong>on</strong> enhancing skills or participati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
(b) included at least <strong>on</strong>e individual or<br />
a populati<strong>on</strong> with moderate, severe, or profound<br />
intellectual disability by described by<br />
name or IQ score (below 55), regardless of a<br />
co-occurring diagnoses; (c) included at least<br />
<strong>on</strong>e individual or a populati<strong>on</strong> between the<br />
age of 3–22; (d) used or focused <strong>on</strong> school or<br />
school-based community settings within the<br />
United States; <strong>and</strong> (e) the locati<strong>on</strong> of the<br />
research or practice occurred within a U.S.<br />
school-based setting.<br />
Categorizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Following identificati<strong>on</strong> as curricular articles,<br />
25% of the curricular articles were categorized<br />
individually by both authors in terms<br />
of primary focus, research methodology employed,<br />
<strong>and</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>text used or focused<br />
<strong>on</strong>. Disagreements in this test of categorizati<strong>on</strong><br />
led the authors to further clarify<br />
the distinctive labels within each category<br />
(e.g., specific definiti<strong>on</strong>s for functi<strong>on</strong>al life<br />
skills, or the general educati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>text).<br />
These refined categorizati<strong>on</strong> labels were then<br />
used to categorize all included curricular articles<br />
by primary focus, research method, <strong>and</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />
Curricular Focus<br />
Seven categories existed for curricular focus.<br />
Six were retained from the previous review<br />
(Nietupski et al., 1997): functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills,<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s, communicati<strong>on</strong>, sensorimotor, cognitive-academic,<br />
<strong>and</strong> other. The present study in-<br />
78 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
cluded the category mixed to classify curricular<br />
articles that presented an equal combinati<strong>on</strong><br />
of two or more of the original six categories.<br />
Functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills. A curricular focus of<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills represented articles addressing<br />
“the variety of skills that are frequently<br />
dem<strong>and</strong>ed in natural domestic, vocati<strong>on</strong>al,<br />
<strong>and</strong> community envir<strong>on</strong>ments” (Brown<br />
et al., 1979, p. 83). Brown et al. further defined<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills as age appropriate,<br />
meaning activities typically performed by an<br />
individual’s same-age peers without disabilities.<br />
Included within this category was c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
addressing domestic or self-help, community,<br />
vocati<strong>on</strong>al preparati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> training, <strong>and</strong><br />
recreati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> leisure skills (Brown et al.).<br />
Studies in this category also included those<br />
related to instructi<strong>on</strong> in self-determinati<strong>on</strong><br />
(e.g., Wehmeyer, Garner, Yeager, & Lawrence,<br />
2006), choice making (e.g., Guess, Bens<strong>on</strong>, &<br />
Siegel-Causey, 1995), <strong>and</strong> health <strong>and</strong> safety<br />
(e.g., Madaus et al., 2010) due to their impact<br />
<strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>ing in everyday life.<br />
Interacti<strong>on</strong>s. Articles in this category exhibited<br />
a clear focus <strong>on</strong> curricular activities<br />
specifically intended to increase or enhance<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s of individuals with moderate or<br />
severe intellectual disability with their peers<br />
without disabilities. Included articles focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> specific skills <strong>and</strong> issues regarding the c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
of instructi<strong>on</strong> for including students in<br />
classroom, school, or community settings.<br />
Communicati<strong>on</strong>. The primary emphasis of<br />
articles deemed communicati<strong>on</strong>-focused was<br />
student expressi<strong>on</strong>. Specifically, the category<br />
of communicati<strong>on</strong> represented c<strong>on</strong>tent in<br />
expressive <strong>and</strong> receptive communicati<strong>on</strong> as<br />
well as augmentative <strong>and</strong> alternative communicati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Sensorimotor. Sensorimotor refers to developmental<br />
skills involving <strong>on</strong>e or more senses<br />
(e.g., visi<strong>on</strong> or ambulati<strong>on</strong>; Nietupski et al.,<br />
1997). Articles were included within this area<br />
when the primary focus was <strong>on</strong> building or<br />
maintaining sensorimotor skills al<strong>on</strong>e <strong>and</strong> not<br />
<strong>on</strong> sensorimotor skills as a means to achieve<br />
an end, such as learning to move <strong>on</strong>es h<strong>and</strong> in<br />
order to make a choice (i.e., this example<br />
would instead be described as a functi<strong>on</strong>al life<br />
skill).<br />
Cognitive-Academic. Articles deemed cognitive<br />
or academic in nature included a focus<br />
<strong>on</strong> cognitive development or traditi<strong>on</strong>al aca-<br />
demic subjects (i.e., mathematics, science,<br />
reading, social studies, writing, <strong>and</strong> spelling).<br />
Included within this category were articles focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> general academic st<strong>and</strong>ards, preacademic<br />
skills, or specific general curriculum<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent related skills.<br />
Mixed. Mixed articles represented those<br />
decidedly split between two or more of the<br />
topics listed above. One example included a<br />
study <strong>on</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent taught in a pers<strong>on</strong>nel<br />
preparati<strong>on</strong> program for pre-service<br />
teachers of students with severe disabilities,<br />
including a range of topics (i.e., self-care<br />
skills, reading, <strong>and</strong> social skills; Agran & Alper,<br />
2000).<br />
Other. Articles that met the criteria for inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
yet did not clearly fit into any of the<br />
categories listed above were grouped as other.<br />
For example, Ault’s (2010) review of the literature<br />
<strong>on</strong> religi<strong>on</strong> in special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> planning was included within this<br />
category.<br />
Methodology<br />
Classificati<strong>on</strong> of articles by research methodology<br />
was also used to describe the curricular<br />
literature. Five classificati<strong>on</strong>s were used to<br />
categorize the methodologies: quantitative,<br />
qualitative, <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-data based—as in the initial<br />
review (Nietupski et al., 1997); two additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
classificati<strong>on</strong>s were added—literature review<br />
<strong>and</strong> mixed methods. Quantitative studies<br />
included those with single subject, group<br />
comparis<strong>on</strong>, meta- or other statistical analyses<br />
designs. Qualitative research was comprised<br />
of studies under the qualitative umbrella such<br />
as case studies <strong>and</strong> ethnographies (Brantlinger,<br />
Jimenez, Klingner, Pugach, & Richards<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2005). N<strong>on</strong>-data based studies included<br />
positi<strong>on</strong> papers, theoretical papers, <strong>and</strong> program<br />
descripti<strong>on</strong>s. The literature review category<br />
was created to group studies from the<br />
quantitative <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-data based categories<br />
with a shared primary focus <strong>on</strong> reviewing the<br />
previous literature <strong>and</strong> reporting those findings.<br />
These articles were described as having a<br />
central focus <strong>on</strong> discussi<strong>on</strong> or summary of a<br />
compilati<strong>on</strong> of previous research <strong>on</strong> the topic.<br />
The mixed methods category included those<br />
articles with a clear mix of quantitative <strong>and</strong><br />
qualitative research methodologies, such as<br />
Curricular Review / 79
Browder et al.’s c<strong>on</strong>tent analysis of alternate<br />
assessments (2003).<br />
C<strong>on</strong>text. C<strong>on</strong>text was used to categorize<br />
curricular articles through a focus <strong>on</strong> the<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ment utilized in a research study or<br />
the c<strong>on</strong>text highlighted in a n<strong>on</strong>-data based<br />
article. Seven locati<strong>on</strong> categories were used to<br />
discriminate studies: general educati<strong>on</strong>, special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>, community, special school, mixed, other,<br />
<strong>and</strong> unspecified. General educati<strong>on</strong> included<br />
the classroom or other areas within a school<br />
not primarily occupied by students with disabilities<br />
(e.g. general educati<strong>on</strong> classroom,<br />
cafeteria, playground). The special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>text referred to settings occupied solely<br />
or primarily by students with disabilities (e.g.,<br />
segregated special educati<strong>on</strong> classroom, speech<br />
therapy room). Community represented schoolsp<strong>on</strong>sored<br />
settings apart from school grounds<br />
(e.g., grocery store, restaurant). The special<br />
school c<strong>on</strong>text was used to describe schools<br />
that serve <strong>on</strong>ly students with disabilities.<br />
Mixed c<strong>on</strong>texts referred to articles c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />
at or focused <strong>on</strong> two or more settings. Other<br />
included c<strong>on</strong>texts not listed above, such as<br />
<strong>on</strong>e article c<strong>on</strong>ducted in a laboratory setting<br />
(Fidler, Most, & Guibers<strong>on</strong>, 2005). “Unspecified”<br />
signified research or n<strong>on</strong>-data based articles<br />
that did not clearly state the locati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
the investigati<strong>on</strong> or c<strong>on</strong>textual focus.<br />
Reliability<br />
Data from both the inclusi<strong>on</strong> search <strong>and</strong> categorizati<strong>on</strong><br />
was initially coded by the first author<br />
<strong>and</strong> checked for reliability by the sec<strong>on</strong>d.<br />
Inter-rater reliability was c<strong>on</strong>ducted for 25%<br />
of the 5,812 articles for inclusi<strong>on</strong> (n 1,454)<br />
<strong>and</strong> 29% of the 134 (n 39) included curricular<br />
articles. Reliability was calculated by dividing<br />
the sum of agreements by the sum of<br />
the agreements plus disagreements, multiplied<br />
by 100. Reliability for inclusi<strong>on</strong> criteria<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g raters was 97% with a range of 91%–<br />
100% am<strong>on</strong>g the ten journals. Within the curricular<br />
categorizati<strong>on</strong> of articles, data indicated<br />
85% reliability for both focus <strong>and</strong><br />
methodology <strong>and</strong> 69% reliability for c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />
Specific details <strong>and</strong> implicati<strong>on</strong>s of the low<br />
c<strong>on</strong>text reliability are provided in the discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
secti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
TABLE 1<br />
Percentage of Curricular Articles per Journal<br />
Results<br />
A total of 5,812 articles represent the 15-year<br />
span of research from the ten selected journals.<br />
Results are reported both as an overall<br />
representati<strong>on</strong> of the fifteen years <strong>and</strong> also<br />
summarized in three five-year spans (1996–<br />
2000, 2001–2005, <strong>and</strong> 2006–2010) to illustrate<br />
the trends in the research, as well as to maintain<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistency with Nietupski et al.’s (1997)<br />
original review.<br />
Inclusi<strong>on</strong><br />
Journal<br />
Percent<br />
(%)<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> 21%<br />
Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with<br />
Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong> 17%<br />
Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children 17%<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children 11%<br />
Research in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> 10%<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong> 7%<br />
The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> 6%<br />
The Journal of Applied Behavioral<br />
Analysis 4%<br />
Intellectual <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> 4%<br />
Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> 2%<br />
Of the 5,812 articles searched, 2% (n 134)<br />
were found to have a curricular focus. Table 1<br />
provides a depicti<strong>on</strong> of the distributi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
curricular articles am<strong>on</strong>g selected journals.<br />
Within the five-year spans, the percentage of<br />
curricular articles ranged from 2% (n <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>) of<br />
the 1,941 published articles in 1996–2000 to<br />
3% (n 47) of the 2,067 articles published in<br />
2001–2005 <strong>and</strong> back to 2% (n 39) of the<br />
1,804 published articles in 2006–2010. Over<br />
the three five-year spans, the curricular research<br />
identified am<strong>on</strong>g the journals declined.<br />
In the initial span, 1996–2000, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g> articles<br />
were identified as primarily curricular,<br />
which accounts for 36% of the curricular articles<br />
over the fifteen years. The following<br />
span, 2001–2005, produced 47 articles (35%<br />
80 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 1. Percentage of Curricular Article Focus by 5-Year Span. Note: FLS Functi<strong>on</strong>al Life Skills, INT <br />
Interacti<strong>on</strong>s, COM Communicati<strong>on</strong>, SEN Sensorimotor, COG Cognitive-Academic, MIX <br />
Mixed, OTH Other<br />
of the included literature), followed by 39 in<br />
the final span of 2006–2010 (29% of the included<br />
literature). Curricular research experienced<br />
a 19% reducti<strong>on</strong> in quantity from the<br />
first to the last five-year span. On average, the<br />
ten journals yielded 9.6 curricular articles per<br />
year in the first span (1996–2000), followed by<br />
9.4 (2001–2005), <strong>and</strong> 7.8 per year in the final<br />
span (2006–2010), for a fifteen-year average<br />
of 8.9 articles per year.<br />
The highest percentage of curricular articles<br />
per total published articles over the fifteen-year<br />
span were found in the journals<br />
Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
(6% of the published articles, n 23),<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
(5% of the published articles, n 28),<br />
<strong>and</strong> Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children (4% of the published<br />
articles, n 15). Over half (56%, n 74) of<br />
the curricular articles identified from all published<br />
articles (n 134) came from the three<br />
journals: Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> (21% of the curricular<br />
articles, n 28), Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong> (17% of the curricular<br />
articles, n 23), <strong>and</strong> Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children (17% of the curricular articles, n <br />
23). The remaining 44% (n 60) of curricular<br />
articles came from the other seven journals<br />
included in the search.<br />
Categorizati<strong>on</strong><br />
Focus. Nearly half of all identified curricular<br />
articles (43%, n 58) were focused primarily<br />
<strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills (see Figure 1<br />
for a graphical representati<strong>on</strong> of article focus<br />
overall as well as for each of the five-year<br />
spans). The following two most frequent curricular<br />
foci included cognitive-academics<br />
(19% of the curricular literature, n 25) <strong>and</strong><br />
mixed c<strong>on</strong>tent (16% of the curricular literature,<br />
n 21). Over the five-year spans, functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
life skills experienced a 4% increase<br />
from 1996–2000 to the 2006–2010 span. Articles<br />
with a focus <strong>on</strong> cognitive <strong>and</strong> academic<br />
related c<strong>on</strong>tent saw a substantial 365% increase<br />
from 6% in the initial five year span to<br />
36% in the final span of the included studies.<br />
Research with a focus <strong>on</strong> interacti<strong>on</strong>s saw a<br />
decrease over the three time spans from 6%<br />
in 1996–2000 to 2% in 2001–2005 <strong>and</strong> finally<br />
to 0% in 2006–2010 with a fifteen year average<br />
of 3%. Communicati<strong>on</strong>s related curricular<br />
studies decreased by 90% over the five-year<br />
spans from an initial 21% of the literature<br />
base in 1996–2000 to merely 3% of the articles<br />
in the 2006–2010 span. Articles focused <strong>on</strong><br />
sensorimotor <strong>and</strong> other remained relatively<br />
stable minorities of the included studies, 2%<br />
(n 3) <strong>and</strong> 6% (n 8) respectively.<br />
Curricular Review / 81
Figure 2. Percentage of Research Methodology of Curricular Articles By 5-Year Span. Note: QUAN <br />
quantitative, QUAL qualitative, MIX mixed research, LIT literature review, NDB N<strong>on</strong>-data<br />
based<br />
Research Methodology. Over half of the curricular<br />
articles used <strong>on</strong>e of two methods:<br />
quantitative design (34%, n 46) <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>data<br />
based (30%, n 40) (see Figure 2 for a<br />
graphical representati<strong>on</strong> of research methodology<br />
across the 15-year span). Literature reviews<br />
(19%, n 25), qualitative studies (15%,<br />
n 20), <strong>and</strong> mixed method designs (2%,<br />
n 3) followed in prevalence. All of the designs<br />
remained relatively stable over the fiveyear<br />
spans, with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of qualitative<br />
studies, which dropped from 21% of curricular<br />
articles in 1996–2000 to 8% in 2006–2010.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>text. Unspecified c<strong>on</strong>texts (i.e., those<br />
settings that could not be determined from<br />
the text) accounted for over half (52%, n <br />
70) of the included curricular studies. Together,<br />
unspecified <strong>and</strong> mixed c<strong>on</strong>texts represented<br />
81% (n 109) of the settings of<br />
included articles. The remaining <strong>on</strong>e-fifth<br />
were special educati<strong>on</strong> (7%, n 9), general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> (6%, n 8), special schools (3%,<br />
n 4), community <strong>and</strong> other settings (combined<br />
at 3%, n 4). General educati<strong>on</strong> settings<br />
experienced a slight increase from 2% in<br />
1996–2000 to 10% of the literature in 2006–<br />
2010. Research with unspecified c<strong>on</strong>text also<br />
experienced an increase in prevalence from<br />
46% in the first five-year span to 51% in the<br />
final five-year span. Figure 3 provides an overview<br />
of the distributi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> trends <strong>on</strong> reported<br />
c<strong>on</strong>text in the curricular articles.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
This study employed a systematic review to<br />
highlight the current status <strong>and</strong> trends of curricular<br />
research for students with moderate<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability from 1996–<br />
2010. Findings indicate that curricular articles<br />
c<strong>on</strong>stitute a very low percentage of the research<br />
published in the primary journals devoted<br />
to special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> individuals<br />
with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability.<br />
Within the limited literature, the majority<br />
of curricular articles over the fifteen-year span<br />
focused <strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills c<strong>on</strong>tent while<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in cognitive academic skills experienced<br />
a significant increase over the review<br />
span to rival functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills as the most<br />
comm<strong>on</strong> focus of curricular research from<br />
2006–2010. However, problematic is that the<br />
majority of curricular studies did not provide<br />
a clearly defined envir<strong>on</strong>mental c<strong>on</strong>text or<br />
focus. Results of this review shed light <strong>on</strong> the<br />
themes <strong>and</strong> directi<strong>on</strong>s of curricular research<br />
for students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intel-<br />
82 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 3. Percentage of C<strong>on</strong>text of Curricular Articles By 5-Year Span. Note: GEN General Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
SPED Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, COMM Community, SPES Special School, Mix Mixed, OTH <br />
Other, UNSP Unspecified<br />
lectual disability during 1996–2010 <strong>and</strong> extended<br />
the findings of the previous review by<br />
Nietupski et al. (1997).<br />
Curricular articles represent a very small<br />
porti<strong>on</strong> (2%) of the overall literature am<strong>on</strong>g<br />
the ten journals within the fifteen-year span.<br />
The set of 134 curricular-related articles in<br />
the present study is drastically less than those<br />
reported by Nietupski et al. (1997). On average,<br />
the present review found 77% fewer articles<br />
per five-year span than the previous review,<br />
which raises the questi<strong>on</strong> “why?” The<br />
authors hypothesize at least two possible explanati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for this discrepancy: (a) a previous<br />
saturati<strong>on</strong> within the literature reduced the<br />
publicati<strong>on</strong> of curricular research, or (b) a<br />
shift in emphasis from curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
specific to students with severe disabilities to<br />
adaptati<strong>on</strong> of the general educati<strong>on</strong> curricular<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent. In terms of the saturati<strong>on</strong> perspective,<br />
it is important to c<strong>on</strong>sider whether<br />
or not there is a need for curricular research<br />
focused <strong>on</strong> students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe<br />
intellectual disability. Nietupski et al. (1997)<br />
indicated curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent, although not<br />
dominant, accounted for 16% of the literature<br />
from 1976–1995; the present authors questi<strong>on</strong><br />
whether this research al<strong>on</strong>e is sufficient<br />
to guide <strong>and</strong> support practice. Educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
opportunities for students with disabilities<br />
change <strong>and</strong> in many cases improve over time<br />
due to technological advances <strong>and</strong> changes in<br />
social perspectives of disability (Rose & Meyer,<br />
2000). IDEA (2004) al<strong>on</strong>e more pointedly refers<br />
to access to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
as a m<strong>and</strong>ate for instructi<strong>on</strong> of all students<br />
with disabilities. The fifteen-year span<br />
(1996–2010) reviewed here includes c<strong>on</strong>cepts<br />
such as self-determinati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> college inclusi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
as well as new technological applicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
adding to the curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent repertoire<br />
for these students. With this in mind, we c<strong>on</strong>clude<br />
the field is in fact not saturated with<br />
curricular research <strong>and</strong> hence saturati<strong>on</strong> is<br />
not a plausible explanati<strong>on</strong> for the lack of<br />
research. Instead, more research is necessary<br />
to c<strong>on</strong>tinue to keep track with the advances in<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> society so as to provide high<br />
quality opportunities <strong>and</strong> experiences for individuals<br />
with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability.<br />
Another, more plausible, explanati<strong>on</strong> for<br />
the lack of prevalence of curricular research<br />
may be the increased emphasis <strong>on</strong> access to<br />
the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum <strong>and</strong> st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
(Browder, Spo<strong>on</strong>er, Wakeman, Trela, &<br />
Baker, 2006; Cushing et al., 2005; Downing,<br />
2006; Lee et al., 2006). Both the 1997 <strong>and</strong><br />
2004 reauthorizati<strong>on</strong>s of IDEA emphasized<br />
the access of all students to the general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
curriculum. An increased legislative<br />
emphasis <strong>on</strong> the general educati<strong>on</strong> curricular<br />
Curricular Review / 83
c<strong>on</strong>tent for this populati<strong>on</strong> could explain the<br />
overall decrease in curricular focused articles.<br />
However, a focus <strong>on</strong> general educati<strong>on</strong> curricular<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent creates some c<strong>on</strong>cern as it is<br />
unclear that the general curriculum can sufficiently<br />
ensure the basic principles of IDEA<br />
<strong>and</strong> assist students in making successful postschool<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong>s (Ayres et al., 2011; Dym<strong>on</strong>d<br />
& Orelove, 2001). Ayres et al. equated an exclusive<br />
focus <strong>on</strong> general educati<strong>on</strong> st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
for instructi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>tent as a denial of students’<br />
individualized educati<strong>on</strong> rights afforded<br />
by IDEA.<br />
Related to the argument that the small<br />
amount of curricular research for students<br />
with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability<br />
can be explained by a shifting focus<br />
(i.e., access), is an increasing emphasis <strong>on</strong><br />
cognitive/academic curriculum in the literature.<br />
Although, functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills emerged<br />
as the most prevalent topic (43%) of curricular<br />
articles across the 15 years, the most recent<br />
five-year (2006–2010) time span experienced<br />
an increased prevalence of articles addressing<br />
cognitive academics nearly equal to functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
life skills focused articles. While the prevalence<br />
of articles <strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills suggests<br />
Brown et al.’s (1979) seminal work in<br />
this topic has remained an essential comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
of the curriculum for students with moderate<br />
<strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability, based<br />
<strong>on</strong> the emerging data trend over the fifteenyear<br />
span, cognitive academics may surpass<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills as the most researched<br />
curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent in the future. The focus <strong>on</strong><br />
increased academic curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent aligns<br />
with the shifted focus <strong>on</strong> access to the general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum <strong>and</strong> further highlights<br />
the growing philosophical divide between<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills <strong>and</strong> general academics<br />
(Ayres et al., 2011).<br />
Taking a closer look at the cognitiveacademic<br />
data indicates half of the articles in<br />
2006–2010 are n<strong>on</strong>-data based <strong>and</strong> the majority<br />
of these do not clearly specify the educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
c<strong>on</strong>text. Several articles st<strong>and</strong> as excepti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to this data such as Mims, Browder,<br />
Baker, Lee, <strong>and</strong> Spo<strong>on</strong>er’s (2009) study <strong>on</strong><br />
increasing comprehensi<strong>on</strong> during shared stories<br />
<strong>and</strong> Kliewer’s (2008) ethnographic research<br />
<strong>on</strong> literacy access. However, given the<br />
importance for specificity in research c<strong>on</strong>text<br />
for the purpose of applicability in practice <strong>and</strong><br />
future research <strong>and</strong> the need for rigorous research<br />
methodologies (Browder et al., 2007;<br />
Odom et al., 2005), the recent surge in academics-related<br />
curricular articles as a whole<br />
leaves something to be desired. In order to<br />
effectively guide practice <strong>and</strong> scholarship, research<br />
in the area of cognitive <strong>and</strong> academic<br />
curricula should increasingly employ research<br />
methodologies such as quantitative, qualitative,<br />
<strong>and</strong> mixed methods. In additi<strong>on</strong>, this<br />
research should increasingly provide explicit<br />
descripti<strong>on</strong>s of the c<strong>on</strong>text, to increase the<br />
applicability of the research (Odom et al.,<br />
2005).<br />
Although what <strong>and</strong> where to teach are<br />
two separate issues, the c<strong>on</strong>text of instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
is often closely tied to the c<strong>on</strong>tent (Jacks<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Ryndak, & Wehmeyer, 2008). Due to the<br />
breadth of the c<strong>on</strong>tinuum of educati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>texts<br />
for this populati<strong>on</strong>, curricular researchers<br />
have a duty to specify the c<strong>on</strong>text used in<br />
order to accurately describe the envir<strong>on</strong>ment<br />
<strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s for the purposed of replicati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> applicati<strong>on</strong> (Odom et al., 2005). Additi<strong>on</strong>ally,<br />
the increased rigor dem<strong>and</strong>ed of<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>al research (NCLB, 2002), the recent<br />
debate between functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills <strong>and</strong><br />
academic c<strong>on</strong>tent, <strong>and</strong> the large number of<br />
unspecified c<strong>on</strong>texts observed in this study<br />
indicate the need for future research to include<br />
more clarity in c<strong>on</strong>text descripti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> Future Directi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s of this study include the extent<br />
to which comparis<strong>on</strong> of the findings in this<br />
review can be made with those in the previous<br />
review (Nietupski et al., 1997). Although<br />
careful planning <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong><br />
were given to the procedures <strong>and</strong> operati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
definiti<strong>on</strong>s used in the review by Nietupski<br />
et al., the researchers in this study<br />
deemed some changes necessary for the purpose<br />
of additi<strong>on</strong>al clarity (i.e., the added<br />
restricti<strong>on</strong> of U.S. <strong>on</strong>ly studies to avoid c<strong>on</strong>flicts<br />
in disability terminology). In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the authors added four relevant journals for<br />
this review. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children <strong>and</strong> Research<br />
in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> provided a substantial<br />
amount of the curricular-related literature,<br />
followed by Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
However, the journal, Focus <strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
84 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
produced the least amount of curricular articles<br />
per journal (2%), yet accounted for<br />
7% of the articles searched for inclusi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
While inclusi<strong>on</strong> of this journal may have<br />
lowered the overall percentages of curricular<br />
articles within the literature, the general<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistency in results from each journal<br />
combined as well as the results from the<br />
previous study (6%-34% range am<strong>on</strong>g journals<br />
c<strong>on</strong>taining curricular articles) <strong>and</strong> the<br />
pertinent focus of the journals led the researchers<br />
to justify their inclusi<strong>on</strong> as c<strong>on</strong>tributing<br />
to the overall findings of this study.<br />
While the inter-rater reliability for inclusi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
focus, <strong>and</strong> methodology were all reported<br />
at or above 85%, the inter-rater reliability for<br />
c<strong>on</strong>text was much lower at 69%. Up<strong>on</strong> closer<br />
review, it was found that in each of the disagreed<br />
up<strong>on</strong> articles, <strong>on</strong>e reviewer used either<br />
unspecified or mixed c<strong>on</strong>texts to describe the<br />
locati<strong>on</strong>. Hence, both reviewers were able to<br />
identify clear-cut c<strong>on</strong>texts (e.g., special educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
general educati<strong>on</strong>, community-based<br />
settings), but struggled with mixed <strong>and</strong> unspecified<br />
c<strong>on</strong>texts, which reiterates the lack of<br />
clarity over c<strong>on</strong>text within the research. Future<br />
research should include more precise<br />
definiti<strong>on</strong>s for the curricular c<strong>on</strong>text of focus.<br />
The minimal research based <strong>on</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent is particularly troubling as it<br />
leaves a gap for directing the educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
opportunities <strong>and</strong> experiences for this populati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
While potentially limiting the pool<br />
of curricular research, articles focused <strong>on</strong><br />
technological applicati<strong>on</strong>s (e.g., Cihak, Fahrenkrog,<br />
Ayres, & Smith, 2010) <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
methodology (e.g. Browder, Ahlgrim-<br />
Delzell, Spo<strong>on</strong>er, Mims, & Baker, 2009)<br />
were not included in this review. Although<br />
these studies may imply instructi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>tent,<br />
the primary focus did not include the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent of instructi<strong>on</strong>. Clear curricular-specific<br />
research that helps to direct the field in<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent plays a vital role in the educati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual<br />
disability by informing practice <strong>and</strong><br />
building the knowledge base of the field<br />
(Nietupski et al., 1997). Future research in<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe intellectual disability<br />
should include an increased c<strong>on</strong>centrati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Implicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
What is the current state of curricular research<br />
for students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe<br />
intellectual disability? The results of this study<br />
indicate curricular research c<strong>on</strong>tinues to be a<br />
minority of the literature within the field. As<br />
research inevitably guides practice <strong>and</strong> helps<br />
build field as a whole (Browder, 1997), an<br />
increased emphasis <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>tent of instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
is necessary. The current pool of curricular<br />
articles suggests scholarship in special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
for this populati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tinues to be<br />
rooted in functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills but is experiencing<br />
a rapid emergence of general curriculumrelated<br />
academics. In additi<strong>on</strong>, the increased<br />
variety in research methodology observed can<br />
be said to have a strengthening effect <strong>on</strong> the<br />
research base as a whole. The reported lack of<br />
clarity in c<strong>on</strong>text am<strong>on</strong>g curricular articles<br />
can lead to reduced research replicati<strong>on</strong> as<br />
well as difficulty in accurately applying the<br />
research findings to practice. It is imperative<br />
that clarity in reporting c<strong>on</strong>text in scholarship<br />
becomes more comm<strong>on</strong>. Overall, our assessment<br />
of the literature <strong>on</strong> curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
for this populati<strong>on</strong> is cautiously optimistic.<br />
There are many exciting studies from the previous<br />
fifteen year span that significantly add to<br />
the knowledge base of instructi<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>tent,<br />
however much work yet to be d<strong>on</strong>e, particularly<br />
in the area of increased quantity of articles<br />
<strong>and</strong> clarity in reporting c<strong>on</strong>text.<br />
References<br />
Agran, M., & Alper, S. (2000). Curriculum <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
in general educati<strong>on</strong>: Implicati<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
service delivery <strong>and</strong> teacher preparati<strong>on</strong>. The Journal<br />
of the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe H<strong>and</strong>icaps,<br />
25, 167–174.<br />
Agran, M., Alper, S., & Wehmeyer, M. (2002). Access<br />
to the general curriculum for students with<br />
significant disabilities: What it means to teachers.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 37, 123–133.<br />
Aguillard, D. (1999). Evoluti<strong>on</strong> educati<strong>on</strong> in Louisiana<br />
Public schools: a decade following: Edwards<br />
v Aguillard. The American Biology Teacher, 61, 182–<br />
188.<br />
Alwell, M., & Cobb, B. (2009). Functi<strong>on</strong>al life skills<br />
curricular interventi<strong>on</strong>s for youth with disabilities:<br />
A systematic review. Career Development for<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Individuals, 32, 282–293.<br />
Ault, M. J. (2010). Inclusi<strong>on</strong> of religi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> spiritu-<br />
Curricular Review / 85
ality in the special educati<strong>on</strong> literature. The Journal<br />
of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 44, 176.<br />
Ayres, K. M., Lowrey, K. A., Douglas, K. H., &<br />
Sievers, C. (2011). I can identify Saturn but I can’t<br />
brush my teeth: What happens when the curricular<br />
focus for students with severe disabilities shifts.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 46, 11–21.<br />
Beane, J. A. (1998). Reclaiming a democratic purpose<br />
for educati<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong>al Leadership, 56(2),<br />
8–11.<br />
Bouck, E. C. (2008). Factors impacting the enactment<br />
of a functi<strong>on</strong>al curriculum in self-c<strong>on</strong>tained<br />
cross-categorical programs. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training<br />
in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 43, 294–310.<br />
Brantlinger, E., Jimenez, R., Klingner, J., Pugach,<br />
M., & Richards<strong>on</strong>, V. (2005). Qualitative studies<br />
in special educati<strong>on</strong>. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 71,<br />
195–207.<br />
Browder, D. M. (1997). Educating students with<br />
severe disabilities: Enhancing the c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong><br />
between research <strong>and</strong> practice. The Journal of Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, 31, 137–144.<br />
Browder, D. M. (2001). Curriculum <strong>and</strong> assessment for<br />
students with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe disabilities. New<br />
York, NY: The Guilford Press.<br />
Browder, D. M., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Wakeman, S., Trela,<br />
K., & Baker, J. N. (2006). Aligning instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
with academic c<strong>on</strong>tent st<strong>and</strong>ards: Finding the<br />
link. Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 31, 309–321.<br />
Browder, D. M., Wakeman, S. Y., Flowers, C., Rickelman,<br />
R. J., Pugalee, D., & Karv<strong>on</strong>en, M. (2007).<br />
Creating access to the general curriculum with<br />
links to grade-level c<strong>on</strong>tent for students with significant<br />
cognitive disabilities. The Journal of Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, 41, 2–16.<br />
Browder, D., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Mims,<br />
P. J., & Baker, J. N. (2009). Using time delay to<br />
teach literacy to students with severe developmental<br />
disabilities. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 75, 343–364.<br />
Browder, D., Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Flowers,<br />
C., Algozzine, B., & Karv<strong>on</strong>en, M. (2003). A<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent analysis of the curricular philosophies<br />
reflected in states’ alternate assessment performance<br />
indicators. Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 28, 165–181.<br />
Brown, L., McLean, M. B., Nietupski, S. H., Pumpian,<br />
I., Certo, N., & Gruenewald, L. (1979). A<br />
strategy for developing chr<strong>on</strong>ological age appropriate<br />
<strong>and</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>al curricular c<strong>on</strong>tent for adolescents<br />
<strong>and</strong> young adults with significant disabilities.<br />
Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 13, 81–90.<br />
Brown, L., Nietupski, J., & Hamre-Nietupski, S.<br />
(1976). Criteri<strong>on</strong> of ultimate functi<strong>on</strong>ing. Hey,<br />
d<strong>on</strong>’t forget about me! (pp. 2–15). Rest<strong>on</strong>, VA: The<br />
Council for Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children.<br />
Cihak, D., Fahrenkrog, C., Ayres, K. M., & Smith, C.<br />
(2010). The use of video modeling via a video<br />
iPod <strong>and</strong> a system of least prompts to improve<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong>al behaviors for students with autism<br />
spectrum disorders in the general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
12, 103–115.<br />
Cushing, L. S., Clark, N. M., Carter, E. W., & Kennedy,<br />
C. H. (2005). Access to the general educati<strong>on</strong><br />
curriculum for students with significant cognitive<br />
disabilities. Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 38,<br />
6–13.<br />
Downing, J. (2006). On peer support, universal design,<br />
<strong>and</strong> access to the core curriculum for students<br />
with severe disabilities: A pers<strong>on</strong>nel preparati<strong>on</strong><br />
perspective. Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 31, 327–330.<br />
Dym<strong>on</strong>d, S. K., & Orelove, F. P. (2001). What c<strong>on</strong>stitutes<br />
effective curricula for students with severe<br />
disabilities? Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 9, 109–122.<br />
Fidler, D. J., Most, D. E., & Guibers<strong>on</strong>, M. M. (2005).<br />
Neuropschological correlates of word identificati<strong>on</strong><br />
in Down syndrome. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 26, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>7–501.<br />
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2001). Access to the core<br />
curriculum: Critical ingredients for student success.<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 22, 1<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>–157.<br />
Giroux, H. A. (1994). Teachers, public life, <strong>and</strong><br />
curriculum reform. Peabody Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
69(3), 35–47.<br />
Guess, D., Bens<strong>on</strong>, H. A., & Siegel-Causey, E.<br />
(1995). C<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>and</strong> issues related to choicemaking<br />
<strong>and</strong> aut<strong>on</strong>omy am<strong>on</strong>g pers<strong>on</strong>s with severe<br />
disabilities. In K. M. Huebner, J. G. Prickett,<br />
T. R. Welch, & E. Joffee (Eds.), H<strong>and</strong> in h<strong>and</strong>:<br />
Selected reprints <strong>and</strong> annotated bibliography <strong>on</strong> working<br />
with students who are deaf-blind (73–80). New York,<br />
NY: AFB Press.<br />
Halle, J. W., & Dym<strong>on</strong>d, S. K. (2008). Inclusive<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>: A necessary prerequisite to accessing<br />
the general curriculum? Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for<br />
Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 33, 196–198.<br />
Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act of 2004,<br />
P.L. 108-44.<br />
Jacks<strong>on</strong>, L. B., Ryndak, D. L., & Wehmeyer, M.<br />
(2008). The dynamic relati<strong>on</strong>ship between c<strong>on</strong>text,<br />
curriculum, <strong>and</strong> student learning: A case for<br />
inclusive educati<strong>on</strong> as a research-based practice.<br />
Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
33, 175–195.<br />
Kearns, J., Kleinert, H., Harris<strong>on</strong>, B., Sheppard-<br />
J<strong>on</strong>es, K., Hall, M., & J<strong>on</strong>es, M. (2010). What Does<br />
“College <strong>and</strong> Career Ready” mean for Students with<br />
Significant Cognitive <strong>Disabilities</strong>? Lexingt<strong>on</strong>, KY:<br />
University of Kentucky.<br />
Kleinert, H. L., Browder, D. M., & Towles-Reeves,<br />
E. A. (2009). Models of cogniti<strong>on</strong> for students<br />
with significant cognitive disabilities: Implicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
86 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
for assessment. Review of Educati<strong>on</strong>al Research, 79,<br />
301–326.<br />
Kliewer, C. (2008). Joining the literacy flow: Fostering<br />
symbol <strong>and</strong> written language learning in<br />
young children with significant developmental<br />
disabilities through the four currents of literacy.<br />
Research <strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
33, 103–121.<br />
Lee, S., Amos, B. A., Gragoudas, S., Lee, Y.,<br />
Shogren, K. A., Theoharis, R., & Wehmeyer, M.<br />
(2006). Curriculum augmentati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> adaptati<strong>on</strong><br />
strategies to promote access to the general<br />
curriculum for students with intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental<br />
disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in<br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 41, 199–212.<br />
Madaus, J. W., Pivarnik, L., Scarpati, S., Richard, N.,<br />
Hirsch, D. W., Carb<strong>on</strong>e, E., Gable, R. K., Patnoad,<br />
M. (2010). Teaching food safety skills to students<br />
with disabilities. Teaching Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
42(4), 44–51.<br />
Milner, H. R. (2003). A case study of an African<br />
American English teacher’s cultural comprehensive<br />
knowledge <strong>and</strong> self-reflective planning. Journal<br />
of Curriculum <strong>and</strong> Supervisi<strong>on</strong>, 18, 175–196.<br />
Mims, P. J., Browder, D. M., Baker, J. N., Lee, A., &<br />
Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F. (2009). Increasing comprehensi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
students with significant intellectual disabilities<br />
<strong>and</strong> visual impairments during shared stories. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
44, 409–420.<br />
Nietupski, J., Hamre-Nietupski, S., Curtin, S., &<br />
Shrikanth, K. (1997). A review of curricular research<br />
in severe disabilities from 1976 to 1995 in<br />
six selected journals. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
31, 36–55.<br />
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No.<br />
107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).<br />
Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner,<br />
R. H., Thomps<strong>on</strong>, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005).<br />
Research in special educati<strong>on</strong>: Scientific methods<br />
<strong>and</strong> evidence-based practices. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children,<br />
71, 137–1<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />
Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2000). The future is in the<br />
margins: The role of technology <strong>and</strong> disability<br />
in educati<strong>on</strong>al reform. Retrieved from: http://<br />
udl<strong>on</strong>line.cast.org/resources/images/future_in_<br />
margins.pdf<br />
Ryndak, D. L., Clark, D., C<strong>on</strong>roy, M., & Stuart, C. H.<br />
(2001). Preparing teachers to meet the needs of<br />
students with severe disabilities: Program c<strong>on</strong>figurati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> expertise. The Journal of The Associati<strong>on</strong><br />
for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe H<strong>and</strong>icaps, 26, 96–105.<br />
Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Dym<strong>on</strong>d, S. K., Smith, A., & Kennedy,<br />
C. H. (2006). What we know <strong>and</strong> need to know<br />
about accessing the general curriculum for students<br />
with significant cognitive disabilities. Research<br />
<strong>and</strong> Practice for Pers<strong>on</strong>s with Severe <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
31, 277–283.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Lattin, D., & Agran, M. (2001).<br />
Achieving access to the general educati<strong>on</strong> curriculum<br />
for students with mental retardati<strong>on</strong>: A curriculum<br />
decisi<strong>on</strong>-making model. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 36, 327–342.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Schalock, R. L. (2001). Selfdeterminati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> quality of life: Implicati<strong>on</strong>s for<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> services <strong>and</strong> supports. Focus <strong>on</strong><br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 33(8), 1–16.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Garner, N., Yeager, D., & Lawrence,<br />
M. (2006). Infusing self-determinati<strong>on</strong> into<br />
18–21 services for students with intellectual or<br />
developmental disabilities: A multi-stage, multiple<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent model. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 41, 3–13.<br />
Williams, W., Brown, L., & Certo, N. (1975). Basic<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ents of instructi<strong>on</strong>al programs. Theory into<br />
practice, 14, 123–136.<br />
Received: 11 October 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 16 December 2011<br />
Final Acceptance: 8 February 2012<br />
Curricular Review / 87
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 88–102<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling in Teaching<br />
First Aid Skills to Children with Intellectual Disability<br />
Serife Yucesoy Ozkan<br />
Anadolu University<br />
Abstract: The purposes of this study were to (1) compare peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling in terms of effectiveness<br />
<strong>and</strong> efficiency in teaching first aid skills to children with intellectual disability, (2) analyze the error patterns<br />
made in probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s, (3) determine whether the children who took the role of sufferers during the first aid skill<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s acquired the first aid skills by observing their peers, <strong>and</strong> (4) whether the research findings have social<br />
validity. Participants c<strong>on</strong>sisted of three children (two females <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e male) between the ages of nine <strong>and</strong> 14<br />
who have intellectual disability. An adapted alternating treatments design was used to compare the effects of peer<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-video modeling. According to the data, both peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling are equally effective <strong>and</strong><br />
efficient. The errors made by the children mostly c<strong>on</strong>sisted of sequential <strong>and</strong> topographical errors. The children<br />
who played the role of sufferers acquired both skill sets by <strong>on</strong>ly observing their peers. The social validity data is<br />
positive. Results, implicati<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> opportunities for future research are discussed.<br />
Children are exposed to accidents all the time,<br />
no matter how old they are. For instance, in<br />
Turkey, according to data obtained in 2002,<br />
accidents cause 13.9% of deaths of children<br />
between the ages of <strong>on</strong>e <strong>and</strong> 14 (Bahadir,<br />
Oral, & Guven, 2011). It is possible to ensure<br />
that children are protected from accidents<br />
or to lessen the harm they suffer by taking a<br />
few precauti<strong>on</strong>s against accidents they may be<br />
exposed to at home, at school, or in the community.<br />
It is important that all children, especially<br />
those with disabilities, learn the necessary<br />
skills to prevent potential dangers <strong>and</strong> to<br />
react appropriately when unsafe situati<strong>on</strong>s occur<br />
in order for them to functi<strong>on</strong> independently<br />
as much as possible in community settings<br />
(Collins, Wolery, & Gast, 1992).<br />
First aid skills are safety skills that are required<br />
to be taught to children who have disabilities<br />
(Collins et al., 1992). Various research<br />
has been d<strong>on</strong>e regarding teaching first aid<br />
The author is grateful to Nuray Oncul for collecting<br />
the reliability data. The author would also like<br />
to thank Prof. Dr. Dilek Erbas for her review<br />
<strong>and</strong> Omer Faruk Ozkan for his proofreading. Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should be addressed<br />
to Serife Yucesoy Ozkan. Anadolu Universitesi<br />
Egitim Fakultesi Ozel Egitim Bolumu, 26470<br />
Eskisehir, TURKEY. E-mail: syucesoy@anadolu.edu.tr<br />
skills to children with disabilities, such as<br />
how to identify first aid materials (Tekin-Iftar,<br />
Acar, & Kurt, 2003), seeking adult assistance<br />
when injured (Christensen, Lignugaris/<br />
Kraft, & Fiechtl, 1996; Christensen, March<strong>and</strong>-<br />
Martella, Martella, Fiechtl, & Christensen,<br />
1993; Timko & Sainato, 1999), treating abrasi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
(March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, Martella, Christensen,<br />
Agran, & Young, 1992a; March<strong>and</strong>-<br />
Martella et al., 1992), treating burns (Gast<br />
& Winterling, 1992; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella &<br />
Martella, 1990; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al.,<br />
1992), treating cuts (Gast & Winterling, 1992;<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al., 1992), treating<br />
injuries (March<strong>and</strong>-Martella & Martella, 1990;<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al., 1992b; Spo<strong>on</strong>er,<br />
Stem, & Test, 1989), treating insect bites<br />
(Gast & Winterling, 1992), applying plastic<br />
b<strong>and</strong>ages, <strong>and</strong> helping some<strong>on</strong>e who is choking<br />
(Spo<strong>on</strong>er et al., 1989).<br />
It is possible to draw some c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s from<br />
the available research <strong>on</strong> teaching first aid<br />
skills to children with disabilities. First, in most<br />
of the studies, the children apply first aid to<br />
themselves or to a puppet (Christensen et al.,<br />
1993, 1996; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella & Martella,<br />
1990; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al., 1992a, 1992b;<br />
Timko & Sainato, 1999), <strong>and</strong> they apply first<br />
aid to another pers<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>ly in generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s (Gast & Winterling, 1992; March<strong>and</strong>-<br />
88 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Martella & Martella, 1990; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella<br />
et al., 1992a). However, applying first aid to<br />
<strong>on</strong>eself is different from applying first aid to<br />
some<strong>on</strong>e else. Sec<strong>on</strong>d, they focus <strong>on</strong> applying<br />
first aid to specific parts of the body (e.g.,<br />
elbow, knee, or h<strong>and</strong>, although an abrasi<strong>on</strong>, a<br />
burn, a cut, or another injury can happen to<br />
any part of the body) (Christensen et al., 1996;<br />
Gast & Winterling, 1992; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella<br />
et al., 1992a; Timko & Sainato, 1999). Third,<br />
in most of the research, <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e type of<br />
first aid material is used, while alternative<br />
materials that could serve as replacements<br />
are preferred in a limited number of studies<br />
(March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al., 1992). Fourth, although<br />
it is important to underst<strong>and</strong> the error<br />
patterns involved in complicated skills like<br />
first aid in order to organize the training in a<br />
study, error patterns were <strong>on</strong>ly analyzed in a<br />
limited number of studies (Gast & Winterling,<br />
1992; March<strong>and</strong>-Martella et al., 1992).<br />
The present research was carried out to<br />
extend the previous research that has been<br />
d<strong>on</strong>e regarding the teaching of first aid skills.<br />
This research differs from the previous research<br />
in a number of ways: (1) first aid skills<br />
to be used <strong>on</strong> another pers<strong>on</strong> who is in need<br />
were taught to children with intellectual disability;<br />
(2) sufficient exemplars (different sufferers,<br />
different body parts, <strong>and</strong> different first<br />
aid materials) were used to ensure generalizability<br />
of the results to teaching other first aid<br />
skills; (3) error patterns were analyzed to determine<br />
what kinds of errors the children<br />
made; (4) whether the children who played<br />
the role of sufferers learned the first aid skills<br />
by observing their peers; <strong>and</strong> (5) whether the<br />
research findings were socially valid.<br />
Video modeling, which is <strong>on</strong>e of the most<br />
effective methods of teaching various skills to<br />
children with disabilities, c<strong>on</strong>sists of watching<br />
a video recording of a peer or an adult performing<br />
the target behavior <strong>and</strong> then having<br />
the child perform the same behavior afterward<br />
(Haring, Kennedy, Adams, & Pitts-<br />
C<strong>on</strong>way, 1987; Rehfeldt, Dahman, Young,<br />
Cherry, & Davis, 2003). A variati<strong>on</strong> of video<br />
modeling is self-video modeling. In self-video<br />
modeling, the child performs the target behavior<br />
by following prompts or instructi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> the child’s performance is recorded.<br />
Later, a new recording is obtained by deleting<br />
the errors made <strong>and</strong> combining the steps<br />
through editing. The child watches as he or<br />
she performs the target behavior using the<br />
new video, <strong>and</strong> then he or she performs the<br />
behavior afterward (Buggey, Toombs, Gardener,<br />
& Cervetti, 1999; Dowrick, 1999; Wert<br />
& Neisworth, 2003).<br />
Both peer video modeling <strong>and</strong> self-video<br />
modeling are effective tools for teaching various<br />
skills to children with disabilities (e.g.,<br />
Bidwell & Rehfeldt, 2004; Buggey et al., 1999;<br />
Dowrick, 1999; Haring et al., 1987; Rehfeldt<br />
et al., 2003; Wert & Neisworth, 2003). However,<br />
little research has been d<strong>on</strong>e to determine<br />
which kind of video modeling is more<br />
effective. For instance, two studies compared<br />
peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling in the literature<br />
(Marcus & Wilder, 2009; Sherer et al., 2001).<br />
The effects of peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling<br />
were compared in the research carried out by<br />
Sherer et al. (2001) regarding teaching c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills to children with autism <strong>and</strong> in<br />
the research c<strong>on</strong>ducted by Marcus <strong>and</strong> Wilder<br />
(2009) about teaching Greek <strong>and</strong> Arabic letters<br />
to children with autism. Both of these<br />
studies looked at children with autism, included<br />
discrete behaviors, <strong>and</strong> used children<br />
with normal development as models. However,<br />
it is important that peer models be similar<br />
to the participants in terms of age, gender,<br />
competence, <strong>and</strong> status in order to ensure<br />
that learning is achieved (B<strong>and</strong>ura, Ross, &<br />
Ross, 1961; Marcus & Wilder, 2009). Thus,<br />
there is a need for the current research, which<br />
differs from <strong>and</strong> exp<strong>and</strong>s up<strong>on</strong> previous research<br />
by comparing the effects of peer <strong>and</strong><br />
self-video modeling using peers with intellectual<br />
disability.<br />
The purpose of this study was to extend<br />
research <strong>on</strong> teaching first aid skills to children<br />
with intellectual disability by comparing peer<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-video modeling in terms of effectiveness<br />
<strong>and</strong> efficiency. To achieve this, the research<br />
looked at the following questi<strong>on</strong>s:<br />
(1) Is there any difference between peer <strong>and</strong><br />
self-video modeling in terms of effectiveness?<br />
(2) Is there any difference between peer <strong>and</strong><br />
self-video modeling in terms of efficiency (i.e.,<br />
number of training sessi<strong>on</strong>s, training trials,<br />
errors, <strong>and</strong> total training time required before<br />
criteria are met)? (3) What error patterns do<br />
the children show in the probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s? (4)<br />
Can the children who take the role of sufferers<br />
in the probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s acquire the first aid<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 89
skills by observing their peers? <strong>and</strong> (5) Are the<br />
findings of the research socially valid?<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
Participants were three children (two females<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e male) between the ages of nine <strong>and</strong><br />
14 who have intellectual disability. All of the<br />
children attended a unified special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
class in the same public elementary school.<br />
The children were expected to be able to<br />
accomplish the following prerequisite behaviors:<br />
(1) pay attenti<strong>on</strong> for at least 10 minutes,<br />
(2) imitate verbal <strong>and</strong> motor behaviors, <strong>and</strong><br />
(3) use a mouse or clicker. The researcher<br />
spoke to the class teacher beforeh<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
arranged an observati<strong>on</strong> time to determine<br />
whether the children were able to accomplish<br />
these behaviors. During the observati<strong>on</strong>s, the<br />
researcher determined that all of the children<br />
fulfilled the prerequisite behaviors. All of the<br />
children had systematic instructi<strong>on</strong> with video<br />
modeling before the study.<br />
Nesrin, age 9 years <strong>and</strong> 4 m<strong>on</strong>ths, was a<br />
female student with intellectual disability. She<br />
was a third grader in the unified special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
class <strong>and</strong> showed age-appropriate development<br />
in receptive language, expressive<br />
language, <strong>and</strong> gross <strong>and</strong> fine motor skills. She<br />
needed supportive educati<strong>on</strong> in social, daily<br />
life, <strong>and</strong> cognitive skills. She could count to<br />
100 in <strong>on</strong>es, twos, fives, <strong>and</strong> tens, <strong>and</strong> she<br />
could count backwards from 100 in <strong>on</strong>es. She<br />
could also add <strong>and</strong> do simple subtracti<strong>on</strong> with<br />
two-digit numbers. She could copy sentences<br />
by looking at them, <strong>and</strong> she could read sentences<br />
that were composed of the letters between<br />
A <strong>and</strong> O.<br />
Ferdi, age 13 years <strong>and</strong> 4 m<strong>on</strong>ths, was a<br />
male student with intellectual disability. He<br />
was a sixth grader in the unified special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
class <strong>and</strong> showed age-appropriate development<br />
in receptive language, expressive<br />
language, <strong>and</strong> gross <strong>and</strong> fine motor skills. He<br />
needed supportive educati<strong>on</strong> in social, daily<br />
life, <strong>and</strong> cognitive skills. He could count to<br />
100 in <strong>on</strong>es, twos, fives, <strong>and</strong> tens, <strong>and</strong> he could<br />
count backwards from 20 in <strong>on</strong>es. He could<br />
add two-digit numbers without carrying, <strong>and</strong><br />
he could read three-digit numbers independently.<br />
He could write down sentences that<br />
were spoken to him, <strong>and</strong> he could create sentences<br />
by himself. He could also recite the<br />
addresses of his home <strong>and</strong> school.<br />
Figen, age 13 years <strong>and</strong> 7 m<strong>on</strong>ths, was a<br />
female student with intellectual disability. She<br />
was a seventh grader in the unified special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> class. She was not competent in<br />
receptive language <strong>and</strong> expressive language<br />
skills, but she showed age-appropriate development<br />
in her gross <strong>and</strong> fine motor skills.<br />
She needed supportive educati<strong>on</strong> in social,<br />
daily life, <strong>and</strong> cognitive skills. She could count<br />
to 100 in <strong>on</strong>es, twos, fives, <strong>and</strong> tens, <strong>and</strong> she<br />
could count backwards from 50 in <strong>on</strong>es.<br />
She could add two three-digit numbers by<br />
carrying <strong>and</strong> subtract a two-digit number from<br />
another two-digit number, which required<br />
breaking tens. She could also identify the digits<br />
of two- <strong>and</strong> three-digit numbers <strong>and</strong> count<br />
in twos <strong>on</strong> the multiplicati<strong>on</strong> chart. She could<br />
write down sentences that she remembered<br />
from a paragraph she listened to or that she<br />
was told.<br />
Three additi<strong>on</strong>al children with intellectual<br />
disability, who were classmates of the participants,<br />
joined the study to play the role of<br />
sufferers. At the end of the study, probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were arranged to determine whether<br />
these children acquired the first aid skills simply<br />
by observing their friends, without having<br />
any further training. The characteristics of the<br />
children who joined the study as both participants<br />
<strong>and</strong> sufferers are shown in Table 1.<br />
Setting<br />
All sessi<strong>on</strong>s occurred (12:00–3:00 p.m.) three<br />
days per week, in a <strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
format. The training sessi<strong>on</strong>s were carried<br />
out in the guidance teacher’s room, which is<br />
near the students’ bathroom in the school <strong>and</strong><br />
measured 3 m 4 m. In the room, there was<br />
a desk, two office armchairs, <strong>on</strong>e bookcase,<br />
<strong>on</strong>e couch, <strong>and</strong> four guest armchairs appropriate<br />
to an office. An undergraduate student<br />
who studied special educati<strong>on</strong> was also in the<br />
room. During instructi<strong>on</strong>, a notebook computer<br />
with a mouse was placed in the middle<br />
of the desk, <strong>and</strong> the children <strong>and</strong> instructor<br />
sat side-by-side so they could both see the<br />
computer screen. In the full probe, probe,<br />
<strong>and</strong> maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s, a first aid kit was<br />
placed <strong>on</strong> the desk. The child who was being<br />
90 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 1<br />
Characteristics of Participants <strong>and</strong> Peers<br />
Participant Sex Age Grade Score Test<br />
Nesrin Female 9 y, 4 mo 3rd n/a n/a<br />
Ferdi Male 13 y, 4 mo 6th 51 Stanford Binet Intelligence Test<br />
26 Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test<br />
57 Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al Performance<br />
Scale<br />
Figen Female 13 y, 7mo 7th 51 Stanford Binet Intelligence Test<br />
Peer Sex Age Grade Score Test<br />
Arda Male 8 y, 4 mo 2nd n/a n/a<br />
Selin Female 9 y, 1 mo 2nd 43 Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al Performance<br />
Scale<br />
Belgin Female 13 y, 2 mo 6th 36 Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test<br />
55 Leiter Internati<strong>on</strong>al Performance<br />
Scale<br />
trained <strong>and</strong> the child who was playing the role<br />
of the sufferer stood next to each other while<br />
the instructor watched them from a distance.<br />
All sessi<strong>on</strong>s were recorded with a digital video<br />
camera.<br />
Materials<br />
First aid bag. A first aid kit with a Red<br />
Crescent symbol <strong>on</strong> it was used in the study.<br />
The kit c<strong>on</strong>tained the following items: two<br />
pairs of disposable gloves, two rolling b<strong>and</strong>ages,<br />
two units of sterile gauze cloths in two<br />
different sizes (5 cm 5 cm <strong>and</strong> 10 cm 10<br />
cm), two units of sticky cover dressing in three<br />
different sizes (5 cm 5 cm, 10 cm 10 cm,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 15 cm 15 cm), two units of adhesive<br />
b<strong>and</strong>ages in three different sizes (1 cm 4<br />
cm,3cm 3 cm, <strong>and</strong> 2 cm 5 cm), a paper<br />
plaster roller (30 m), five safety pins, blunttipped<br />
scissors, two plastic bags, paper, <strong>and</strong> a<br />
pen.<br />
Videos. Two videos, a peer modeling video<br />
<strong>and</strong> a self modeling video, were made for each<br />
child using the Windows Movie Maker program.<br />
The videos were made by recording<br />
the children as they performed two skill sets<br />
using instructi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> prompts. Then, new<br />
recordings were made by cutting/editing the<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> prompts in the videos. Thus,<br />
six videos (two for each child) were prepared.<br />
In order to help the children realize with<br />
which method the training was being made,<br />
the peer video began with the sentence “My<br />
friend is applying first aid for the bleeding/<br />
burn. I must watch him/her” appearing <strong>on</strong><br />
the screen, <strong>and</strong> the self-video began with the<br />
sentence “I’m doing first aid for the bleeding/<br />
burn. I must watch” appearing <strong>on</strong> the screen.<br />
In both videos, the sufferer who was bleeding<br />
or had a burn <strong>on</strong> part of his or her body then<br />
appeared. After the sufferer appeared, the<br />
video showed images of children carrying out<br />
the first aid steps for bleeding or burns. The<br />
children watched the video of their peers in<br />
the peer video modeling <strong>and</strong> their own images<br />
in the self-video modeling. Both the<br />
peer <strong>and</strong> self modeling videos included <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
<strong>on</strong>e trial. The videos lasted an average of<br />
three minutes for bleeding <strong>and</strong> eight minutes<br />
for burns. The videos portraying the first aid<br />
for burns lasted l<strong>on</strong>ger because the first aid<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>s required that the burnt body part<br />
be held underwater for four to five minutes.<br />
Bleedings <strong>and</strong> burns. In the study, makeup<br />
materials <strong>and</strong> paints with different features<br />
<strong>and</strong> colors were used to illustrate simple<br />
bleeding <strong>and</strong> burns. For bleeding, makeup<br />
was used to create a 1–2 cm l<strong>on</strong>g cut, <strong>and</strong> red<br />
paint was used for the blood. For the burns,<br />
makeup was used to create a pinkish-brown<br />
circle with a diameter of 2–3 cm. For bleeding,<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 91
TABLE 2<br />
Task Analysis of First Aid for Bleeding<br />
26 body parts, including right <strong>and</strong> left fingers,<br />
palms, upper parts of the h<strong>and</strong>s, wrists, forearms,<br />
elbows, upper arms, legs, <strong>and</strong> knees,<br />
were used. For burns, 22 body parts were used,<br />
including the same <strong>on</strong>es listed for bleeding,<br />
except the legs <strong>and</strong> knees. A video camera,<br />
notebook, <strong>and</strong> data collecti<strong>on</strong> forms were also<br />
used in the study.<br />
Task Analysis<br />
Researcher determined the skills (first aid for<br />
simple bleeding <strong>and</strong> burn) with the children’s<br />
classroom teacher by c<strong>on</strong>sidering the Individualized<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Plans (IEPs) of the children.<br />
Before starting her undergraduate educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the researcher completed four years of<br />
nursing educati<strong>on</strong>, after which she served as a<br />
nurse for four years in various health establishments.<br />
Relying <strong>on</strong> her professi<strong>on</strong>al experiences<br />
<strong>and</strong> the teaching materials entitled “Re-<br />
First Aid for Bleeding<br />
1. He/she tells his/her friend “Take it easy, I will help you.”<br />
2. He/she opens the first aid kit.<br />
3. He/she takes out a pair of disposable gloves.<br />
4. He/she puts <strong>on</strong> the gloves.<br />
5. He/she takes the sterile gauze cloth packet <strong>and</strong> scissors out of the first aid kit.<br />
6. He/she cuts open the sterile gauze cloth packet.<br />
7. He/she puts the scissors <strong>on</strong> the table.<br />
8. He/she takes <strong>on</strong>e of the sterile gauze cloths out of the packet without touching it with his/her h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
9. He/she puts the sterile gauze cloth down <strong>on</strong> the bleeding part.<br />
10. He/she takes the other sterile gauze cloth out of the packet without touching it with his/her h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
11. He/she puts the sec<strong>on</strong>d sterile gauze cloth down <strong>on</strong> the bleeding part.<br />
12. He/she takes out the cover dressing that is the appropriate size.<br />
*He/she takes out the roller plaster.<br />
13. He/she takes the scissors in his/her other h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
14. He/she cuts open the packet of the cover dressing.<br />
*He/she cuts the roller plaster to an appropriate length.<br />
15. He/she puts the scissors in the first aid kit.<br />
16. He/she takes the cover dressing out of the packet.<br />
17. He/she opens the cover dressing by pulling its h<strong>and</strong>les.<br />
18. He/she takes the sticky b<strong>and</strong>age behind the plaster off.<br />
19. He/she sticks the cover dressing <strong>on</strong> the sterile gauze cloth.<br />
*He/she sticks the plaster <strong>on</strong> the cover dressing.<br />
20. He/she raises the bleeding part above the sufferer’s heart level.<br />
21. He/she takes the gloves off.<br />
22. He/she asks for help from an adult.<br />
* Functi<strong>on</strong>ally equivalent step<br />
liable Behavior <strong>and</strong> First Aid Training,” which<br />
were created for children between the ages<br />
of 6 <strong>and</strong> 14 by the Turkish Red Crescent (www.<br />
kizilay.org.tr), the researcher created two<br />
skills analyses for use in the study. After she<br />
developed the initial skills analyses, they were<br />
reviewed by a nurse <strong>and</strong> a health technician,<br />
who had served in an emergency room for at<br />
least 10 years. In light of their opini<strong>on</strong>s, she<br />
altered the analyses <strong>and</strong> created the final versi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
shown in Tables 2 <strong>and</strong> 3.<br />
Procedure<br />
Baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Before the training, baseline<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s were arranged to determine the<br />
performances of the children regarding the<br />
first aid skills. Before the baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
the researcher prepared simulated bleeding<br />
or burns <strong>on</strong> the sufferer-peers <strong>and</strong> told the<br />
peers to act as if the wounds were real. During<br />
92 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 3<br />
Task Analysis of First Aid for Burns<br />
the sessi<strong>on</strong>, the researcher presented the target<br />
stimulus to the child who was going to be<br />
trained, saying, “Your friend’s arm is bleeding./Your<br />
friend’s arm has a burn. Give first<br />
aid to him/her” <strong>and</strong> then walking away in<br />
order to watch the child’s resp<strong>on</strong>se. The researcher<br />
waited for 10 sec<strong>on</strong>ds for the child to<br />
start the first step.<br />
When the child carried out the first step<br />
correctly, the researcher marked a plus ()<br />
sign <strong>on</strong> the data collecti<strong>on</strong> sheet, reinforced<br />
the child verbally, <strong>and</strong> observed the child to<br />
see whether he or she started the next step<br />
within 10 sec<strong>on</strong>ds. If the child did not carry<br />
out the first step of the skill correctly or did<br />
not resp<strong>on</strong>d within 10 sec<strong>on</strong>ds, the researcher<br />
First Aid for Burns<br />
1. He/she tells his/her friend “Take it easy, I will help you.”<br />
2. He/she opens the first aid kit.<br />
3. He/she takes out a pair of disposable gloves.<br />
4. He/she puts <strong>on</strong> the gloves.<br />
5. He/she takes the sterile gauze cloth packet <strong>and</strong> scissors out of the first aid kit.<br />
6. He/she cuts open the packet of sterile gauze cloth.<br />
7. He/she puts the scissors <strong>on</strong> the table.<br />
8. He/she takes <strong>on</strong>e of the sterile gauze cloths out of the packet without touching it with his/her h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
9. He/she takes his/her friend to the bathroom.<br />
10. He/she turns <strong>on</strong> the faucet so the water is flowing at a low pressure.<br />
11. He/she holds the burnt part under the flowing water.<br />
12. He/she counts to 100 twice.<br />
*He/she waits for four minutes.<br />
13. He/she wets the gauze cloth in his/her h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
14. He/she turns off the tap.<br />
15. He/she puts the wet gauze cloth <strong>on</strong> the burnt part.<br />
16. He/she takes his/her friend back to the original setting.<br />
17. He/she takes out the cover dressing that is the appropriate size.<br />
*He/she takes out the roller plaster.<br />
18. He/she takes the scissors in his/her other h<strong>and</strong>.<br />
19. He/she cuts open the packet of the cover dressing.<br />
*He/she cuts the roller plaster to an appropriate length.<br />
20. He/she puts the scissors <strong>on</strong> the table.<br />
21. He/she takes the cover dressing out of the packet.<br />
22. He/she opens the cover dressing by pulling its h<strong>and</strong>les.<br />
*He/she takes the adhesive b<strong>and</strong>age behind the plaster off.<br />
23. He/she sticks the cover dressing <strong>on</strong> the gauze cloth.<br />
*He/she sticks the plaster <strong>on</strong> the cover dressing.<br />
24. He/she takes his/her gloves off.<br />
25. He/she asks for help from an adult.<br />
* Functi<strong>on</strong>ally equivalent step<br />
marked a negative () sign <strong>on</strong> the data collecti<strong>on</strong><br />
sheet <strong>and</strong> ended the sessi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Post-video-creati<strong>on</strong> probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were arranged after the videos were<br />
made for each child <strong>and</strong> each skill to determine<br />
whether the learning took place. These<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s were arranged like the baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Training sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During the training sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
a laptop computer was placed in the<br />
middle of the desk, the child sat in fr<strong>on</strong>t of the<br />
computer, <strong>and</strong> the researcher sat next to the<br />
child. The researcher turned <strong>on</strong> the computer<br />
<strong>and</strong> then asked the child if he or she was ready<br />
(“Are you ready?”). After receiving an affirmative<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>se, the researcher told the child to<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 93
TABLE 4<br />
Participants, Procedures, <strong>and</strong> Skills<br />
start the video (“Click <strong>on</strong> the video ic<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
start.”). After the child clicked <strong>on</strong> the video<br />
ic<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> started the video, the researcher<br />
presented the target stimulus (“Please, watch<br />
the video carefully.”). When the child asked<br />
a questi<strong>on</strong> while watching the video, the researcher<br />
answered it. If the child began to pay<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong> to something else, the researcher<br />
redirected him or her to the video. At the end<br />
of each sessi<strong>on</strong>, the child’s participati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
cooperati<strong>on</strong> behaviors were reinforced verbally.<br />
The teaching methods, peer video modeling,<br />
<strong>and</strong> self-video modeling were defined<br />
r<strong>and</strong>omly for each child <strong>and</strong> each skill. The<br />
distributi<strong>on</strong> of the methods according to the<br />
children <strong>and</strong> the skills are shown in Table 4.<br />
The training process was the same for both<br />
the peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling. The <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
difference between the two methods is that<br />
the model in the videos was either the child’s<br />
peer or the child. In peer video modeling, the<br />
children watched their peers doing the skill,<br />
<strong>and</strong> in self-video modeling, they watched<br />
themselves doing the skill. The training sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinued until the children showed a<br />
100% correct resp<strong>on</strong>se in three subsequent<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During the study, probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were arranged after every training sessi<strong>on</strong><br />
to determine whether the children learned<br />
the skill being taught. The probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s were<br />
carried out using a format similar to the baseline<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Generalizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Because<br />
sufficient stimulus exemplars were used<br />
in the research to ensure the generalizability<br />
of the results, other generalizati<strong>on</strong> sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were not included (Westling & Fox, 2004).<br />
As cited in Westling <strong>and</strong> Fox, to increase the<br />
generalizability, Stokes <strong>and</strong> Osnes (1988) recommended<br />
varying the materials, setting,<br />
Skills <strong>and</strong> Procedures<br />
Participant First Aid for Bleeding First Aid for Burns<br />
Nesrin Self video modeling Peer video modeling<br />
Ferdi Peer video modeling Self video modeling<br />
Figen Peer video modeling Self video modeling<br />
<strong>and</strong> pers<strong>on</strong>s in the training process. Thus, in<br />
this research, the researcher tried to increase<br />
the generalizability by varying the peers that<br />
played the role of sufferers, the body parts<br />
where the bleeding <strong>and</strong> burns existed, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
first aid materials used.<br />
Follow-up sessi<strong>on</strong>s were c<strong>on</strong>ducted to determine<br />
at what level the children maintained<br />
the skills they had gained after the training<br />
was over. The follow-up sessi<strong>on</strong>s were arranged<br />
<strong>on</strong>e or two weeks after the training finished;<br />
a l<strong>on</strong>ger follow-up period could not be used<br />
due to the summer break. The follow-up sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were arranged in a format similar to the<br />
baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s but reinforcements were withdrawn.<br />
At the end of each sessi<strong>on</strong>, students’<br />
participati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> cooperati<strong>on</strong> behaviors were<br />
reinforced verbally.<br />
Observati<strong>on</strong>al learning sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Observati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
learning sessi<strong>on</strong>s were c<strong>on</strong>ducted before <strong>and</strong><br />
after the training to determine whether the<br />
children who played the role of sufferers acquired<br />
the target behaviors by observing their<br />
peers carrying out the first aid skills <strong>on</strong> them.<br />
Whether learning by observing took place was<br />
tested via pre-test post-test manner. One sessi<strong>on</strong><br />
was arranged for each child who had<br />
played the role of the sufferer <strong>and</strong> for each<br />
skill. They were c<strong>on</strong>ducted using the same<br />
format as the baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s. In these sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
the children who were trained took over<br />
the role of the sufferer.<br />
Experimental Design<br />
The dependent variable of the research was<br />
the percentage of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses regarding<br />
the first aid skills for bleeding <strong>and</strong> burns; the<br />
independent variables were peer <strong>and</strong> selfvideo<br />
modeling. An adapted alternating treatments<br />
design was used to compare the effects<br />
94 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
of the peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling in teaching<br />
first aid skills (Holcombe, Wolery, & Gast,<br />
1994; Sindelar, Rosenberg, & Wils<strong>on</strong>, 1985;<br />
Tekin-Iftar & Kircaali-Iftar, 2004) <strong>and</strong> was replicated<br />
across the three subjects. In the study,<br />
multiple procedures were covered in <strong>on</strong>e<br />
day. One of them was d<strong>on</strong>e at no<strong>on</strong> (12:00–<br />
1:00 p.m.), <strong>and</strong> the other was d<strong>on</strong>e in the<br />
afterno<strong>on</strong> (2:00–3:00 p.m.). The order of procedures<br />
was r<strong>and</strong>omly chosen, <strong>and</strong> the procedures<br />
were performed in equal numbers in a<br />
balanced way. The experimental c<strong>on</strong>trol occurred<br />
when the change that the level of an<br />
dependent variable had <strong>on</strong> its affiliated independent<br />
variable happened faster than the<br />
change that the level of the dependent variable<br />
had <strong>on</strong> the other independent variable<br />
(Tekin-Iftar & Kircaali-Iftar, 2004).<br />
Reliability<br />
Inter-observer agreement <strong>and</strong> procedural reliability<br />
data were collected for each child<br />
<strong>and</strong> each c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> in at least 30% of the<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Inter-observer agreement was calculated<br />
using the point by point method (Tekin-<br />
Iftar & Kircaali-Iftar, 2004). The number of<br />
agreements was divided by the number of<br />
agreements plus disagreements multiplied by<br />
100. The percentage of agreement for all children<br />
for all situati<strong>on</strong>s was 100%.<br />
Procedural reliability was calculated by dividing<br />
the number of instructor behaviors<br />
observed by the number of planned instructor<br />
behaviors multiplied by 100 (Billingsley, White,<br />
& Muns<strong>on</strong>, 1980). Procedural reliability was<br />
measured in the baseline, post-video-creati<strong>on</strong><br />
probe, probe, <strong>and</strong> maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s regarding<br />
the following behaviors: (1) getting<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong>, (2) giving target stimuli, (3) resp<strong>on</strong>se-time<br />
interval, (4) reinforcing verbally,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (5) terminating the sessi<strong>on</strong>. Procedural<br />
reliability was 97% for baseline <strong>and</strong> post-videocreati<strong>on</strong><br />
probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s, 90% for probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 100% for maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Procedural reliability was measured in the<br />
training sessi<strong>on</strong>s regarding the following behaviors:<br />
(1) getting attenti<strong>on</strong>, (2) starting the<br />
training video or telling the child to start the<br />
video, (3) giving instructi<strong>on</strong> for watching,<br />
(4) reinforcing the child for watching the<br />
video when necessary, (5) reinforcing participati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> (6) terminating the sessi<strong>on</strong>. Pro-<br />
cedural reliability was 88% for training sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Social Validati<strong>on</strong><br />
In order to determine the social validity of<br />
the research findings, the performances of<br />
the children regarding the skills were evaluated<br />
by two nurses, <strong>on</strong>e of whom served <strong>on</strong> the<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al Medical Rescue Team. To determine<br />
social validity, a grading scale was created with<br />
three opti<strong>on</strong>s—“acceptable,” “unacceptable,”<br />
<strong>and</strong> “undecided”—opposite each step in the<br />
skill analyses. The videos of the sessi<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
which the children met the criteria in both<br />
analyses were given to the nurses <strong>on</strong> a CD. The<br />
nurses were asked to watch the videos <strong>and</strong><br />
then to grade each of the skill steps in terms of<br />
their fulfillment, order, <strong>and</strong> time.<br />
Results<br />
Effectiveness Data<br />
Figures 1, 2, <strong>and</strong> 3 show the percentage of<br />
correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for Nesrin, Ferdi, <strong>and</strong><br />
Figen in the baseline, post-video-creati<strong>on</strong><br />
probe, probe, <strong>and</strong> maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s. The<br />
data show that both the peer <strong>and</strong> the selfvideo<br />
modeling are equally effective in teaching<br />
the first aid skills for simple bleeding <strong>and</strong><br />
burns to children with disabilities. That is, the<br />
three children who participated in the study<br />
acquired the first aid skills for both bleeding<br />
<strong>and</strong> burns at a level of 100%. All of the children<br />
failed to carry out the skills in the baseline<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s (0%), but after the peer <strong>and</strong><br />
self-video modeling were completed, the children<br />
performed the criteria at a level of 100%,<br />
which they maintained in the maintenance<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
The effect sizes of the methods were also<br />
calculated using the percentage of n<strong>on</strong>overlapping<br />
data (PND) <strong>and</strong> the percentage<br />
of data points exceeding the mean (PEM).<br />
The results of these calculati<strong>on</strong>s are shown in<br />
Table 5. For Nesrin, both of the methods were<br />
highly effective according to the PND <strong>and</strong><br />
PEM calculati<strong>on</strong>s. As for Ferdi <strong>and</strong> Figen,<br />
both methods were effective according to the<br />
PND calculati<strong>on</strong>s; according to the PEM calculati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
both methods were moderately effective<br />
(Ma, 2006; Olive & Franco, 2007;<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 95
Figure 1. Percentage of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for Nesrin. Note: SVM Self-video Modeling PVM Peer Video<br />
Modeling<br />
Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1998, 2001; Scruggs,<br />
Mastropieri, Cook, & Escobar, 1986). The results<br />
of the calculati<strong>on</strong>s made to determine<br />
the effect sizes show that there is not an important<br />
difference between the two methods<br />
in terms of their effectiveness.<br />
Figure 2. Percentage of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for Ferdi. Note: SVM Self-video Modeling PVM Peer Video<br />
Modeling<br />
96 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 3. Percentage of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for Figen. Note: SVM Self-video Modeling PVM Peer Video<br />
Modeling<br />
Efficiency Data<br />
For peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling, the data<br />
regarding number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s, number of errors,<br />
<strong>and</strong> total training time required until<br />
the criteria were met are shown in Table 6.<br />
The efficiency data are complex. For peer<br />
video modeling, the total number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
carried out before all the children met the criteria<br />
was 24; for self-video modeling, it was 23.<br />
The total number of errors committed by the<br />
children before the criteria were met was 15 in<br />
peer video modeling <strong>and</strong> 13 in self-video<br />
TABLE 5<br />
PND <strong>and</strong> PEM Scores of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self Video<br />
Modeling<br />
Participants<br />
Peer Video<br />
Modeling<br />
Self Video<br />
Modeling<br />
PND PEM PND PEM<br />
Nesrin 100% 1 100% 1<br />
Ferdi 89% .89 83% .83<br />
Figen 89% .89 89% .89<br />
modeling. Although peer video modeling was<br />
more efficient for Nesrin, self-video modeling<br />
was more efficient for Ferdi in terms of the<br />
total number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s carried out <strong>and</strong> the<br />
errors made before the criteria were met. As<br />
for Figen, there was no difference between<br />
the two methods in terms of the total number<br />
of sessi<strong>on</strong>s carried out <strong>and</strong> the errors made<br />
before the criteria were met. Before the criteria<br />
were met, the children spent a total of 3<br />
hours, 38 minutes, <strong>and</strong> 47 sec<strong>on</strong>ds in peer<br />
video modeling training <strong>and</strong> 4 hours, 42 minutes,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 49 sec<strong>on</strong>ds in self-video modeling<br />
training. Peer video modeling seemed to be<br />
more efficient than self-video modeling in<br />
terms of the total time spent <strong>on</strong> training before<br />
the criteria were met.<br />
Error Pattern Analysis<br />
The errors made by all of the children before<br />
the criteria were met for peer <strong>and</strong> selfvideo<br />
modeling are shown in Table 7. Sixteen<br />
errors were made during <strong>on</strong>ly six of the<br />
22 steps of first aid skills for bleeding. For<br />
burns, 12 errors were made during <strong>on</strong>ly six<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 97
TABLE 6<br />
Efficiency Data<br />
Participant Procedure Skill<br />
of the 25 steps of the first aid skills. It is<br />
worth noting that, of the errors that occurred<br />
during the first aid skills for bleeding,<br />
10 of the 16 mistakes were sequential<br />
errors, five were topographical errors, <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong>e was a time error. Of the errors that<br />
occurred during first aid skills for burns,<br />
eight of the 12 were topographical errors,<br />
Number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
required to<br />
meet criteria<br />
Number of errors<br />
made before<br />
meeting criteria<br />
Training time<br />
required to meet<br />
criteria (h:min:s)<br />
Nesrin *PVM Burns 6 3 01:34:<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
**SVM Bleeding 8 4 00:56:33<br />
Ferdi PVM Bleeding 9 63 01:00:36<br />
SVM Burns 6 3 01:31:27<br />
Figen PVM Bleeding 9 6 01:03:23<br />
SVM Burns 9 6 02:14:49<br />
* PVM Peer Video Modeling<br />
** SVM Self Video Modeling<br />
TABLE 7<br />
Error Patterns for Children during Probe Sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Step of<br />
task<br />
analysis*<br />
Number<br />
of errors<br />
Participants<br />
three were sequential errors, <strong>and</strong> <strong>on</strong>e was a<br />
time error. For first aid skills for bleeding,<br />
the greatest number of errors was made during<br />
the 20th step, “raise the bleeding part<br />
above the sufferer’s heart level.” For first aid<br />
skills for burns, the greatest number of errors<br />
was made during the ninth step, “taking<br />
the friend to the bathroom.”<br />
Nesrin Ferdi Figen<br />
Type of<br />
error<br />
Number<br />
of errors<br />
Type of<br />
error<br />
Number<br />
of errors<br />
Type of<br />
error<br />
Bleeding<br />
1 1 Durati<strong>on</strong> 1 Sequence 2<br />
4 1 Topographic 1<br />
5 1 Topographic 1<br />
9 1 Topographic 1 Topographic 2<br />
10 1 Topographic 1 Sequence 2<br />
20 2 Sequence 3 Sequence 3 Sequence 8<br />
Total 4 6 6 16<br />
Burns<br />
1 1 Durati<strong>on</strong> 1 Sequence 2<br />
4 1 Topographic 1<br />
8 1 Topographic 1<br />
9 2 Sequence 1 Topographic 3 Topographic 6<br />
13 1 Topographic 1<br />
14 1 Topographic 1<br />
Total 3 3 6 12<br />
* Only steps during which an error was made are shown.<br />
98 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013<br />
Total
Observati<strong>on</strong>al Learning<br />
While the children who played the role of<br />
sufferers <strong>and</strong> were not trained in any way performed<br />
at 0% in both skill sets in the probe<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s c<strong>on</strong>ducted before the study, they performed<br />
at a level of 100% in the probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
c<strong>on</strong>ducted after the training. According<br />
to these findings, the three children who<br />
played the role of sufferers acquired both skill<br />
sets by <strong>on</strong>ly observing their peers.<br />
Social Validati<strong>on</strong><br />
The nurses who evaluated the social validity of<br />
the research findings reported generally positive<br />
opini<strong>on</strong>s regarding the acceptability of<br />
the skill steps in terms of their topography,<br />
sequence, <strong>and</strong> durati<strong>on</strong>. One of the nurses<br />
found 23 of the 25 steps completed by Nesrin<br />
regarding first aid skills for burns acceptable,<br />
<strong>and</strong> the other <strong>on</strong>e found 25 steps acceptable.<br />
As for the steps for first aid skills for<br />
bleeding, <strong>on</strong>e nurse found 19 of the 22 steps<br />
acceptable, <strong>and</strong> the other <strong>on</strong>e found 21 steps<br />
acceptable. For Ferdi, <strong>on</strong>e of the nurses found<br />
23 of the 25 steps he completed regarding<br />
first aid skills for burns acceptable, while the<br />
other <strong>on</strong>e found 24 steps acceptable. For first<br />
aid skills for bleeding, <strong>on</strong>e of the nurses found<br />
17 of the 22 steps acceptable, <strong>and</strong> the other<br />
found 18 steps acceptable. For Figen, <strong>on</strong>e of<br />
the nurses found 25 of the 25 steps she completed<br />
regarding first aid skills for burns acceptable;<br />
the nurse also found 21 of the 22<br />
steps for first aid skills for bleeding acceptable.<br />
The other nurse found all of the steps<br />
completed by Figen to be acceptable for both<br />
skill sets.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
The aim of this research was to determine<br />
the difference between peer <strong>and</strong> self-video<br />
modeling in terms of effectiveness <strong>and</strong> efficiency<br />
in teaching first aid skills with sufficient<br />
exemplars to children with intellectual disability.<br />
The study also aimed to determine the<br />
error patterns made during probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
whether the children who took <strong>on</strong> the role of<br />
sufferers acquired the first aid skills by observing<br />
their peers, <strong>and</strong> whether the research findings<br />
have social validity. In light of the data<br />
gained from the research, the following c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
can be drawn.<br />
First, in teaching first aid skills to children<br />
with intellectual disability, peer <strong>and</strong> self-video<br />
modeling were found to be equally effective<br />
in the phases of acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> maintenance.<br />
This finding is c<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous research<br />
findings regarding the effectiveness<br />
of peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling (Bidwell &<br />
Rehfeldt, 2004; Rehfeldt et al., 2003; Wert &<br />
Neiswoth, 2003). While the findings are c<strong>on</strong>sistent<br />
with research that compared peer <strong>and</strong><br />
self modeling in terms of effectiveness (Sherer<br />
et al., 2001), they differ from another study<br />
that found self-video modeling was superior<br />
to peer video modeling (Marcus & Wilder,<br />
2009). The latter two previous studies both<br />
focused <strong>on</strong> discrete behaviors taught to children<br />
with autism using children with normal<br />
development as models. This research aimed<br />
at teaching linked behaviors to children with<br />
intellectual disability using peers with intellectual<br />
disability as models. Therefore, due to<br />
these differences in the research, this study<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tributes to the current literature.<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, it is difficult to determine whether<br />
peer or self-video modeling is more efficient<br />
based <strong>on</strong> the findings. In terms of the total<br />
number of sessi<strong>on</strong>s carried out <strong>and</strong> the number<br />
of errors made before the children met<br />
the criteria, peer video modeling was more<br />
efficient for <strong>on</strong>e child, but self-video modeling<br />
was more efficient for another child, <strong>and</strong><br />
there was no difference between the two<br />
methods in terms of efficiency for the third<br />
child. It is possible to state that peer video<br />
modeling seems more efficient than self-video<br />
modeling in terms of the total time spent in<br />
training before the criteria were met, but this<br />
difference between the two methods is really<br />
based <strong>on</strong> the difference between the times<br />
required to accomplish each skill. The first aid<br />
skills for burns lasted five minutes l<strong>on</strong>ger than<br />
the first aid skills for bleeding because the<br />
burnt part must be held underwater for four<br />
to five minutes. Therefore, it is not appropriate<br />
to state this difference between the methods<br />
is a reflecti<strong>on</strong> of their efficiency. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
in both skills, the children spent a l<strong>on</strong>g<br />
time <strong>on</strong> the step in which they had to put <strong>on</strong><br />
disposable gloves, which led to l<strong>on</strong>ger total<br />
times. Although the previous studies did not<br />
include a step in which children with disabil-<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 99
ities were required to put <strong>on</strong> disposable<br />
gloves, it is important that those providing<br />
first aid protect their own lives by putting <strong>on</strong><br />
disposable gloves before beginning first aid, as<br />
recommended by health specialists (www.ilkyardim.org.tr).<br />
While <strong>on</strong>e of the nurses whose<br />
social validity data was collected found that<br />
using gloves was necessary, the other stated<br />
that using gloves before attending to simple<br />
bleeding <strong>and</strong> burns was not necessary <strong>and</strong> that<br />
the children took a l<strong>on</strong>g time to put <strong>on</strong> the<br />
gloves.<br />
Third, during the probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s, the errors<br />
made by the children generally centered <strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong>e step for each skill, <strong>and</strong> the types of errors<br />
mostly c<strong>on</strong>sisted of sequential <strong>and</strong> topographical<br />
errors. In this research, most of the time,<br />
the children made a sequential error by skipping<br />
to the next step <strong>and</strong> forgetting to raise<br />
the bleeding part above the sufferer’s heart<br />
level. They made a topographical error by<br />
failing to correctly carry out the step of taking<br />
the friend to the bathroom in order to<br />
hold the burn underwater. In the research<br />
carried out by March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, Martella,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Agran (1992) <strong>and</strong> Gast <strong>and</strong> Winterling<br />
(1992), the children generally made topographical<br />
or sequential errors but almost no<br />
time errors. Therefore, the findings of this<br />
research are c<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous research.<br />
A training program c<strong>on</strong>sidering the steps at<br />
which the errors were comm<strong>on</strong>ly made may<br />
be recommended to instructors <strong>and</strong> parents<br />
working in this field.<br />
Fourth, the three children who took the<br />
role of sufferers acquired both sets of first aid<br />
skills by <strong>on</strong>ly observing their peer. This finding<br />
supports other research findings that<br />
showed first aid skills are learned by observing<br />
(Christensen et al., 1996; Timko & Sainato,<br />
1999). In previous research, the participants<br />
watched the complete training process. However,<br />
in the current research, the children<br />
who played the role of sufferers did not watch<br />
the training process in any way; they <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
took part in the probe sessi<strong>on</strong>s in which their<br />
peers carried out first aid skills <strong>on</strong> them.<br />
Therefore, the research c<strong>on</strong>tributes to the<br />
current literature regarding observati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
learning. Instructors <strong>and</strong> parents in the field<br />
are recommended to make as many observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
as possible regarding the skills they want<br />
to teach to children.<br />
Fifth, the social validity of the findings was<br />
evaluated by two nurses, who found the social<br />
validity of the findings was high. The social<br />
validity findings are also c<strong>on</strong>sistent with previous<br />
research findings (Gast & Winterling,<br />
1992; Timko & Sainato, 1999). The social validity<br />
of the training purposes is high because<br />
the skills for which the students received training<br />
were selected from the skills included in<br />
their IEPs.<br />
Moreover, making the peer <strong>and</strong> self modeling<br />
videos was easier <strong>and</strong> took less than time<br />
the instructor expected. In additi<strong>on</strong>, the instructor<br />
applied both methods with a high<br />
reliability <strong>and</strong> ease. Therefore, these methods<br />
may be comfortably used by parents, teachers,<br />
or teacher c<strong>and</strong>idates to teach most of the<br />
skills.<br />
These findings should be interpreted by<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidering the following limitati<strong>on</strong>s. First,<br />
the processes for carrying out the two sets of<br />
first aid skills were quite different from <strong>on</strong>e<br />
another. The first aid skills for burns lasted<br />
four to five minutes l<strong>on</strong>ger than the first aid<br />
skills for bleeding. This situati<strong>on</strong> prevented<br />
a comparis<strong>on</strong> of the efficiencies of the two<br />
modeling methods in terms of training time<br />
spent before the criteria were met. This may<br />
be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a limitati<strong>on</strong>. Sec<strong>on</strong>d, adapted<br />
alternating treatments may include <strong>on</strong>ly the<br />
baseline <strong>and</strong> comparis<strong>on</strong> phases, <strong>on</strong>ly the<br />
comparis<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> better treatment phases, or<br />
ideally, <strong>on</strong>ly the comparis<strong>on</strong> phase (Holcombe,<br />
Wolery, & Gast, 1994). However, in this research,<br />
baseline, comparis<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> maintenance<br />
phases took place, baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were not returned to again or with better<br />
treatment, <strong>and</strong> the applicati<strong>on</strong> was sustained.<br />
This may also be assessed as a limitati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Third, the researcher tried to ensure the social<br />
validity of the instructi<strong>on</strong> objective, <strong>and</strong><br />
the social validity of the research findings was<br />
subjectively assessed. Although it was observed<br />
anecdotally that the children who participated<br />
in the study generally liked the self-video modeling<br />
better, any systematic data regarding<br />
the social validity of the methods applied to<br />
the children were not collected. This situati<strong>on</strong><br />
may be a limitati<strong>on</strong> for the comparis<strong>on</strong> of the<br />
two methods. Fourth, while the study used<br />
peers with characteristics similar to the children<br />
who took part in the study for the peer<br />
video modeling, it did not c<strong>on</strong>sider peer pref-<br />
100 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
erences when choosing the peers. In the literature,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidering peer preferences is recommended<br />
when using peer video modeling.<br />
Therefore, this situati<strong>on</strong> may also be seen as a<br />
limitati<strong>on</strong>. Fifth, owing to the fact that the<br />
setting in which the training was carried out<br />
was not suitable, the steps in the first aid skill<br />
set for burns regarding taking the sterile<br />
gauze cloth out in the first place <strong>and</strong> holding<br />
the burn underwater took place in a different<br />
order than they would in daily life. This can<br />
also be seen as an important limitati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Based <strong>on</strong> these findings <strong>and</strong> limitati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
some recommendati<strong>on</strong>s for future research<br />
may be made. The repetiti<strong>on</strong> of this research<br />
with different participants, teaching different<br />
skills, <strong>and</strong> by different researchers is recommended.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, research should be c<strong>on</strong>ducted<br />
in which peer <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling<br />
are compared for teaching two skills that take<br />
the same amount of time to complete. In this<br />
research, the children who took the role of<br />
sufferers learned the skills <strong>on</strong>ly by observing<br />
their peers. Future research could study the<br />
effectiveness of training a small group in<br />
which the participants are both the first aid<br />
practiti<strong>on</strong>ers <strong>and</strong> the sufferers. In additi<strong>on</strong>, in<br />
future research, social validity data regarding<br />
the methods should be collected directly from<br />
the participants. For peer video modeling, research<br />
should also be designed in which the<br />
peers are chosen based <strong>on</strong> peer preferences.<br />
Research studies in which wearing gloves is<br />
not a step in the first aid process could also be<br />
designed.<br />
References<br />
Bahadir, G. B., Oral, A., & Guven, A. (2011). Cocukluk<br />
cagi travmalari ve <strong>on</strong>lenmesinde koruyucu<br />
hekimligin rolu. [The role of preventive medicine<br />
in childhood trauma.] TAF Preventive Medicine<br />
Bulletin, 10, 243–250.<br />
B<strong>and</strong>ura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmissi<strong>on</strong><br />
of aggressi<strong>on</strong> through imitati<strong>on</strong> of aggressive<br />
models. Journal of Abnormal <strong>and</strong> Social Psychology,<br />
63, 575–582.<br />
Bidwell, M. A., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2004). Using video<br />
modeling to teach a domestic skill with an embedded<br />
social skill to adults with severe mental<br />
retardati<strong>on</strong>. Behavioral Interventi<strong>on</strong>, 19, 263–274.<br />
Billingsley, F., White, O. R., & Muns<strong>on</strong>, R. (1980).<br />
Procedural reliability: A rati<strong>on</strong>ale <strong>and</strong> an example.<br />
Behavioral Assessment, 2, 229–241.<br />
Buggey, T., Toombs, K., Gardener, P., & Cervetti, M.<br />
(1999). Training resp<strong>on</strong>ding behaviors in students<br />
with autism: Using videotaped self-modeling.<br />
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventi<strong>on</strong>s, 1,<br />
205–214.<br />
Christensen, A. M., Lignugaris-Kraft, B., & Fiechtl,<br />
B. J. (1996). Teaching pairs of preschoolers with<br />
disabilities to seek adult assistance in resp<strong>on</strong>se to<br />
simulated injuries: Acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> promoti<strong>on</strong> of<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>al learning. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Treatment of<br />
Children, 19, 3–18.<br />
Christensen, A. M., March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N. E., Martella,<br />
R. C., Fiechtl, B. J., & Christensen, B. R.<br />
(1993). Teaching preschoolers with disabilities<br />
to seek adult assistance in resp<strong>on</strong>se to simulated<br />
injuries. Journal of Behavioral Educati<strong>on</strong>, 3, 109–<br />
123.<br />
Collins, B. C., Wolery, M., & Gast, D. L. (1992). A<br />
nati<strong>on</strong>al survey of safety c<strong>on</strong>cerns for students<br />
with special needs. Journal of <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Physical <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 4, 263–276.<br />
Dowrick, P. W. (1999). A review of self modeling<br />
<strong>and</strong> related interventi<strong>on</strong>s. Applied <strong>and</strong> Preventative<br />
Psychology, 8, 23–39.<br />
Gast, D. L., & Winterling, V. (1992). Teaching first<br />
aid skills to students with moderate h<strong>and</strong>icaps in<br />
small group instructi<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Treatment<br />
of Children, 15, 101–125.<br />
Haring, T. G., Kennedy, C. H., Adams, M. J., &<br />
Pitts-C<strong>on</strong>way, V. (1987). Teaching generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
of purchasing skills across community settings to<br />
autistic youth using videotape modeling. Journal<br />
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 89–96.<br />
Holcombe, A., Wolery, M., & Gast, D. L. (1994).<br />
Comparative single subject research: Descripti<strong>on</strong><br />
of designs <strong>and</strong> discussi<strong>on</strong> of problems. Topics in<br />
Early Childhood <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 16, 168–190.<br />
Ma, H. H. (2006). An alternative method for quantitative<br />
synthesis of single-subject researches percentage<br />
of data points exceeding the median.<br />
Behavior Modificati<strong>on</strong>, 30, 598–617.<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N. E., & Martella, R. C. (1990).<br />
The acquisiti<strong>on</strong>, maintenance, <strong>and</strong> generalizati<strong>on</strong><br />
of first-aid skills by youths with h<strong>and</strong>icaps. Behavioral<br />
Residential Treatment, 5, 221–237.<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Agran,<br />
M., Salzberg, C. L., Young, K. R., & Morgan, D.<br />
(1992). Generalized effects of a peer-delivered<br />
first aid program for students with moderate intellectual<br />
disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior<br />
Analysis, 25, 841–851.<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Christensen,<br />
A. M., Agran, M., & Young, K. R. (1992a).<br />
Teaching a first aid skill to students with disabilities<br />
using two training programs. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Treatment of Children, 15, 15–31.<br />
March<strong>and</strong>-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Christensen,<br />
A. M., Agran, M., & Young, K. R. (1992b).<br />
Comparis<strong>on</strong> of Peer <strong>and</strong> Self-video Modeling / 101
Assessing the durati<strong>on</strong> of first-aid treatments by<br />
elementary-aged students with disabilities. Child<br />
<strong>and</strong> Family Behavior Therapy, 14, 33–52.<br />
Marcus, A., & Wilder, D. A. (2009). A comparis<strong>on</strong> of<br />
peer video modeling <strong>and</strong> self-video modeling to<br />
teach textual resp<strong>on</strong>ses in children with autism.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 335–341.<br />
Olive, M. L., & Franco, J. H. (2007). Effect size<br />
matters: And so does the calculati<strong>on</strong>. The Behavior<br />
Analyst Today, 8, 76–86.<br />
Rehfeldt, R. A., Dahman, D., Young, A., Cherry, H.,<br />
& Davis, P. (2003). Teaching a simple meal preparati<strong>on</strong><br />
skill to adults with moderate <strong>and</strong> severe<br />
mental retardati<strong>on</strong> using video modeling. Behavioral<br />
Interventi<strong>on</strong>, 18, 209–218.<br />
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1998). Synthesizing<br />
single subject research: Issues <strong>and</strong> applicati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Behavior Modificati<strong>on</strong>, 22, 221–242.<br />
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2001). How to<br />
Summarize Single-Participant Research: Ideas<br />
<strong>and</strong> Applicati<strong>on</strong>s. Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 9, 227–244.<br />
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Cook, S., & Escobar,<br />
C. (1986). Early interventi<strong>on</strong> for children<br />
with c<strong>on</strong>duct disorders: A quantitative synthesis of<br />
single-subject research. Behavioral Disorders, 11,<br />
260–271.<br />
Sherer, M., Pierce, K., Paredes, S., Kisacky, K., Ingersoll,<br />
B., & Schreibman, L. (2001). Enhancing<br />
c<strong>on</strong>versati<strong>on</strong> skills in children with autism via<br />
video technology. Behavior Modificati<strong>on</strong>, 25, 140–<br />
159.<br />
Sindelar, P. T., Rosenberg, M. S., & Wils<strong>on</strong>, R. J.<br />
(1985). An adapted alternating treatments design<br />
for instructi<strong>on</strong>al research. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Treatment<br />
of Children, 8, 67–76.<br />
Spo<strong>on</strong>er, F., Stem, B., & Test, D. W. (1989). Teaching<br />
first aid skills to adolescents who are moderately<br />
mentally h<strong>and</strong>icapped. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training<br />
in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong>, 24, 341–351.<br />
Stokes, T. F., & Osnes, P. G. (1988). The developing<br />
applied technology of generalizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> maintenance.<br />
In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L.<br />
Koegel, (Eds.), Generalizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> maintenance<br />
(pp. 5–19). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.<br />
Tekin-Iftar, E., Acar, G., & Kurt, O. (2003). The<br />
effects of simultaneous prompting <strong>on</strong> teaching<br />
expressively identifying the objects: An instructive<br />
feedback study. Internati<strong>on</strong>al Journal of Disability,<br />
Development <strong>and</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong>, 50, 149–167.<br />
Tekin-Iftar, E., & Kircaali-Iftar, G. (2004). Ozel egitimde<br />
yanlissiz ogretim y<strong>on</strong>temleri [Errorless teaching<br />
procedures in special educati<strong>on</strong>]. Ankara, Turkey:<br />
Nobel Yayin Dagitim.<br />
Timko, T. C., & Sainato, D. M. (1999). Effects of<br />
first aid training using small group instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
with young children with disabilities. Journal of<br />
Early Interventi<strong>on</strong>, 22, 323–336.<br />
Wert, B. Y., & Neisworth, J. T. (2003). Effects of<br />
video self-modeling <strong>on</strong> sp<strong>on</strong>taneous requesting in<br />
children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior<br />
Interventi<strong>on</strong>s, 5, 30–34.<br />
Westling, D. L., & Fox, L. (2000). Teaching students<br />
with severe disabilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ:<br />
Pears<strong>on</strong> Prentice-Hall, Inc.<br />
www.ilkyardim.org.tr. http://www.ilkyardim.org.tr/<br />
indexCntnt.php?sfcntnt&id30<br />
Received: 2 November 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 5 January 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 18 February 2012<br />
102 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 103–119<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> with<br />
Individuals with Intellectual Disability in<br />
Employment Settings<br />
Ailsa E. Goh<br />
Nanyang Technological University<br />
Linda M. Bambara<br />
Lehigh University<br />
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the effectiveness of video self-modeling (VSM) to teach chained<br />
job tasks to individuals with intellectual disability in community-based employment settings. Initial empirical<br />
evaluati<strong>on</strong>s have dem<strong>on</strong>strated that VSM when used in combinati<strong>on</strong> with other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies, are<br />
effective methods to teach chained tasks to individuals with intellectual disability. However, no study has<br />
investigated the effectiveness of VSM as a st<strong>and</strong>-al<strong>on</strong>e interventi<strong>on</strong> to teach chained tasks. In this study, the<br />
effectiveness of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e to teach chained job tasks was first evaluated before the additi<strong>on</strong> of other instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
strategies (i.e., instructor feedback <strong>and</strong> practice) to the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong> package. Three adults with intellectual<br />
disability participated in this study. A within participant multiple probe design across targeted job tasks,<br />
replicated across the three participants, was used to evaluate the effectiveness of VSM in this study. All of the<br />
participants dem<strong>on</strong>strated increased task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> with the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>; however, the effectiveness of<br />
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, or in combinati<strong>on</strong> with feedback <strong>and</strong> practice, varied across participants <strong>and</strong> job tasks. Limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of the study <strong>and</strong> implicati<strong>on</strong>s for future research are discussed.<br />
For many adults with intellectual disability,<br />
having a job is a significant stepping-st<strong>on</strong>e in<br />
life. Aside from providing for a means towards<br />
independent living, the employment setting<br />
allows for the formati<strong>on</strong> of meaningful friendships<br />
<strong>and</strong> community participati<strong>on</strong>. Without a<br />
doubt, employment is an important factor to<br />
the quality of life of an adult with intellectual<br />
disability (Rusch & Millar, 1998). At a minimum,<br />
in order to obtain <strong>and</strong> maintain employment,<br />
adults with intellectual disability<br />
must be able to dem<strong>on</strong>strate their ability to<br />
acquire <strong>and</strong> maintain job skills with a certain<br />
level of proficiency <strong>and</strong> job independence.<br />
A substantial body of research has focused <strong>on</strong><br />
strategies for teaching employment skills to<br />
individuals with intellectual disability (Test &<br />
Mazzotti, 2011). Many job skills (e.g., photocopying,<br />
food preparati<strong>on</strong>, cleaning) are<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Ailsa E. Goh, Nati<strong>on</strong>al Institute<br />
of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Nanyang Technological University,<br />
Early Childhood <strong>and</strong> Special Needs Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
Academic Group, 1 Nanyang Walk, SINGAPORE<br />
637616. E-mail: ailsa.goh@nie.edu.sg<br />
chained tasks that require an individual to<br />
perform a series of steps to complete the<br />
whole task or a work routine. Historically, systematic<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> has been comm<strong>on</strong>ly used<br />
to teach chained job tasks to adults with intellectual<br />
disability (Snell & Brown, 2011). With<br />
systematic instructi<strong>on</strong>, a task analysis is first<br />
carried out to analyze <strong>and</strong> break the job task<br />
into multiple individual steps, then a prompting<br />
procedure (e.g., c<strong>on</strong>stant time delay, system<br />
of least prompts, simultaneous prompting)<br />
is used to teach the individual steps (e.g.,<br />
Ch<strong>and</strong>ler, Schuster, & Stevens, 1993; Maciag,<br />
Schuster, Collins, & Cooper, 2000). In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
antecedent prompts (e.g., picture, audio<br />
prompts) have been used to facilitate the acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of a complex job tasks by providing<br />
employees with prompts for each step of the<br />
task, <strong>and</strong> then teaching them to use the<br />
prompts independently to guide their own<br />
performance (e.g., Cihak, Kessler, & Alberto,<br />
2007; Riffel et al., 2005).<br />
More recently, with the advent of video<br />
technology, researchers have begun to explore<br />
the feasibility <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of<br />
video strategies, such as, video modeling,<br />
video prompting, <strong>and</strong> computer-based video<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 103
instructi<strong>on</strong>, for promoting the acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> maintenance of chained tasks (Mechling,<br />
2005). Research using video technology with<br />
individual with intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental<br />
disability has focused <strong>on</strong> teaching daily<br />
living skills (e.g., Goods<strong>on</strong>, Sigafoos, O’Reilly,<br />
Canella, & Lanci<strong>on</strong>i, 2007; Shipley-Benamou,<br />
Lutzker, & Taubman, 2002), <strong>and</strong> to some extent,<br />
employment skills (e.g., Allen, Wallace,<br />
Renes, Bowen, & Burke, 2010; Mechling &<br />
Ortega-Hurnd<strong>on</strong>, 2007).<br />
Video-modeling, in particular, has received<br />
much attenti<strong>on</strong> recently. Video modeling is<br />
the procedure where a participant watches a<br />
video dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of a skill <strong>and</strong> is then<br />
required to perform the skill at a later time.<br />
The video model is usually a same-age peer or<br />
a familiar instructor; however, subjective viewpoint<br />
videos, where the video recordings are<br />
made from the participant’s point of view<br />
or eye level, have also been used. Research<br />
evaluating the effectiveness of video-modeling<br />
with chained tasks typically included additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies, such as, behavioral<br />
rehearsal <strong>and</strong> resp<strong>on</strong>se prompting<br />
systems (e.g., Branham, Collins, Schuster, &<br />
Kleinert, 1999; Van Laarhoven, Zurita, Johns<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Grider, & Grider, 2009). The additi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies occurred either<br />
during the video viewing sessi<strong>on</strong> or the performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong>, sometimes,<br />
both. However, video-modeling al<strong>on</strong>e, without<br />
the additi<strong>on</strong> of other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies,<br />
has also been found to be effective in<br />
teaching chained tasks (e.g., Mechling, Gast,<br />
& Gustafs<strong>on</strong>, 2009; Shipley-Benamou et al.,<br />
2002).<br />
Applicati<strong>on</strong>s of video-modeling to chained<br />
tasks have been emerging, however, there has<br />
been limited dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong>s of using videomodeling<br />
in employment settings (e.g., Allen<br />
et al., 2010). One video strategy that has yet to<br />
be explored for teaching chained job tasks in<br />
employment settings is video self-modeling<br />
(VSM). Instead of observing a model perform<br />
a task <strong>on</strong> video, as in video modeling, VSM<br />
involves the process of repeated observati<strong>on</strong><br />
of <strong>on</strong>eself <strong>on</strong> edited videotapes that depict<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly appropriate or desired behaviors (Dowrick,<br />
1991). The str<strong>on</strong>gest theoretical basis for<br />
VSM is social learning theory (B<strong>and</strong>ura, 1969)<br />
that suggests that learning can occur by observing<br />
the behavior of others <strong>and</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>se-<br />
quences they experience. In additi<strong>on</strong>, according<br />
to social cognitive theory (B<strong>and</strong>ura, 1986),<br />
the closer the model resembles the observer,<br />
the greater the effect it will have <strong>on</strong> the target<br />
behavior. In VSM, since the observer is also<br />
the model, the anticipated effect <strong>on</strong> the target<br />
behavior <strong>and</strong> feelings of self-efficacy, should<br />
be theoretically enhanced (B<strong>and</strong>ura, 1986;<br />
1997).<br />
Although VSM has not been evaluated in<br />
employment settings with individuals with intellectual<br />
disability, VSM has been examined<br />
<strong>and</strong> found to be effective for a variety of training<br />
<strong>and</strong> therapeutic applicati<strong>on</strong>s with diverse<br />
populati<strong>on</strong>s (such as children <strong>and</strong> adults with<br />
or without disabilities) <strong>and</strong> settings (including<br />
home, school <strong>and</strong> community settings) (e.g.,<br />
Dowrick, 1999; Hitchcock, Dowrick, & Prater,<br />
2003; Meharg & Woltersdorf, 1990). Research<br />
studies examining VSM have dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
its effectiveness with the following target behaviors:<br />
improving physical skills (e.g., Dowrick<br />
& Raeburn, 1995), teaching academic<br />
skills (e.g., Dowrick, Kim-Rupnow, & Power,<br />
2006), reducing problem behaviors, <strong>and</strong> increasing<br />
prosocial skills (e.g., Buggey, 2005;<br />
Wert & Neisworth 2003).<br />
VSM has str<strong>on</strong>g potential for job skill training<br />
in employment settings. First, VSM research<br />
studies c<strong>on</strong>ducted with adults with<br />
traumatic brain injury in home settings (e.g.,<br />
McGraw-Hunter, Faw, & Davis, 2006) <strong>and</strong><br />
children with autism in school settings<br />
(e.g., Buggey, 2005; Wert & Neisworth, 2003)<br />
have shown str<strong>on</strong>g maintenance effects <strong>and</strong><br />
good generalizati<strong>on</strong> effects across novel tasks<br />
<strong>and</strong> across settings. Additi<strong>on</strong>ally, <strong>on</strong>ce a VSM<br />
video has been produced, it could be used to<br />
program for maintenance. Third, VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
are unintrusive, <strong>and</strong> therefore may<br />
be a good match for inclusive employment<br />
settings. Except for time used to capture the<br />
videos, the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong> itself may <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
require viewing a 2–5 minute video outside of<br />
actual work situati<strong>on</strong> (Dowrick, 1991). Thus, if<br />
effective, the employee can learn new job<br />
skills without direct prompting from the instructor<br />
or job coach during actual work situati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
This has the potential of reducing<br />
stigma <strong>and</strong> time needed for training <strong>on</strong> the<br />
job. Lastly, in studies where social validity assessment<br />
was c<strong>on</strong>ducted, participants evalu-<br />
104 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ated the interventi<strong>on</strong> positively (e.g., Buggey,<br />
2005; Cihak & Schrader, 2008).<br />
Few studies have evaluated VSM with<br />
chained tasks but these studies have found<br />
that the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>s were effective for<br />
promoting task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> (i.e., Cihak &<br />
Schrader, 2008; Lasater & Brady, 1995;<br />
McGraw-Hunter et al., 2006; Van Laarhoven<br />
et al., 2009). However, these research studies<br />
included other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies (e.g.,<br />
behavior rehearsal, system of least prompts) as<br />
part of the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong> package <strong>and</strong><br />
they did not assess the effectiveness of VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e to teach chained tasks. Therefore, it was<br />
not known if VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, without the additi<strong>on</strong><br />
of other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies, would be<br />
sufficient for task acquisiti<strong>on</strong>. While, in comparis<strong>on</strong>,<br />
few studies have shown that videomodeling<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e (e.g., Mechling et al., 2009;<br />
Shipley-Benamou et al., 2002), without the<br />
additi<strong>on</strong> of other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies, can<br />
be effective in teaching chained task to children<br />
<strong>and</strong> young adults with disabilities, the<br />
number of dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong>s are limited.<br />
The purpose of this study was two fold. The<br />
first purpose was to evaluate the use of VSM to<br />
teach chained job tasks to individuals with<br />
intellectual disability in employment settings.<br />
The sec<strong>on</strong>d purpose was to c<strong>on</strong>tinue to systematically<br />
explore the feasibility <strong>and</strong> effectiveness<br />
of using VSM al<strong>on</strong>e or in combinati<strong>on</strong><br />
with other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies to enhance<br />
effectiveness. The effectiveness of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e<br />
was first evaluated by implementing VSM without<br />
any other instructi<strong>on</strong>al strategies. If VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e was not sufficient to increase acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of a chained task, instructor feedback was<br />
added to the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>. Finally, if<br />
VSM <strong>and</strong> feedback did not lead to task acquisiti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the participants would practice the<br />
steps of the tasks during video viewing. Both<br />
instructor feedback <strong>and</strong> practice occurred<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly during video viewing sessi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> not during<br />
the performance observati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
Three adults (2 male <strong>and</strong> 1 female) with intellectual<br />
disability, receiving services from a<br />
university-affiliated supported employment<br />
program, participated in this study. The su-<br />
pervisors of the supported employment program<br />
nominated the participants, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
first author c<strong>on</strong>ducted further observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to determine if the nominated individual<br />
met the selecti<strong>on</strong> criteria. An individual was<br />
selected if he/she had: (a) regularly scheduled<br />
employment/job training participati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
(b) the ability to model behavior observed <strong>on</strong><br />
short video clips, <strong>and</strong> (c) no dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
aversi<strong>on</strong> to viewing self <strong>on</strong> video.<br />
Daniel was a 53-year-old male with mild intellectual<br />
disability <strong>and</strong> bipolar disorder.<br />
Daniel had good verbal <strong>and</strong> gross motor skills<br />
<strong>and</strong> was able to complete many tasks in his<br />
daily routines independently. At the beginning<br />
of the study, Daniel had been working<br />
part time at the thrift store as a part time<br />
janitor <strong>and</strong> merch<strong>and</strong>ise associate for about<br />
<strong>on</strong>e year. His job duties at the thrift store<br />
included sorting, arranging, <strong>and</strong> shelving<br />
merch<strong>and</strong>ise, <strong>and</strong> simple janitorial tasks (e.g.<br />
sweeping, emptying the trash, cleaning the<br />
restrooms). Daniel was easily distracted <strong>and</strong><br />
required regular prompts from his job coach<br />
to remain <strong>on</strong>-task. Daniel would often times<br />
lose his spatial orientati<strong>on</strong> during some of his<br />
job tasks (e.g., sweeping the floor). For example,<br />
during his job task of removing empty<br />
hangers from a clothing rack, instead of c<strong>on</strong>tinuously<br />
working <strong>and</strong> moving towards his<br />
right, he would go from right to left to right<br />
again, thus not progressing through the whole<br />
rack at a competitive rate. Daniel also required<br />
c<strong>on</strong>stant reminders from his job coach<br />
regarding appropriate social behaviors in the<br />
work place. Daniel’s employment goals were<br />
to exp<strong>and</strong> his work resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities <strong>and</strong> to improve<br />
his competitive work rate.<br />
J<strong>on</strong>athan was a 47-year old male with mild<br />
intellectual disability. J<strong>on</strong>athan was living independently<br />
in his apartment with part-time<br />
supports from a life-coaching agency. He was<br />
capable of independently completing most of<br />
his daily living activities. At the beginning of<br />
the study, J<strong>on</strong>athan had been working part<br />
time at a department store for about eight<br />
years. His job resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities included opening<br />
boxes of merch<strong>and</strong>ise, tagging the items<br />
with security tags, displaying the merch<strong>and</strong>ise,<br />
<strong>and</strong> janitorial tasks. His job tasks were performed<br />
mainly in the warehouse of the department<br />
store. He required <strong>on</strong>ly minimal assistance<br />
from his job coach to complete his job<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 105
tasks. J<strong>on</strong>athan’s employment goals were to<br />
exp<strong>and</strong> his job resp<strong>on</strong>sibilities <strong>and</strong> to maintain<br />
his work performance rate.<br />
Maria was a 28-year old female with mild<br />
intellectual disability <strong>and</strong> autism. Maria was<br />
primarily receiving <strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e job training<br />
from her job coach at the supported employment<br />
office. In additi<strong>on</strong>, she was participating<br />
in job training experiences in the community<br />
including a thrift store. Maria had good verbal<br />
skills but she was shy <strong>and</strong> often appeared withdrawn<br />
in social situati<strong>on</strong>s. Although Maria<br />
was able to perform many of her job tasks, she<br />
tended to wait for prompts or assurance from<br />
her job coach before she proceeded with a<br />
task. Maria’s employment goals were to exp<strong>and</strong><br />
her work experiences, increase her independence<br />
at the job training settings, <strong>and</strong><br />
secure a paid job.<br />
Settings<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong>al settings. VSM sessi<strong>on</strong>s (i.e.,<br />
video viewing <strong>and</strong> instructi<strong>on</strong>) took place in<br />
a quiet area at the employment setting for<br />
both Daniel <strong>and</strong> J<strong>on</strong>athan. For Maria, instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
took place in a quiet office space in the<br />
same building where the supported employment<br />
program was located. During instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly the instructor <strong>and</strong> the participant<br />
were present, with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of procedural<br />
fidelity checks at which times <strong>on</strong>e additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
observer was present.<br />
Performance observati<strong>on</strong> settings. Observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of the participant’s performance of the<br />
targeted job tasks were c<strong>on</strong>ducted in the relevant<br />
areas at the participant’s employment or<br />
job training setting. For Daniel, performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s took place in the warehouse <strong>and</strong><br />
the book room of the thrift store. For J<strong>on</strong>athan,<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s took place at<br />
the men’s fitting room <strong>and</strong> clothing department,<br />
shoe department, <strong>and</strong> the staff training<br />
room. For Maria, performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
took place at the following places within the<br />
university building where supported employment<br />
program office was located: target office<br />
space, the hallways of the university building,<br />
<strong>and</strong> the photocopy room. During performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>on</strong>ly the job coach <strong>and</strong><br />
the participant were present in the immediate<br />
vicinity except when interobserver agreement<br />
<strong>and</strong> procedural fidelity checks were being<br />
c<strong>on</strong>ducted at which times <strong>on</strong>e additi<strong>on</strong>al observer<br />
was present. However, depending <strong>on</strong><br />
the employment setting, other people (e.g.,<br />
co-workers, customers) were occasi<strong>on</strong>ally present<br />
during performance observati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Videotaping settings. Videotaping took place<br />
at the same settings where performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
took place for each participant.<br />
Target Job Tasks<br />
Selected job tasks or routines were relevant to<br />
the participant’s employment or job training.<br />
To select the job tasks for training, the first<br />
author first obtained recommendati<strong>on</strong>s of potential<br />
target job tasks from the job coaches<br />
<strong>and</strong> supported employment supervisors. Then<br />
the first author observed the participant at his<br />
or her employment or job training setting to<br />
ascertain the participant’s current level of job<br />
performance. After that, the first author collaborated<br />
with the job coach <strong>and</strong> supervisors<br />
to finalize the job tasks for each participant.<br />
Two chained job tasks were selected for<br />
Daniel (three job tasks were initially selected<br />
for Daniel but <strong>on</strong>ly two job tasks were targeted<br />
for instructi<strong>on</strong>) <strong>and</strong> three chained job tasks<br />
were selected each for J<strong>on</strong>athan <strong>and</strong> Maria. A<br />
task analysis was c<strong>on</strong>ducted to break each job<br />
task into smaller steps. Through discussi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with the respective job coach <strong>and</strong> observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of each participant working at his or her employment<br />
or job-training site, the first author<br />
modified the task analyses based <strong>on</strong> the participant’s<br />
skill level. Table 1 provides the task<br />
analysis of the selected job tasks for each participant.<br />
The job tasks for the participants<br />
ranged from 9–15 steps.<br />
Dependent Measure <strong>and</strong> Recording Procedures<br />
Percentage of steps completed correctly. The primary<br />
dependent measure was the percentage<br />
of steps completed correctly <strong>on</strong> the task analysis<br />
for the job task or routine. A correct step<br />
was scored when the participant independently<br />
completed the step as operati<strong>on</strong>ally defined<br />
(See Table 1). An incorrect step was<br />
scored when the participant did not perform<br />
the step as operati<strong>on</strong>ally defined or did not<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>d within five sec<strong>on</strong>ds of the previous<br />
step or initial cue to begin. To determine the<br />
percentage of steps completed correctly for<br />
106 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 1<br />
Task Analysis of Job Skills for the Participants<br />
Daniel J<strong>on</strong>athan Maria<br />
Job Skill 1: Shoe Cleaning<br />
1. Pick up shoe cleaning spray*<br />
2. Spray <strong>on</strong>ce inside of both<br />
shoes*<br />
3. Pick up cloth*<br />
4. Wipe inside of shoe<br />
5. Wipe inside of other shoe<br />
6. Pick up shoe cleaning spray*<br />
7. Spray <strong>on</strong>ce <strong>on</strong> the fr<strong>on</strong>t/top<br />
of both shoes*<br />
8. Pick up cloth*<br />
9. Wipe shoe exterior (fr<strong>on</strong>t,<br />
sides, back)<br />
10. Wipe exterior of other shoe<br />
11. Place shoes together*<br />
12. Take a rubber-b<strong>and</strong>*<br />
13. Wrap rubber-b<strong>and</strong> around<br />
both shoes<br />
Job Skill 2: Book Room<br />
1. Pick up all misplaced items<br />
<strong>and</strong> place into the shopping<br />
basket*<br />
2. Walk (with the basket) to a<br />
specific corner of the<br />
bookshelf<br />
3. Place basket <strong>on</strong> the floor by<br />
the bookshelf<br />
4. Place all books in the<br />
specific corner of the<br />
bookshelf<br />
5. Walk (with the basket) to<br />
the CD & cassette box<br />
6. Place basket <strong>on</strong> the CD &<br />
cassette box<br />
7. Place all CDs in the CD pile<br />
8. Place all cassette tapes in the<br />
cassette pile<br />
9. Walk (with the basket) to<br />
the video shelf<br />
10. Place basket <strong>on</strong> the floor by<br />
the video shelf<br />
11. Place all videotapes <strong>on</strong> the<br />
video shelf<br />
12. Pick up all misplaced n<strong>on</strong>-<br />
Book Room merch<strong>and</strong>ise<br />
(clothing/shoes) <strong>and</strong> place<br />
items in the basket*<br />
13. Walk (with the basket) to<br />
the back of the store<br />
Job Skill 1: Fitting Room<br />
1. Check every fitting room <strong>and</strong> remove<br />
all items*<br />
2. Bring all items to the outside rack*<br />
3. Match clothing item (Item 1) to<br />
hanger by size*<br />
4. Hang Item 1 correctly<br />
5. Match Item 2 to hanger by size*<br />
6. Hang Item 2 correctly<br />
7. Match Item 3 to hanger by size*<br />
8. Hang Item 3 correctly<br />
9. Walk out of fitting room with all items<br />
<strong>on</strong> the hangers*<br />
10. Find the correct rack for the 1st item*<br />
11. Place item correctly <strong>on</strong> the rack<br />
12. Find the correct rack for the 2nd<br />
item*<br />
13. Place item correctly <strong>on</strong> the rack<br />
14. Find the correct rack for the 3rd<br />
item*<br />
15. Place item correctly <strong>on</strong> the rack<br />
Job Skill 2: Shoe Storing<br />
1. Match a pair of shoes to its respective<br />
box (Pair 1)*<br />
2. Place shoes correctly in the box<br />
3. Match a pair of shoes to its respective<br />
box (Pair 2)*<br />
4. Place shoes correctly in the box<br />
5. Match a pair of shoes to its respective<br />
box (Pair 3)*<br />
6. Place shoes correctly in the box<br />
7. Find the correct area for Box 1 (match<br />
shoebox)*<br />
8. Check the style of the shoe (open box<br />
to look at style)*<br />
9. Place Box 1 back into the correct shelf<br />
10. Find the correct area for Box 2*<br />
11. Check the style of the shoe*<br />
12. Place Box 2 back into the correct<br />
shelf<br />
13. Find the correct area for Box 3*<br />
14. Check the style of the shoe*<br />
15. Place Box 3 back into the correct<br />
shelf<br />
Job Skill 3: Computer<br />
1. Left click “intranet” press Enter *<br />
2. Left click URL address bar*<br />
3. Scroll down <strong>and</strong> click “@@@@.com”*<br />
4. Left click “Pers<strong>on</strong>al Informati<strong>on</strong>”*<br />
5. Enter Login ID:*<br />
6. Enter Pin:*<br />
7. Left click “Login”*<br />
8. Left click “Salary”*<br />
9. Left click “log off”<br />
Note. * Critical step that will affect the performance of subsequent steps.<br />
Job Skill 1: C<strong>on</strong>ference Packet<br />
1. Open up sample folder*<br />
2. Open a new folder*<br />
3. Pick up a sheet of paper<br />
from each tray*<br />
4. Place the stack of paper<br />
in the correct pocket in<br />
the folder<br />
5. Pick up a booklet*<br />
6. Place booklet in the<br />
correct pocket<br />
7. Pick up a CD*<br />
8. Place CD in the correct<br />
pocket in the right<br />
positi<strong>on</strong><br />
9. Pick up a business card*<br />
10. Paperclip business card<br />
to the pocket<br />
11. Place completed<br />
packet upright in the<br />
box<br />
Job Skill 2: Paper Shredder<br />
1. Press butt<strong>on</strong> to turn<br />
shredder <strong>on</strong> (green light<br />
goes <strong>on</strong>)*<br />
2. Lift up the shredder<br />
cover<br />
3. Remove all the paper<br />
clips <strong>and</strong> staples*<br />
4. Count 5 pieces of paper<br />
5. Put the stack of paper<br />
into the shredder<br />
6. Repeat until the stack of<br />
paper has been<br />
shredded*<br />
7. Close the shredder<br />
cover<br />
8. Press butt<strong>on</strong> to turn<br />
shredder off (green<br />
light goes off)<br />
9. Open shredder door*<br />
10. Remove the c<strong>on</strong>tainer*<br />
11. Take the c<strong>on</strong>tainer to<br />
the paper recycling bin*<br />
12. Place all shredded<br />
paper into the recycling<br />
bin*<br />
13. Walk back to the room<br />
with the c<strong>on</strong>tainer*<br />
14. Place c<strong>on</strong>tainer back<br />
into the shredder*<br />
15. Close shredder door<br />
Job Skill 3: Photocopier<br />
1. Enter 5 digit password<br />
(refer to notecard)*<br />
2. Touch “ok” <strong>on</strong> the<br />
screen*<br />
3. Remove post-it-note<br />
from the original copy*<br />
4. Place original copy<br />
facing up <strong>on</strong> the top<br />
loader*<br />
5. Enter “# of copies” <strong>on</strong><br />
the keypad (refer to<br />
post-it-note for the #)*<br />
6. Press start (green)<br />
butt<strong>on</strong>*<br />
7. Take the original copy<br />
8. Take the photocopies<br />
9. Press yellow <strong>and</strong> red<br />
keys simultaneously to<br />
end sessi<strong>on</strong><br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 107
each participant, the number of correct steps<br />
was divided by the total number of steps in the<br />
task analysis <strong>and</strong> multiplied by 100%.<br />
Performance observati<strong>on</strong>s. Data were collected<br />
<strong>on</strong> the dependent measure during performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s of the participant at<br />
the participant’s employment or job-training<br />
site for the durati<strong>on</strong> of time required for the<br />
completi<strong>on</strong> of the job task or routine. Performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s occurred <strong>on</strong>ce daily, at<br />
least four times per week c<strong>on</strong>sistent with the<br />
participant’s regular work schedule throughout<br />
all phases of the study. Each performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sisted of <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e trial or <strong>on</strong>e<br />
opportunity to engage in the task analysis. The<br />
job coach set up the relevant area for performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s with materials for the job<br />
task before the sessi<strong>on</strong> began. Performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong> procedures were held c<strong>on</strong>stant<br />
across all phases of the study. See Baseline 1<br />
for performance observati<strong>on</strong> procedures. During<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s, the job coach<br />
observed the participant <strong>and</strong> recorded the<br />
steps completed correctly <strong>and</strong> incorrectly by<br />
the participant using a data sheet <strong>on</strong> a clipboard.<br />
Observer <strong>and</strong> Observer Training<br />
Three job coaches employed by the supported<br />
employment program served as the primary<br />
observers during performance observati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
The job coaches were selected as the primary<br />
observers to reduce the intrusiveness of having<br />
multiple observers at the employment or<br />
job training setting. The primary observers<br />
were trained <strong>on</strong> the steps of the task analyses,<br />
definiti<strong>on</strong>s of correct resp<strong>on</strong>ses for each step,<br />
<strong>and</strong> methods of recording. They were also<br />
provided with examples of task related <strong>and</strong><br />
n<strong>on</strong>-task related prompts, <strong>and</strong> they were<br />
trained <strong>on</strong> the correct protocol during data<br />
collecti<strong>on</strong>. During data collecti<strong>on</strong>, the primary<br />
observers were directed to <strong>on</strong>ly provide<br />
n<strong>on</strong>-task related prompts (e.g., “Just try your<br />
best”) <strong>and</strong> not task-related prompts (i.e.,<br />
prompt initiati<strong>on</strong> of a step in the task analysis)<br />
to the participants. The use of role-playing in<br />
the performance observati<strong>on</strong> settings was utilized<br />
for observer training. Each observer was<br />
required to meet a criteri<strong>on</strong> of 90% interobserver<br />
agreement for the primary dependent<br />
measure for at least two c<strong>on</strong>secutive practice<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. The observer was also required to<br />
meet a criteri<strong>on</strong> of 100% procedural fidelity<br />
for the procedures (i.e., not providing any<br />
task-related prompts for each step of the task<br />
analysis) during the job task for at least two<br />
c<strong>on</strong>secutive practice sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Experimental Design<br />
A within participant multiple probe design<br />
(Gast & Ledford, 2010) across targeted job<br />
tasks, replicated across three participants,<br />
was used to evaluate the effectiveness of VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e <strong>and</strong> combined with feedback <strong>and</strong> practice<br />
to teach chained job tasks. The multiple<br />
probe design was selected to avoid possible<br />
reactive effects from frequently requiring the<br />
participant to perform the sec<strong>on</strong>d job task<br />
during a prol<strong>on</strong>ged baseline c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>. The<br />
experimental phases of this design c<strong>on</strong>sisted<br />
of (a) Baseline 1, (b) Baseline 2 (baseline<br />
assessment after videotaping), (c) VSM al<strong>on</strong>e,<br />
(d) VSM plus feedback (VSM 2), (e) VSM plus<br />
feedback <strong>and</strong> practice (VSM 3), <strong>and</strong> (f) Maintenance.<br />
Experimental C<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Baseline 1. During Baseline 1, performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s began when the job coach provided<br />
the participant with an initial cue to<br />
begin the task. A total observati<strong>on</strong> method was<br />
implemented. The participant was allowed to<br />
complete the task until either (a) s/he indicated<br />
verbally that s/he was d<strong>on</strong>e with the<br />
task, (b) s/he stopped resp<strong>on</strong>ding for 15s, or<br />
(c) s/he could not move <strong>on</strong> to the next step<br />
due to an incomplete critical step. Similar to a<br />
single opportunity probe (Brown & Snell,<br />
2011), whenever the participant made an error<br />
<strong>on</strong> a step, the job coach did not correct<br />
the task materials to allow for further resp<strong>on</strong>ses.<br />
The job coach did not provide any<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al feedback. When the participant<br />
performed a step correctly, the job coach<br />
marked the step as correct <strong>on</strong> the data sheet.<br />
To insure sufficient motivati<strong>on</strong> for the participant<br />
to c<strong>on</strong>tinue through the task analysis,<br />
the job coach provided intermittent general<br />
praise to the participant for staying <strong>on</strong> task.<br />
When the participant asked a questi<strong>on</strong> that<br />
was related to the job task (e.g., “What should<br />
I do now?), the job coach provided a general<br />
108 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
statement to the participant to c<strong>on</strong>tinue <strong>on</strong><br />
with the task (e.g., “Just try your best”).<br />
If the participant made an error (i.e., did<br />
not complete the step as operati<strong>on</strong>ally defined),<br />
the job coach marked that step as incorrect,<br />
without providing any feedback <strong>on</strong><br />
incorrect resp<strong>on</strong>ses. If the participant made<br />
an error during a critical step (See Table 1),<br />
without providing any feedback <strong>on</strong> incorrect<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses, the job coach marked that step<br />
<strong>and</strong> all following steps that were linked to<br />
the critical step as incorrect. At the end of<br />
the performance observati<strong>on</strong>, the job coach<br />
thanked the participant for working but did<br />
not provide any specific feedback regarding<br />
task performance.<br />
Creati<strong>on</strong> of the video. After Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong><br />
prior to Baseline 2, in order to create the<br />
video for training, the participant was videotaped<br />
performing all the steps of the job task<br />
at his or her employment or job training setting<br />
using two different sets of materials for<br />
the job (e.g., different shoes for shoe cleaning).<br />
The video clips were then edited <strong>and</strong> two<br />
final edited videos were created for each job<br />
task for each participant.<br />
Videotaping. A Flip Ultra camcorder,<br />
Can<strong>on</strong> PowerShot A570 IS digital camera, <strong>and</strong><br />
tripod were used during videotaping. During<br />
videotaping, as the step was being videotaped,<br />
the first author <strong>and</strong> job coach directed the<br />
participant to perform each step of the job<br />
task. In order to prevent exposing the participant<br />
to the correct sequence, which may<br />
have influenced participant’s performance in<br />
the subsequent baseline phase, videotaping<br />
of each step did not follow the correct sequence<br />
in the task analysis. Additi<strong>on</strong>al narrati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for the completi<strong>on</strong> of each step in the<br />
task analysis were recorded with the participant<br />
separately.<br />
For each step of the task, multiple video<br />
clips were shot to allow the researchers the<br />
flexibility of choosing the clearest video clips<br />
to be used in the final edited video. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the multiple video clips with different<br />
exemplars also provided for variati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
final edited videos. The variati<strong>on</strong> of materials<br />
shown in the different final edited videos was<br />
intended to reduce participant’s boredom<br />
<strong>and</strong> increase generalizati<strong>on</strong> of the skill. Additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
video clips of the participant introducing<br />
himself or herself, smiling, <strong>and</strong> shots<br />
of the supervisor thanking the participant for<br />
a job well d<strong>on</strong>e were also videotaped. These<br />
video clips were added for aesthetic <strong>and</strong> motivati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
purposes.<br />
Video editing. The iMovie HD6 software was<br />
used for video editing. During video editing,<br />
any incorrect or extraneous steps or verbalizati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
from the participant, job coach <strong>and</strong> the<br />
first author were edited from the video. Narrati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of the correct steps were added to the<br />
video. Background music at a low volume was<br />
added to the video. Two final edited videos for<br />
each job task were created. The videos were<br />
formatted into a DVD movie <strong>and</strong> burned <strong>on</strong>to<br />
a DVDR. Video editing took around 10 to<br />
20 hours for each set of videos. Two doctoral<br />
students in special educati<strong>on</strong> evaluated the<br />
final edited videos <strong>and</strong> determined that all<br />
the steps of the task were present <strong>and</strong> clearly<br />
observable. When needed, more editing was<br />
d<strong>on</strong>e to improve the clarity of the videos.<br />
Edited videos. A final edited video began<br />
with the participant stating the job task that<br />
s/he would be doing. Then the video showed<br />
clips of the participant performing each step<br />
of the task while the steps were being narrated<br />
simultaneously. In between natural segments<br />
of the task analyses in the video, a black screen<br />
with a number indicating the segment number<br />
was shown for several sec<strong>on</strong>ds. The video<br />
ended with a clip of the supervisor thanking<br />
the participant for a job well d<strong>on</strong>e. Throughout<br />
the video, background music at a low<br />
volume was audible. The two final edited videos<br />
of each job tasks were similar in length.<br />
The final videos ranged in length from 1 min<br />
23 sec (i.e., Photocopier video for Maria) to<br />
5 min 18 sec (i.e., Fitting Room video for<br />
J<strong>on</strong>athan) because some job tasks, such as<br />
routines, took l<strong>on</strong>ger to complete.<br />
Baseline 2. Performance observati<strong>on</strong>s during<br />
Baseline 2 were c<strong>on</strong>ducted exactly as in<br />
Baseline 1. The purpose of the Baseline 2 was<br />
to determine whether there was a change in<br />
performance in completing the job task after<br />
making the video. If the first three data points<br />
in Baseline 2 were similar to or lower than<br />
the data obtained in Baseline 1, VSM al<strong>on</strong>e<br />
was implemented. If the data obtained in<br />
Baseline 2 showed an increase when compared<br />
with the data obtained in Baseline 1,<br />
then Baseline 2 c<strong>on</strong>tinued until the performance<br />
stabilized.<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 109
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e. In this interventi<strong>on</strong> phase, the<br />
participant was asked to watch a video created<br />
in the prior phase. The video was presented <strong>on</strong><br />
a Philips 7-inch screen portable DVD player.<br />
The first author c<strong>on</strong>ducted the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>s took place <strong>on</strong>ce<br />
daily, at least four days a week. The instructor<br />
alternated the two final edited videos, thus<br />
the participant would watch each final edited<br />
video <strong>on</strong> alternate instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During<br />
each instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>, the participant<br />
would watch a video <strong>on</strong>ce, <strong>and</strong> immediately<br />
after viewing the video, the participant was given<br />
a choice to watch the video again. Within each<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>, the participant watched<br />
the video at least <strong>on</strong>ce, <strong>and</strong> at the most three<br />
times.<br />
At the end of the instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>, the<br />
instructor directed the participant to perform<br />
the job task just as s/he had seen <strong>on</strong><br />
the video. Immediately after the instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>, the job coach observed the participant<br />
perform the job tasks during the regularly<br />
scheduled work routine. Performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong> procedures were c<strong>on</strong>ducted exactly<br />
like Baseline 1.<br />
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e procedures c<strong>on</strong>tinued until the<br />
participant was able to correctly <strong>and</strong> independently<br />
complete 90% of the steps in the task<br />
analyses for three c<strong>on</strong>secutive performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s. If the participant achieved criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
with VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, the Maintenance phase<br />
followed <strong>and</strong> further interventi<strong>on</strong> phases were<br />
not implemented.<br />
VSM plus feedback (VSM 2). If the participant<br />
reached a stable trend with no improvement<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated, then a sec<strong>on</strong>d phase of<br />
the interventi<strong>on</strong>, VSM 2, was initiated.<br />
During each VSM 2 sessi<strong>on</strong>, the instructor<br />
directed the participant to watch the video.<br />
For each step of the task analysis that the<br />
participant was able to perform independently<br />
during the previous performance observati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the instructor provided praise to the<br />
participant for performing the step correctly.<br />
For the particular step that the participant<br />
was observed having difficulty with or making<br />
errors in during the previous performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>, the instructor briefly paused the<br />
video <strong>and</strong> provided feedback in the following<br />
ways: (a) pointed out the correct steps, (b) gave<br />
rati<strong>on</strong>ale for the correct step (e.g., “You have<br />
to wipe the inside of the shoe after you spray<br />
because it can get very dirty inside the shoe.”),<br />
<strong>and</strong> (c) questi<strong>on</strong>ed the participant <strong>on</strong> the<br />
step completed in the video clip. If the participant<br />
provided the correct answer, the instructor<br />
provided specific verbal praise. If the<br />
participant was not able to provide the correct<br />
answer, the instructor provided the correct<br />
answer.<br />
At the end of the whole video, the instructor<br />
asked the participant if s/he would like to<br />
watch the video again. If the participant chose<br />
to watch the video again, the instructor replayed<br />
the whole video again. The procedures<br />
for the first viewing were implemented in the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d viewing. The participant watched the<br />
video at least <strong>on</strong>ce <strong>and</strong> at most three times<br />
during each instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Immediately after the VSM 2 instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>, performance observati<strong>on</strong> procedures<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted exactly like Baseline 1. VSM 2<br />
procedures c<strong>on</strong>tinued until the participant<br />
was able to correctly <strong>and</strong> independently complete<br />
90% of the steps in the task analysis for<br />
three c<strong>on</strong>secutive performance observati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
If the participant achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> with VSM<br />
2, the Maintenance phase was c<strong>on</strong>ducted <strong>and</strong><br />
VSM3 was not implemented.<br />
VSM plus feedback <strong>and</strong> practice (VSM 3). If<br />
the participant reached a stable trend with<br />
no improvement dem<strong>on</strong>strated, then a third<br />
phase of the interventi<strong>on</strong>, VSM 3, was initiated.<br />
During each VSM 3 sessi<strong>on</strong>, the instructor<br />
again directed the participant to watch the<br />
video. In additi<strong>on</strong>, the instructor had the necessary<br />
materials for performing the task in<br />
the instructi<strong>on</strong>al setting. If the actual task<br />
materials were not available, simulati<strong>on</strong> materials<br />
(e.g., photographs) were used. For<br />
steps that the participant performed independently<br />
during the previous performance observati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
the instructor provided behavior<br />
specific praise. For steps that the participant<br />
performed incorrectly during the previous<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s, the instructor first<br />
provided feedback using procedures described<br />
in VSM 2. Then the instructor requested the<br />
participant to dem<strong>on</strong>strate the step that was<br />
shown <strong>on</strong> the video. If the participant performed<br />
the step correctly, the instructor provided<br />
specific verbal praise. If the participant<br />
was not able to model the step, the instructor<br />
modeled the step for the participant. After<br />
110 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
modeling the step to the participant, the instructor<br />
directed the participant to practice<br />
the step. The instructor then provided the<br />
participant another opportunity to practice<br />
the step <strong>on</strong>e more time. The instructor repeated<br />
the same procedure with each step<br />
in the task analysis for which the participant<br />
was observed having difficulty or making errors<br />
during the previous performance observati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
At the end of the whole video, the instructor<br />
asked the participant if s/he would like to<br />
watch the video again. If the participant chose<br />
to watch the video again, the instructor replayed<br />
the whole video again. The procedures<br />
for the first viewing were implemented in the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d viewing.<br />
At the end of the VSM 3 sessi<strong>on</strong>, the job<br />
coach observed the participant performing<br />
the job tasks during the regularly scheduled<br />
work routine. Performance observati<strong>on</strong> procedures<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted exactly like Baseline 1.<br />
VSM 3 procedures c<strong>on</strong>tinued until the participant<br />
was able to correctly <strong>and</strong> independently<br />
complete 90% of the steps in the task analyses<br />
for three c<strong>on</strong>secutive performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
or until a stable trend was observed. If<br />
the participant achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> with VSM 3<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>, the Maintenance phase was<br />
c<strong>on</strong>ducted. If the participant did not achieve<br />
criteri<strong>on</strong> performance, the interventi<strong>on</strong> was<br />
terminated.<br />
Maintenance. To assess maintenance effects<br />
of the interventi<strong>on</strong>, after the participants met<br />
the training criteri<strong>on</strong> for three c<strong>on</strong>secutive<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s, maintenance probes<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted for three c<strong>on</strong>secutive performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s. Then delayed follow-up<br />
probes were c<strong>on</strong>ducted at <strong>on</strong>e, two <strong>and</strong> four<br />
weeks following the immediate maintenance<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. During maintenance <strong>and</strong> delayed follow-up<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s, the participant<br />
performed the job tasks under Baseline 1<br />
c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> (i.e., without viewing the video <strong>and</strong><br />
without feedback).<br />
Reliability <strong>and</strong> Procedural Fidelity<br />
Following the same procedures <strong>and</strong> criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
as in the primary observer training, sec<strong>on</strong>dary<br />
observers, naïve to the purposes of the study,<br />
were trained to c<strong>on</strong>duct performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to establish interobserver agreement<br />
<strong>on</strong> the dependent measure. Interobserver<br />
agreement checks were assessed <strong>on</strong> at least<br />
30% of the total performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>and</strong> at least <strong>on</strong>ce in every c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> for each<br />
participant for each job task. Interobserver<br />
agreement was calculated using point-by-point<br />
agreement <strong>and</strong> dividing the number of agreements<br />
by the number of agreements plus disagreements<br />
multiplied by 100. The interobserver<br />
agreements for Daniel, J<strong>on</strong>athan,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Maria were 98.8% (range, 84.6–100%),<br />
98.3% (range, 80–100%), <strong>and</strong> 97.7% (range,<br />
77.8–100%) respectively.<br />
Procedural fidelity data were collected by<br />
a sec<strong>on</strong>d observer to determine if the procedures<br />
were implemented accurately <strong>and</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistently across participants. Procedural fidelity<br />
data were collected for VSM sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>and</strong> performance observati<strong>on</strong>s. Procedural<br />
fidelity during VSM sessi<strong>on</strong>s was to determine<br />
whether the instructor adhered to the<br />
planned protocol during instructi<strong>on</strong>. Procedural<br />
fidelity during performance observati<strong>on</strong><br />
was to determine if the job coaches adhered<br />
to the correct data collecti<strong>on</strong> protocol <strong>and</strong><br />
procedures. Procedural fidelity checks were<br />
c<strong>on</strong>ducted during at least 25% of the sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
in each VSM phase. The procedural fidelity<br />
scores for VSM sessi<strong>on</strong>s averaged across the<br />
participants <strong>and</strong> tasks during VSM al<strong>on</strong>e,<br />
VSM 2, <strong>and</strong> VSM 3 were 100%, 100%, <strong>and</strong><br />
94.0% (range, 80–100%) respectively. Procedural<br />
fidelity checks during performance observati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were c<strong>on</strong>ducted during at least 30%<br />
of the sessi<strong>on</strong>s in each phase. The procedural<br />
fidelity for job coaches across all performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s was 100%.<br />
Results<br />
Figures 1–3 show the data for each participant.<br />
Overall, the results showed idiosyncratic<br />
patterns across the three participants. Furthermore,<br />
the effects of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
in combinati<strong>on</strong> with other instructi<strong>on</strong>al comp<strong>on</strong>ents<br />
also varied across different tasks for<br />
each participant.<br />
Percentage of Steps Completed Correctly<br />
Daniel. Figure 1 presents the percentage of<br />
steps completed correctly across two job tasks<br />
for Daniel.<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 111
Figure 1. Percentage of Steps Completed Correctly Across Two Job Tasks for Daniel<br />
Shoe Cleaning. During both Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong><br />
2 sessi<strong>on</strong>s, Daniel correctly completed 0% of<br />
the steps in the Shoe Cleaning task analysis. The<br />
implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e resulted in an<br />
almost immediate change in the level of performance<br />
with a mean percentage of steps<br />
correctly completed of 23.8%, however, no<br />
increasing trend toward criteri<strong>on</strong> was evident.<br />
Following the implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM 2 (i.e.,<br />
VSM plus feedback), visual analysis suggested<br />
virtually no increase in level <strong>and</strong> trend of the<br />
percentage of steps correctly completed. During<br />
VSM 3 (i.e., VSM plus feedback <strong>and</strong> practice),<br />
Daniel’s highest performance level increased<br />
to 46.2% correct. However, the VSM 3<br />
data were variable <strong>and</strong> indicated decreasing<br />
trend in steps completed. Since Daniel did not<br />
achieve criteri<strong>on</strong>, maintenance data were not<br />
collected.<br />
Book Room. During Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2, the<br />
respective mean percentages of steps correctly<br />
completed by Daniel for the Book Room task<br />
analysis were 4.7% <strong>and</strong> 7.7%. With VSM al<strong>on</strong>e,<br />
Daniel’s performance did not indicate any<br />
change in the level or trend of the task acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
over Baseline 2. However, when VSM 2<br />
was implemented, an immediate change in<br />
level <strong>and</strong> trend were evident <strong>and</strong> his performance<br />
eventually stabilized at 61.5% correct.<br />
With the implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM 3, Daniel<br />
achieved 100% steps completed correctly in<br />
two sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> with another<br />
seven sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Daniel c<strong>on</strong>tinued to<br />
show high performance for the immediate<br />
<strong>and</strong> delayed maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
J<strong>on</strong>athan. Figure 2 displays the percentage<br />
of steps completed correctly across three job<br />
tasks for J<strong>on</strong>athan.<br />
Fitting Room. During Baseline 1, J<strong>on</strong>athan<br />
correctly completed an average of 4.5% of<br />
the steps in the Fitting Room task. After the<br />
videotaping sessi<strong>on</strong>s, J<strong>on</strong>athan’s performance<br />
showed an increase to an average of 34.2%<br />
steps correct during Baseline 2 but the data<br />
were variable (range, 0–73.3%). With the implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, J<strong>on</strong>athan’s initial<br />
performance was variable; however, after five<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, J<strong>on</strong>athan completed<br />
100% of the steps correctly. After another four<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s, his performance stabilized <strong>and</strong> criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
was achieved. Immediate <strong>and</strong> delayed<br />
maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s indicated that J<strong>on</strong>athan<br />
maintained the Fitting Room task at high levels<br />
(range, 86.7–100%).<br />
Shoe Storing. During Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2, the<br />
respective mean percentages of steps correctly<br />
completed by J<strong>on</strong>athan for the Shoe Storing<br />
task analysis were 20.0% <strong>and</strong> 17.8%. Following<br />
112 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 2. Percentage of Steps Completed Correctly Across Three Job Tasks for J<strong>on</strong>athan<br />
the implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, J<strong>on</strong>athan’s<br />
performance was variable but his task acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
eventually stabilized at a higher level<br />
(40.0%) compared to Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2 sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
With the implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM 2,<br />
J<strong>on</strong>athan immediately reached criteri<strong>on</strong>. After<br />
VSM 2 was withdrawn, J<strong>on</strong>athan’s performance<br />
remained at high levels (range, 84.6–<br />
100%) for the immediate <strong>and</strong> delayed maintenance<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Computer. During Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2 sessi<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
J<strong>on</strong>athan correctly completed 0% of the steps<br />
in the Computer task. The implementati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, <strong>and</strong> subsequently VSM 2, did not<br />
increase J<strong>on</strong>athan’s performance. With the<br />
implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM 3, J<strong>on</strong>athan dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
immediate increase in task acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> he achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> in six sessi<strong>on</strong>s. After<br />
VSM 3 was withdrawn, J<strong>on</strong>athan maintained<br />
the Computer task at 100% correct during the<br />
three immediate maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong><br />
delayed maintenance probes at 1 <strong>and</strong> 2-week<br />
post interventi<strong>on</strong>. Due to a reducti<strong>on</strong> in his<br />
work hours <strong>and</strong> changes to his home setting, a<br />
maintenance probe at 4-week post interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
was not collected.<br />
Maria. Figure 3 presents the percentage of<br />
steps completed correctly across three job<br />
tasks for Maria.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>ference Packet. During Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2,<br />
Maria correctly completed 0% of the steps in<br />
the C<strong>on</strong>ference Packet task. The implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e did not increase Maria’s performance<br />
above baseline level. With the implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM 2, Maria dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
minimal increase in performance to a mean<br />
of 5.1% steps correct. With the implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM 3, Maria showed rapid task acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> she achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> in 15 sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Maria maintained the task at high levels<br />
(range, 90.9–100%) during the immediate<br />
<strong>and</strong> delayed maintenance sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Paper Shredder. During Baseline 1, Maria’s<br />
performance averaged at 5% steps correct.<br />
After videotaping, Maria’s performance decreased<br />
<strong>and</strong> remained at 0% correct for the<br />
three Baseline 2 sessi<strong>on</strong>s. With the implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, there was no change in<br />
the level or trend of Maria’s correct completi<strong>on</strong><br />
of the task analysis. Maria showed an<br />
immediate increase in task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> with<br />
the implementati<strong>on</strong> of VSM 2. Maria achieved<br />
86.7% correct in 10 sessi<strong>on</strong>s, which was close<br />
to criteri<strong>on</strong> performance. Since Maria did not<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 113
achieve criteri<strong>on</strong>, VSM3 was implemented,<br />
but further intervening with VSM 3 did not<br />
result in an increase in her level of performance.<br />
During immediate <strong>and</strong> delayed maintenance<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s, Maria maintained the Paper<br />
Shredder task at high levels.<br />
Photocopier. During Baseline 1 <strong>and</strong> 2, the<br />
respective mean percentages of steps correctly<br />
completed by Maria for the Photocopier task<br />
analysis were 0% <strong>and</strong> 13.3 %. The implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e did not result in any<br />
change in the level or trend of Maria’s performance.<br />
When VSM 2 was implemented, Maria<br />
correctly completed an average of 31.5% of<br />
the steps in the task analysis. The implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of VSM 3 did not result in any change of<br />
her level of performance. Since Maria did not<br />
achieve criteri<strong>on</strong> for the Photocopier task, maintenance<br />
data were not collected.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
Figure 3. Percentage of Steps Completed Correctly Across Three Job Tasks for Maria<br />
In summary, while the results of the current<br />
investigati<strong>on</strong> dem<strong>on</strong>strated that VSM can be<br />
effective in teaching new job tasks to adults<br />
with intellectual disability, the results did not<br />
provide c<strong>on</strong>clusive evidence of the effective-<br />
ness of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e or in combinati<strong>on</strong> with<br />
feedback <strong>and</strong> practice for the three participants<br />
in this study. The effects of the various<br />
VSM c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s varied across participants<br />
<strong>and</strong> across job tasks. All the participants, however,<br />
achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> performance with<br />
<strong>on</strong>e of the three VSM phases, except for Daniel<br />
with the Shoe Cleaning task <strong>and</strong> Maria with<br />
the Photocopier task who approached mastery.<br />
Only J<strong>on</strong>athan achieved criteri<strong>on</strong> (i.e., 90%<br />
steps completed correctly for three c<strong>on</strong>secutive<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s) for the Fitting Room task with<br />
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e. With VSM al<strong>on</strong>e, some increase in<br />
performance was observed, but not to criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
level, for Daniel with the Shoe Cleaning<br />
task <strong>and</strong> J<strong>on</strong>athan with the Shoe Storing task.<br />
For Maria with all three job tasks <strong>and</strong> Daniel<br />
with the Book Room task, VSM al<strong>on</strong>e did not<br />
increase performance above Baseline 2 level.<br />
With the additi<strong>on</strong> the VSM2 (e.g., VSM<br />
plus feedback) <strong>and</strong> VSM3 (VSM plus feedback<br />
<strong>and</strong> practice), improvements in task performance<br />
were noted for certain participants<br />
<strong>and</strong> tasks over the VSM al<strong>on</strong>e c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>; however,<br />
not all participants reached criteri<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> even with the additi<strong>on</strong> of the last VSM3<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent, <strong>and</strong> substantial improvements over<br />
114 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
the previous VSM2 c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> did not occur<br />
for some participants <strong>and</strong> tasks.<br />
There are several possible reas<strong>on</strong>s for the<br />
variati<strong>on</strong> in the effectiveness of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e or<br />
in combinati<strong>on</strong> with feedback <strong>and</strong> practice<br />
across participants <strong>and</strong> job tasks. First, the<br />
participant’s previous experience with the job<br />
task itself may impact task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> using<br />
the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>s. This may have been<br />
the case for J<strong>on</strong>athan for the Fitting Room task,<br />
as it appeared that the simple exposure to the<br />
task during video creati<strong>on</strong> produced caused<br />
an increase in performance during the sec<strong>on</strong>d<br />
baseline, <strong>and</strong> criteri<strong>on</strong> performance with VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e. It is interesting to note the participants<br />
in the studies by Lasater <strong>and</strong> Brady (1995)<br />
<strong>and</strong> McGraw-Hunter et al. (2006) had some<br />
initial level of proficiency in the tasks they<br />
were taught using the VSM interventi<strong>on</strong> package.<br />
This could suggest that in order for VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e to have immediate <strong>and</strong> str<strong>on</strong>g effects,<br />
the individual may require at least a moderate<br />
level of experience to the task being taught<br />
through the VSM video. The learning curve<br />
may be too steep for VSM al<strong>on</strong>e if the individual<br />
has no or <strong>on</strong>ly minimal prior experience<br />
with the target job task.<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, task complexity may be a factor<br />
in the success, or the lack of it, of the VSM<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>. The differences in the chosen<br />
job tasks for the participants may have led<br />
to some job tasks being more difficult than<br />
others. For example with the Computer <strong>and</strong><br />
Photocopier tasks, with the multiple ic<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong><br />
the computer screen in the Computer task <strong>and</strong><br />
multiple butt<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the keypad <strong>and</strong> touchsensitive<br />
screen <strong>on</strong> the photocopier in the<br />
Photocopier task, completing <strong>on</strong>e step did not<br />
necessarily present the beginning of the<br />
next step as clearly as in the Book Room or<br />
Paper Shredder tasks. Both these tasks posed<br />
difficulties for the participants who performed<br />
at mastery or near mastery levels for their<br />
other two tasks. In studies that found videomodeling<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e to be effective, the chained<br />
tasks were relatively less complex. Mechling<br />
<strong>and</strong> colleagues (2009) used 10–20s videos to<br />
teach three fire-extinguishing skills that<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sisted of 3–6 steps each. While Shipley-<br />
Benamou <strong>and</strong> colleagues (2002) did not report<br />
the length of their videos, they investigated<br />
video-modeling with simple chained<br />
tasks, such as, making orange juice <strong>and</strong> table<br />
setting, <strong>and</strong> they found video-modeling al<strong>on</strong>e<br />
effective for teaching these skills to children<br />
with autism. This may suggest that both VSM<br />
<strong>and</strong> video-modeling may be better suited to<br />
some tasks more than others.<br />
Third, the participants’ history of job task<br />
performance, support needs, <strong>and</strong> degree of<br />
prompt dependency may have influenced acquisiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of new job tasks. The level of independence<br />
at the work place varied across the<br />
three participants.<br />
Fourth, the videos themselves may have<br />
had influences <strong>on</strong> the effectiveness of the<br />
VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>. The VSM videos also included<br />
these recommendati<strong>on</strong>s by Mayer<br />
<strong>and</strong> Moreno (2003) to reduce cognitive load:<br />
(a) offloading, by using narrati<strong>on</strong> instead of<br />
visual words in the video; (b) segmenting, by<br />
allowing some time between successive segments<br />
of the video; (c) signaling, by adding<br />
arrows to focus <strong>on</strong> essential parts of the video;<br />
<strong>and</strong> (d) synchr<strong>on</strong>izing, by presenting visual<br />
<strong>and</strong> auditory materials simultaneously. Even<br />
though these recommendati<strong>on</strong>s were incorporated<br />
to some extent in the VSM videos, the<br />
degree of clarity across steps in the videos<br />
could potentially be a factor in the success of<br />
the VSM videos.<br />
Although the outcomes were variable, this<br />
study c<strong>on</strong>tributes to the literature in several<br />
ways. First, there are relatively few empirical<br />
evaluati<strong>on</strong>s of video-based interventi<strong>on</strong>s with<br />
individuals with intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental<br />
disability (Wehmeyer, Palmer, Smith,<br />
Parent, Davies, & Stock, 2006) <strong>and</strong> an even<br />
smaller number of studies that examined the<br />
effectiveness of VSM with chained tasks. Although<br />
a few research studies have dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
the effectiveness of video-modeling<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e to teach chained tasks (e.g., Mechling<br />
et al., 2009; Shipley-Benamou et al., 2002),<br />
thus far, no study has evaluated the effectiveness<br />
of VSM al<strong>on</strong>e (i.e., without additi<strong>on</strong>al instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
strategies) to teach chained tasks.<br />
This study made an important c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> as<br />
it found that, with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of J<strong>on</strong>athan<br />
with the Fitting Room task, VSM al<strong>on</strong>e was not<br />
sufficient for job task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> for three<br />
adults with intellectual disability. The findings<br />
of this current study suggest that VSM al<strong>on</strong>e<br />
may not have been the sole c<strong>on</strong>tributor to<br />
the effectiveness VSM interventi<strong>on</strong> packages<br />
in previous VSM studies which taught chained<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 115
tasks (Cihak & Schrader, 2008; Lasater &<br />
Brady, 1995; McGraw-Hunter et al., 2006; Van<br />
Laarhoven et al., 2009).<br />
The sec<strong>on</strong>d c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> of this study is<br />
in the area of job skills training with adults<br />
with intellectual disability. Surveys have found<br />
that <strong>on</strong>e of the top barriers to employment<br />
of individuals with disability is the lack of experience<br />
<strong>and</strong> skills training (Bruyère, 2000;<br />
Loprest & Maag, 2001). The current study<br />
suggests that, while VSM al<strong>on</strong>e may be a weak<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>, VSM when combined with other<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>al comp<strong>on</strong>ents is a promising alternative<br />
to traditi<strong>on</strong>al in-vivo job training in employment<br />
settings. Although the findings were<br />
variable, all the participants were able to dem<strong>on</strong>strate<br />
generalizati<strong>on</strong>, by dem<strong>on</strong>strating job<br />
tasks learned during VSM sessi<strong>on</strong>s to actual<br />
situati<strong>on</strong>s at the job site. Recall that during<br />
performance observati<strong>on</strong>s, no instructi<strong>on</strong> or<br />
feedback of any kind was provided. This is a<br />
welcomed finding that may support the c<strong>on</strong>tinued<br />
explorati<strong>on</strong> of VSM or the use of VSM<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>s to supplement in-vivo training<br />
of job tasks in employment settings.<br />
The third c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> of this study is that<br />
the variable outcomes suggest that there may<br />
be multiple influences <strong>on</strong> performance that<br />
must be c<strong>on</strong>sidered bey<strong>on</strong>d VSM training.<br />
The success of VSM interventi<strong>on</strong>s may be influenced<br />
by any number of the following factors:<br />
(a) previous experience with the job task;<br />
(b) task complexity; (c) participant’s work<br />
performance ability (e.g., level of independent<br />
work performance, level of prompt dependency);<br />
<strong>and</strong> (d) the clarity of the videos,<br />
each of which requires further investigati<strong>on</strong><br />
before statements can be made about the general<br />
effectiveness of VSM for chained tasks.<br />
Although this study raises numerous questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
for future investigati<strong>on</strong>s, the findings<br />
should be interpreted within the c<strong>on</strong>text of<br />
several potential limitati<strong>on</strong>s. First, the use of<br />
single opportunity probes during performance<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s (Brown & Snell, 2011)<br />
may have underestimated participants’ performance.<br />
Because no remediati<strong>on</strong> of task steps<br />
took place, the participants were not able to<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinue after making an error <strong>on</strong> a critical<br />
step, <strong>and</strong> thus the performance observati<strong>on</strong><br />
did not allow performance <strong>on</strong> all possible<br />
steps.<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>d, the absence of corrective feedback<br />
during performance observati<strong>on</strong> may have inevitably<br />
reinforced the participants’ incorrect<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses or decreased the participants’ motivati<strong>on</strong><br />
to resp<strong>on</strong>d. This may have led to the<br />
participants requiring more instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to unlearn previous incorrect steps.<br />
Since corrective feedback was not immediately<br />
provided (i.e., the feedback was provided during<br />
the next instructi<strong>on</strong>al sessi<strong>on</strong>), the effectiveness<br />
of the feedback may have been reduced<br />
(Barbetta, Heward, Bradley, & Miller,<br />
1994).<br />
Third, the lack of uniform means for c<strong>on</strong>trolling<br />
task difficulty across job tasks for each<br />
participant <strong>and</strong> across participants limits the<br />
interpretati<strong>on</strong> of the results of the effectiveness<br />
of VSM. Because the participants worked,<br />
or received job training, in different employment<br />
settings, the targeted job tasks for each<br />
participant were job tasks relevant to each<br />
employment setting. While targeting these<br />
relevant job tasks for interventi<strong>on</strong> was beneficial<br />
for the participants as it increased their<br />
job repertoire in their respective employment<br />
or job training settings, this variati<strong>on</strong> in the<br />
targeted job tasks may have led to greater<br />
variability in task acquisiti<strong>on</strong>. It also made<br />
comparis<strong>on</strong>s between job tasks for each participant<br />
difficult. Since different job tasks<br />
were chosen for each participant, replicati<strong>on</strong><br />
of the research design across participants was<br />
not successfully c<strong>on</strong>ducted.<br />
The use of VSM <strong>and</strong> video modeling for<br />
teaching chained task is emerging, but more<br />
investigati<strong>on</strong> is needed before we can c<strong>on</strong>clude<br />
with c<strong>on</strong>fidence for whom <strong>and</strong> what<br />
skills VSM <strong>and</strong> video modeling should be<br />
used. One potential avenue would be to st<strong>and</strong>ardize<br />
the task analysis across multiple participants,<br />
so that the effectiveness of VSM<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e may be better examined by c<strong>on</strong>trolling<br />
tasks <strong>and</strong> video differences. Of course, this<br />
would not eliminate individual differences,<br />
but with c<strong>on</strong>trol over task difficulty, effects<br />
<strong>on</strong> participant characteristics may be better<br />
illuminated.<br />
Another approach for future research<br />
would be to examine the effectiveness of VSM<br />
with tasks of varying complexity to determine<br />
if VSM is more suited for certain tasks. Future<br />
researchers may want to examine the effectiveness<br />
of VSM for shorter tasks. Furthermore,<br />
instead of presenting the entire VSM video<br />
116 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
for a l<strong>on</strong>ger task, several shorter video clips<br />
of a l<strong>on</strong>ger task could be presented to the<br />
individual with intellectual disability, to reduce<br />
the attenti<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> retenti<strong>on</strong>al dem<strong>and</strong>s<br />
<strong>on</strong> the individual. This area of research<br />
would be closely in line with, <strong>and</strong> would be<br />
guided by, current research in video prompting<br />
to teach chained task (e.g., Mechling &<br />
Stephens, 2009; Sigafoos et al., 2005).<br />
Future research should examine the effects<br />
of adding in-vivo feedback <strong>and</strong> prompting<br />
procedures in additi<strong>on</strong> to VSM to determine<br />
if the in-vivo feedback <strong>and</strong> prompting has an<br />
additive comp<strong>on</strong>ent to VSM or if in-vivo training<br />
al<strong>on</strong>e was sufficient for job task acquisiti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
This is important in order to develop<br />
an effective <strong>and</strong> efficient job skills training<br />
package for individuals with intellectual disability.<br />
Furthermore, this may determine if<br />
VSM videos enhance acquisiti<strong>on</strong> in any way<br />
thus, settling the issue of whether the additi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
resources spent <strong>on</strong> videotaping <strong>and</strong><br />
video editing adds an additi<strong>on</strong>al instructi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
or cost benefit.<br />
Another approach for future research is<br />
in determining whether the use of other models,<br />
instead of self, in the videos could lead to<br />
better outcomes. Current studies in this area<br />
have found that certain individuals perform<br />
better with VSM <strong>and</strong> others, video modeling<br />
(e.g., Cihak & Schrader, 2008; Van Laarhoven<br />
et al., 2009). This is an important area of<br />
future research, as it has to do with the cost<br />
effectiveness of the video interventi<strong>on</strong>. If<br />
video modeling is found to be effective <strong>and</strong><br />
preferred by individuals with intellectual disability<br />
for employment skills training, it may<br />
be more cost effective to produce a generic<br />
job task video for all individuals, instead of producing<br />
a different video of each individual.<br />
In summary, as <strong>on</strong>e of the first studies to<br />
explore the use of VSM for teaching chained<br />
tasks <strong>and</strong> its applicability for employment settings,<br />
this study provides some initial evidence<br />
that VSM can be effective, but at the same<br />
time, raises numerous issues ripe for future<br />
investigati<strong>on</strong>s. Clearly this study suggests that<br />
VSM al<strong>on</strong>e has limited effectiveness, but it has<br />
the potential to promote the acquisiti<strong>on</strong> of job<br />
tasks, without in-vivo instructi<strong>on</strong>, when used in<br />
combinati<strong>on</strong> with other instructi<strong>on</strong>al comp<strong>on</strong>ents.<br />
Future research is needed to investigate<br />
optimal c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s in which VSM may be effective<br />
<strong>and</strong> beneficial in the work place.<br />
References<br />
Allen, K. D., Wallace, D. P., Renes, D., Bowen, S. L.,<br />
& Burke, R. V. (2010). Use of video modeling to<br />
teach vocati<strong>on</strong>al skills to adolescents <strong>and</strong> young<br />
adults with autism spectrum disorders. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Treatment of Children, 33, 339–349.<br />
B<strong>and</strong>ura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modificati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winst<strong>on</strong>.<br />
B<strong>and</strong>ura, A. (1986). Social foundati<strong>on</strong>s of thought <strong>and</strong><br />
acti<strong>on</strong>: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs,<br />
NJ: Prentice-Hall.<br />
B<strong>and</strong>ura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of c<strong>on</strong>trol.<br />
New York: Freeman.<br />
Barbetta, P. M., Heward, W. L., Bradley, D. M., &<br />
Miller, A. D. (1994). Effects of immediate <strong>and</strong><br />
delayed error correcti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
maintenance of sight words by students with developmental<br />
disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior<br />
Analysis, 27, 177–178. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-<br />
177<br />
Branham, R. S., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., &<br />
Kleinert, H. (1999). Teaching community skills to<br />
students with moderate disabilities: Comparing<br />
combined techniques of classroom simulati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
videotape modeling, <strong>and</strong> community-based instructi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 34, 170–81.<br />
Brown, F., & Snell, M. E. (2011). Measuring student<br />
behavior <strong>and</strong> learning. In M. Snell & F. Brown<br />
(Eds.), Instructi<strong>on</strong> of students with severe disabilities<br />
(7 th ed., pp. 186–223). Upper Saddle River, NJ:<br />
Pears<strong>on</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong>, Inc.<br />
Bruyère, S. (2000). Disability employment policies <strong>and</strong><br />
practices in private <strong>and</strong> federal sector organizati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Retrieved from Cornell University, School of<br />
Industrial <strong>and</strong> Labor Relati<strong>on</strong>s Extensi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g>,<br />
Program <strong>on</strong> Employment <strong>and</strong> Disability<br />
website: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extensi<strong>on</strong>/<br />
files/download/Private-Federal%20Final%20<br />
Report.pdf<br />
Buggey, T. (2005). Video self-modeling applicati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with students with autism spectrum disorder in a<br />
small private school setting. Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Other <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 20, 52–63. doi:<br />
10.1177/10883576050200010501<br />
Ch<strong>and</strong>ler, W., Schuster, J. W., & Stevens, K. B.<br />
(1993). Teaching employment skills to adolescents<br />
with mild <strong>and</strong> moderate disabilities using a<br />
c<strong>on</strong>stant time delay procedure. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong>, 28, 155–168.<br />
Cihak, D. F., Kessler, K. B., & Alberto, P. A. (2007).<br />
Generalized use of a h<strong>and</strong>held prompting system.<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 117
Research in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 28, 397–408.<br />
doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2006.05.003<br />
Cihak, D. F., & Schrader, L. (2008). Does the<br />
model matter? Comparing video self-modeling<br />
<strong>and</strong> video adult modeling for task acquisiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
maintenance by adolescents with autism spectrum<br />
disorders. Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology,<br />
23, 9–20.<br />
Dowrick, P. W. (1991). Practical guide to using to using<br />
video in the behavioral sciences. New York: Wiley<br />
Interscience.<br />
Dowrick, P. W. (1999). A review of self-modeling<br />
<strong>and</strong> related interventi<strong>on</strong>s. Applied <strong>and</strong> Preventive<br />
Psychology, 8, 23–39. doi:10.1016/S0962-1849(99)<br />
80009-2<br />
Dowrick, P. W., Kim-Rupnow, W. S., & Power, T. J.<br />
(2006). Video feedforward for reading. Journal<br />
of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 39, 194–207. doi:10.1177/<br />
00224669060390040101<br />
Dowrick, P. W., & Raeburrn, J. M. (1995). Selfmodeling:<br />
Rapid skill training for children<br />
with physical disabilities. Journal of <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Physical <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 7, 25–37. doi:10.1007/<br />
BF02578712<br />
Gast, D. L., & Ledford, J. (2010). Multiple baseline<br />
<strong>and</strong> multiple probe design. In D. L. Gast (Ed.),<br />
Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences<br />
(pp. 276–328). New York: Routledge.<br />
Goods<strong>on</strong>, J., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., Cannella, H.,<br />
& Lanci<strong>on</strong>i, G. E. (2007). Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of a videobased<br />
error correcti<strong>on</strong> procedure for teaching a<br />
domestic skill to individuals with developmental<br />
disabilities. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
28, 458–467. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2006.06.002<br />
Hitchcock, C. H., Dowrick, P. W., & Prater, M. A.<br />
(2003). Video self-modeling interventi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
school-based settings: A review. Remedial <strong>and</strong><br />
Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 24, 36–45. doi:10.1177/<br />
074193250302400104<br />
Lasater, M. W., & Brady, M. P. (1995). Effects of<br />
video self-modeling <strong>and</strong> feedback <strong>on</strong> task fluency:<br />
A home-based interventi<strong>on</strong>. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Treatment<br />
of Children, 18, 389–407.<br />
Loprest, P., & Maag, E. (2001). Barriers to <strong>and</strong> supports<br />
for work am<strong>on</strong>g adults with disabilities: Results<br />
from the NHIS-D. Retrieved from The Urban<br />
Institute website: http://www.urban.org/pdfs/<br />
adultswithdisabilities.pdf<br />
Maciag, K. G., Schuster, J. W., Collins, B.C., &<br />
Cooper, J. T. (2000). Training adults with<br />
moderate <strong>and</strong> severe mental retardati<strong>on</strong> in a vocati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
skill using a simultaneous prompting<br />
procedure. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in Mental Retardati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 35, 306–316.<br />
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to<br />
reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning.<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al Psychologist, 38, 43–52. doi:10.1207/<br />
S15326985EP3801_6<br />
McGraw-Hunter, M., Faw, G. D., & Davis, P. K.<br />
(2006). The use of video self-modeling <strong>and</strong> feedback<br />
to teach cooking skills to individuals with<br />
traumatic brain injury: A pilot study. Brain Injury,<br />
20, 1061–1068. doi:10.1080/02699050600912163<br />
Mechling, L. (2005). The effect of instructorcreated<br />
video programs to teach students with<br />
disabilities: A literature review. Journal of Special<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology, 20, 25–36.<br />
Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L., & Gustafs<strong>on</strong>, M. R.<br />
(2009). Use of video modeling to teach extinguishing<br />
of cooking related fires to individuals<br />
with moderate intellectual disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 44, 67–<br />
79.<br />
Mechling, L. C., & Ortega-Hurnd<strong>on</strong>, F. (2007).<br />
Computer-based video instructi<strong>on</strong> to teach young<br />
adults with moderate intellectual disabilities to<br />
perform multiple step, job tasks in a generalized<br />
setting. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 42, 24–37.<br />
Mechling, L. C., & Stephens, E. (2009). Comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
of self-prompting of cooking skills via picturebased<br />
cookbooks <strong>and</strong> video recipes. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
Training in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 44, 218–236.<br />
Meharg, S. S., & Woltersdorf, M. A. (1990). Therapeutic<br />
use of videotape self-modeling: A review.<br />
Advanced Behavioral Research Therapy, 12, 85–99.<br />
doi:10.1016/0146-6402(90)90008-E<br />
Riffel, L. A., Wehmeyer, M. L., Turnbull, A. P.,<br />
Lattimore, J., Davies, D., Stock, S., & Fisher, S.<br />
(2005). Promoting independent performance of<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong>-related tasks using a Palmtop PC-based<br />
self directed visual <strong>and</strong> auditory prompting system.<br />
Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong> Technology, 20,<br />
5–14.<br />
Rusch, F. R., & Millar, D. M. (1998). Emerging<br />
transiti<strong>on</strong> best practices. In F. R. Rusch & J. G.<br />
Chadsey (Eds.), Bey<strong>on</strong>d high school: Transiti<strong>on</strong><br />
from school to work (pp. 36–59). Belm<strong>on</strong>t, CA:<br />
Wadsworth.<br />
Shipley-Benamou, R., Lutzker, J. R., & Taubman, M.<br />
(2002). Teaching daily living skills to children<br />
with autism through instructi<strong>on</strong>al video modeling.<br />
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventi<strong>on</strong>s, 4,<br />
165–175. doi:10.1177/10983007020040030501<br />
Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., Cannella, H., Upadhyaya,<br />
M., Edrisinha, C., Lanci<strong>on</strong>i, G. E., & Young, D.<br />
(2005). Computer-presented video prompting for<br />
teaching microwave oven use to three adults with<br />
developmental disabilities. Journal of Behavioral<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>, 14, 189–201. doi:10.1007/s10864-005-<br />
6297-2<br />
Snell, M. E., & Brown, F. (2011). Selecting teaching<br />
strategies <strong>and</strong> arranging educati<strong>on</strong>al envir<strong>on</strong>ments.<br />
In M. Snell & F. Brown (Eds.), Instructi<strong>on</strong><br />
of students with severe disabilities (7 th ed., pp. 122–<br />
118 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
185). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pears<strong>on</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Inc.<br />
Test, D. W., & Mazzotti, V. L. (2011). Transiti<strong>on</strong>ing<br />
from school to employment. In M. Snell &<br />
F. Brown (Eds.), Instructi<strong>on</strong> of students with severe<br />
disabilities (7 th ed., pp. 569–611). Upper Saddle<br />
River, NJ: Pears<strong>on</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong>, Inc.<br />
Van Laarhoven, T., Zurita, L. M., Johns<strong>on</strong>, J. W.,<br />
Grider, K. M., & Grider, K. L. (2009). Comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
of self, other, <strong>and</strong> subjective video models<br />
for teaching daily living skills to individuals with<br />
developmental disabilities. Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training<br />
in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 44, 509–522.<br />
Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., Smith, S. J., Parent,<br />
W., Davies, D. K., & Stock, S. (2006). Technology<br />
use by people with intellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental<br />
disabilities to support employment activities:<br />
A single-subject design meta-analysis. Journal<br />
of Vocati<strong>on</strong>al Rehabilitati<strong>on</strong>, 24, 81–86.<br />
Wert, B. Y., & Neisworth, J. T. (2003). Effects<br />
of video self-modeling <strong>on</strong> sp<strong>on</strong>taneous requesting<br />
in children with autism. Journal of Positive<br />
Behavior Interventi<strong>on</strong>s, 5, 30–34. doi:10.1177/<br />
10983007030050010501<br />
Received: 9 November 2011<br />
Initial Acceptance: 9 January 2012<br />
Final Acceptance: 25 June 2012<br />
Video Self-Modeling: A Job Skills Interventi<strong>on</strong> / 119
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 120–131<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Collaborative Training <strong>and</strong> Practice am<strong>on</strong>g Applied<br />
Behavior Analysts who Support Individuals with<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorder<br />
Amy Kelly <strong>and</strong> Matt Tincani<br />
Temple University<br />
Abstract: Increasingly, practicing behavior analysts play an integral role as interdisciplinary team members to<br />
develop instructi<strong>on</strong>al programs for students with autism spectrum disorder. However, there is a lack of research<br />
<strong>on</strong> collaborative training <strong>and</strong> practice as it relates to professi<strong>on</strong>als in the field of ABA. In this study, 302<br />
behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als, 95% of whom worked with individuals with ASD, were surveyed regarding what<br />
training they received in collaborati<strong>on</strong>, the type <strong>and</strong> extent of collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>s with other professi<strong>on</strong>als,<br />
variables they perceive to inhibit <strong>and</strong> facilitate collaborati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> the extent to which they view collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as a valuable comp<strong>on</strong>ent of their practice. Results indicate that while applied behavior analysts frequently<br />
collaborate with a variety of professi<strong>on</strong>als <strong>and</strong> view collaborati<strong>on</strong> as important, <strong>on</strong> average they received little<br />
or no formal training in collaborati<strong>on</strong>, were more likely to provide than to adopt programming recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
from professi<strong>on</strong>als except for those with similar training, <strong>and</strong> reported lower ratings with respect to the experience<br />
<strong>and</strong> value of collaborati<strong>on</strong> in their practice. Collectively, results highlight a need to increase collaborative<br />
training of practicing behavior analysts, particularly in relati<strong>on</strong> to providing recommendati<strong>on</strong>s to <strong>and</strong> adopting<br />
recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from n<strong>on</strong>-behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als, <strong>and</strong> to c<strong>on</strong>duct research <strong>on</strong> modes of collaborati<strong>on</strong> that<br />
lead to best outcomes.<br />
Research shows that strategies incorporating<br />
in the c<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>and</strong> principles of applied<br />
behavior analysis (ABA) are c<strong>on</strong>sistently effective<br />
for teaching children with autism spectrum<br />
disorder (ASD) at a variety of ages <strong>and</strong><br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing levels (Levy, M<strong>and</strong>ell, & Shultz,<br />
2009; Vismara & Rogers, 2010; Virués-Ortega,<br />
2010). In recent years, the field of ABA has<br />
grown to accommodate the need for qualified<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als to develop ABA programs in<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>se to increasing numbers of children<br />
with ASD receiving special educati<strong>on</strong> services<br />
(Travers, Tincani, & Krezmien, 2011). One<br />
measure of the field’s growth is increasing<br />
membership in the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Behavior<br />
Analysis Internati<strong>on</strong>al (ABAI), the discipline’s<br />
flagship professi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> scholarly organizati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
As of August 2010, the organizati<strong>on</strong> re-<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Matt Tincani, 1301 Cecil B. Moore<br />
Ave., Ritter Hall 367, Temple University, Philadelphia,<br />
PA 19122. E-mail: tincani@temple.edu<br />
ported a membership of nearly 13,500 members,<br />
5,800 in U.S. chapters <strong>and</strong> over 7,000 in<br />
n<strong>on</strong>-U.S. chapters in 30 countries with an average<br />
annual growth rate of 6.5% over the<br />
past 10 years. The Behavior Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong><br />
Board (BACB), which has been credentialing<br />
Board Certified Behavior Analysts<br />
(BCBAs) <strong>and</strong> Board Certified Assistant Behavior<br />
Analysts (BCaBAs) since 1998, has also<br />
documented substantial growth. The number<br />
of certificants increased from approximately<br />
500 in 2000 to nearly 6,000 in 2007 (Shook &<br />
Favell, 2008; Shook & Neisworth, 2005). Furthermore,<br />
a number of states have passed legislati<strong>on</strong><br />
to license behavior analysts to work<br />
primarily with c<strong>on</strong>sumers with ASD. As <strong>on</strong>e<br />
example, Nevada Revised Statute Chapter 641<br />
provides for applied behavior analysts who<br />
work with children with autism in that state to<br />
be licensed (Nevada Legislature, 2012). Seventeen<br />
states now have laws m<strong>and</strong>ating insurance<br />
coverage for treatment of children with<br />
autism which includes ABA (Nati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>ference<br />
of State Legislatures, 2011).<br />
120 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Collaborati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Applied Behavior Analysis<br />
Practicing behavior analysts are increasingly<br />
recognized as pivotal related services providers<br />
who serve <strong>on</strong> multidisciplinary teams to<br />
develop <strong>and</strong> evaluate special educati<strong>on</strong> programs<br />
for students with ASD in public schools<br />
(Boutot & Hume, 2010). This means helping<br />
general <strong>and</strong> special educati<strong>on</strong> teachers, related<br />
services providers, <strong>and</strong> administrators to<br />
imbed behavioral teaching techniques within<br />
inclusive settings. C<strong>on</strong>sequently, collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
is integral in upholding the Behavior Analyst<br />
Certificati<strong>on</strong> Board’s (BACB) Guidelines for<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>sible C<strong>on</strong>duct (2010). For example,<br />
Guideline 2.04 (C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>) states that,<br />
“when indicated <strong>and</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>ally appropriate,<br />
behavior analysts cooperate with other<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als in order to serve their clients<br />
effectively <strong>and</strong> appropriately.” To underscore<br />
the importance of collaborati<strong>on</strong> in professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
training, the BACB’s Third Editi<strong>on</strong><br />
Behavior Analyst Task List, C<strong>on</strong>tent Area<br />
10–6, indicates that practicing behavior analysts<br />
should, “provide behavior analysis services<br />
in collaborati<strong>on</strong> with others who support<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or provide services to <strong>on</strong>e’s clients.”<br />
It is evident that collaborati<strong>on</strong> between<br />
practicing behavior analysts <strong>and</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
with whom they work is essential for effective<br />
behavioral programming in public educati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> other settings. C<strong>on</strong>versely, lack of successful<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> may inhibit the educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
team’s ability to develop <strong>and</strong> implement interventi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with high fidelity. However, because<br />
the practice of ABA is a relatively new<br />
discipline that evolved separately from the<br />
mainstream fields of educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong>, research <strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong> as it specifically<br />
applies to ABA is lacking.<br />
What is Collaborati<strong>on</strong>?<br />
There is no st<strong>and</strong>ard operati<strong>on</strong>al definiti<strong>on</strong><br />
for collaborati<strong>on</strong> (Noell & Witt, 1999), hence<br />
the c<strong>on</strong>struct is c<strong>on</strong>ceptualized differently<br />
across disciplines. In the field of special educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> is emphasized as it relates<br />
to many activities (e.g., co-teaching,<br />
problem solving, <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>) with a focus<br />
<strong>on</strong> the interacti<strong>on</strong> between the general<br />
educator <strong>and</strong> special educator. Collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
is suggested in the field to be an essential<br />
element in service delivery that results in improvement<br />
in student outcomes as well as<br />
teacher knowledge <strong>and</strong> skill (Car<strong>on</strong> &<br />
McLaughlin, 2002; Santangelo, 2009; Shann<strong>on</strong><br />
& Bylsma, 2004).<br />
In educati<strong>on</strong> more generally, collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
is emphasized as it relates specifically to the<br />
activity of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> with a focus <strong>on</strong> the<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong> between c<strong>on</strong>sultant (e.g., school<br />
psychologist) <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sultee (e.g., teacher).<br />
Collaborati<strong>on</strong> is noted as a comm<strong>on</strong> characteristic<br />
of a variety of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> models<br />
(e.g., mental health, organizati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> systems,<br />
behavioral, <strong>and</strong> collaborative models)<br />
that result in desirable client outcomes<br />
(Her<strong>on</strong> & Harris, 2001). A comm<strong>on</strong> theme<br />
emerging from research <strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> is<br />
that a collaborative approach involving shared<br />
decisi<strong>on</strong> making between professi<strong>on</strong>als leads<br />
to improved c<strong>on</strong>sumer outcomes (Hunt, Soto,<br />
Maier, & Doering, 2003; Hunt, Soto, Maier,<br />
Liboir<strong>on</strong>, & Bae, 2004; Kelleher, Riley-<br />
Tillman, & Power, 2008; Ray, Skinner, & Wats<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1999), although some studies show little<br />
difference between collaborative <strong>and</strong> direct<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> approaches (e.g., Ratz<strong>on</strong> et al.,<br />
2009; Wickstrom, J<strong>on</strong>es, LaFleur, & Witt, 1998).<br />
One model of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>, behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
embraces a four-stage problem solving<br />
process in which numerous dimensi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
of collaborati<strong>on</strong> are involved: problem identificati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
problem analysis, treatment implementati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> treatment evaluati<strong>on</strong> (Bergan,<br />
1977; Bergan & Kratochwill, 1990). This<br />
model has been distinguished from other<br />
models due to its rigor in regards to methodology<br />
(Sheridan, Welch, & Orme, 1996). In a<br />
literature review from 1985 to 1995 by Sheridan<br />
et al. (1996), behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
its variants (e.g., c<strong>on</strong>joint behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>)<br />
produced the most c<strong>on</strong>sistent desirable<br />
results of the various c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> models in<br />
regards to client achievement <strong>and</strong> social behavior.<br />
Targets for improvement included clients’<br />
behavioral (<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>%) <strong>and</strong> academic (33%)<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerns followed by c<strong>on</strong>sultee skills (22%)<br />
<strong>and</strong> attitudes (15%), changes in referral patterns<br />
(13%), <strong>and</strong> other system-related c<strong>on</strong>cerns<br />
(4%). Various measures were used to<br />
assess c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> outcomes including direct<br />
observati<strong>on</strong>s, ratings, tests, <strong>and</strong> referrals (with<br />
52% using multiple measures). Of all behavioral<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> outcomes reported, 89%<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 121
were in the positive directi<strong>on</strong>. C<strong>on</strong>joint behavioral<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> (a variant that parallels in<br />
practice to traditi<strong>on</strong>al behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>)<br />
further supports the use of a collaborative<br />
problem-solving approach to c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong><br />
across envir<strong>on</strong>ments (Sheridan & Colt<strong>on</strong>,<br />
1994; Sheridan, Kratochwill, & Elliott, 1990;<br />
Galloway & Sheridan, 1994). A major goal of<br />
c<strong>on</strong>joint behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> is to facilitate<br />
parent-teacher communicati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> a shared<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>sibility in educati<strong>on</strong>al decisi<strong>on</strong> making<br />
(Sheridan & Colt<strong>on</strong>, 1994). For example,<br />
Sheridan et al. (1990) found an increase in<br />
social initiati<strong>on</strong>s in both the home <strong>and</strong> school<br />
setting when both the parent <strong>and</strong> teacher<br />
were actively involved in the c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> process.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, Galloway <strong>and</strong> Sheridan investigated<br />
the effects of an interventi<strong>on</strong> with<br />
<strong>and</strong> without c<strong>on</strong>joint behavior therapy <strong>and</strong><br />
found that gains were greater when the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> process was implemented with<br />
teachers <strong>and</strong> parents together. Findings also<br />
suggested greater treatment integrity, maintenance<br />
of gains, <strong>and</strong> greater c<strong>on</strong>sumer acceptability.<br />
Despite the apparent importance of collaborative<br />
strategies as part of the c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong><br />
process in educati<strong>on</strong>, the field of applied behavior<br />
analysis has c<strong>on</strong>ducted <strong>on</strong>ly limited research<br />
<strong>on</strong> this c<strong>on</strong>struct. Studies in the field<br />
of applied behavior analysis that have applied<br />
“collaborative” strategies as part of an interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
have specified the elements of the<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>, but have not lead to c<strong>on</strong>clusive<br />
results (Hundert & Hopkins, 1992; Putnam,<br />
H<strong>and</strong>ler, Ramirez-Platt, & Luiselli, 2003). For<br />
example, in the Hundert <strong>and</strong> Hopkins study<br />
it was unclear which of three comp<strong>on</strong>ents<br />
(supervisory training, c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> by resource<br />
teachers with classroom teachers, or<br />
the collaborative planning process) increased<br />
teacher behavior toward children with disabilities.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, in the study by Putnam et al.,<br />
a bus-riding program that decreased disruptive<br />
behaviors simultaneously applied collaborative<br />
procedures, applied the inventi<strong>on</strong><br />
(positive reinforcement c<strong>on</strong>tingent <strong>on</strong> defined<br />
appropriate behaviors) to all students,<br />
<strong>and</strong> applied preventative strategies; therefore,<br />
no c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong> about collaborati<strong>on</strong>’s influence<br />
<strong>on</strong> the outcome as a separate variable could<br />
be made.<br />
While collaborati<strong>on</strong> is regarded as an im-<br />
portant comp<strong>on</strong>ent of practice in ABA, the<br />
degree to which behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als are<br />
trained in collaborati<strong>on</strong> is poorly understood.<br />
Given substantial recent growth in the field<br />
<strong>and</strong> increasing numbers of behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
working <strong>on</strong> interdisciplinary teams<br />
serving individuals with ASD, more informati<strong>on</strong><br />
is needed <strong>on</strong> the type <strong>and</strong> extent of collaborative<br />
training <strong>and</strong> collaborative practices<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g ABA practiti<strong>on</strong>ers. Therefore, the<br />
goal of this descriptive study is to survey behavioral<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als to identify (a) what, if<br />
any, training they have received in collaborati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
(b) the type <strong>and</strong> extent of collaborative<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s with other professi<strong>on</strong>als; (c) variables<br />
that facilitate <strong>and</strong> inhibit collaborati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
<strong>and</strong> (d) the extent to which they view collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as a valuable comp<strong>on</strong>ent of their<br />
practice. It is hoped that this informati<strong>on</strong> will<br />
inform the training of practicing behavior analysts,<br />
<strong>and</strong> will provide preliminary descriptive<br />
informati<strong>on</strong> for subsequent studies <strong>on</strong> how to<br />
improve behavior analysts’ collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
which will in turn lead to enhancements<br />
in c<strong>on</strong>sumer outcomes.<br />
Method<br />
Participants<br />
Participants were recruited through membership<br />
in an affiliated chapter or special interest<br />
group (SIG) of the Associati<strong>on</strong> for Behavior<br />
Analysis Internati<strong>on</strong>al (ABAI). Criteria for eligibility<br />
to participate in the research as stated<br />
in the c<strong>on</strong>sent form included: (a) holding a<br />
certificati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong>/or license related to the<br />
field of applied behavior analysis, educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
or human services (e.g., behavior analyst,<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> teacher, psychologist) <strong>and</strong><br />
(b) holding a current positi<strong>on</strong> working directly<br />
with c<strong>on</strong>sumers in the field. Participants<br />
were not compensated for their participati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>sent to distribute the survey was obtained<br />
through approval of the c<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong><br />
of chapters <strong>and</strong> SIGs affiliated with ABAI. Recruitment<br />
for the study c<strong>on</strong>sisted of a teleph<strong>on</strong>e<br />
call by the first author to each c<strong>on</strong>tact<br />
pers<strong>on</strong> of the 39 United States associated<br />
chapters <strong>and</strong> four SIGs (i.e., <strong>Autism</strong>, Behavior<br />
Analyst Online, Positive Behavior Support,<br />
<strong>and</strong> Practiti<strong>on</strong>er Issues in Behavior Analysis)<br />
affiliated with ABAI. Initial c<strong>on</strong>tact informa-<br />
122 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
ti<strong>on</strong> for each organizati<strong>on</strong> was obtained from<br />
the ABAI website (www.abainternati<strong>on</strong>al.org).<br />
If the pers<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>tacted was not resp<strong>on</strong>sible<br />
for decisi<strong>on</strong>s regarding research solicitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to be distributed to members, the c<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong><br />
forwarded the solicitati<strong>on</strong> email to the<br />
leadership of the organizati<strong>on</strong>, or the first<br />
author was provided with an e-mail <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
ph<strong>on</strong>e c<strong>on</strong>tact of the organizati<strong>on</strong>’s leader to<br />
seek permissi<strong>on</strong> to distribute the survey.<br />
Following verbal agreement through teleph<strong>on</strong>e<br />
or email, the first author sent an email<br />
to the c<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>taining informati<strong>on</strong><br />
about the research with an embedded link to<br />
the c<strong>on</strong>sent form <strong>and</strong> survey. C<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong>s<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sented by forwarding the email to all members<br />
<strong>and</strong> the first author to c<strong>on</strong>firm participati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>ses for the survey were collected<br />
from September 28, 2010 through October<br />
22, 2010 through SurveyM<strong>on</strong>key, a webbased,<br />
commercial survey tool.<br />
The following 20 state <strong>and</strong> regi<strong>on</strong>al affiliated<br />
chapters of ABAI participated in the<br />
study: Alabama ABA, Behavior Analysis Associati<strong>on</strong><br />
of Michigan, California ABA, Delaware<br />
Valley ABA, Four Corners ABA, Georgia ABA,<br />
Hawai’ian ABA, Iowa ABA, L<strong>on</strong>e Star ABA,<br />
Louisiana ABA, Maryl<strong>and</strong> ABA, Minnesota<br />
Northl<strong>and</strong> ABA, Nevada ABA, Oreg<strong>on</strong> ABA,<br />
Pennsylvania ABA, South Carolina ABA, Tennessee<br />
ABA, Utah ABA, Virginia ABA, <strong>and</strong><br />
Wisc<strong>on</strong>sin ABA. The authors were not able to<br />
obtain informati<strong>on</strong> regarding the number of<br />
emails sent to members of each organizati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
therefore, an exact resp<strong>on</strong>se rate could not<br />
be calculated. However, twenty of 44, or 45%<br />
of ABAI affiliated chapters distributed the<br />
survey, representing Northeast, Mid Atlantic,<br />
Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, <strong>and</strong> Northwest<br />
regi<strong>on</strong>s of the U.S.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, the Behavior Analyst Online<br />
Special Interest Group (SIG) <strong>and</strong> Practiti<strong>on</strong>er<br />
Issues in Behavior Analysis SIG were c<strong>on</strong>tacted<br />
to distribute the survey. The c<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong> of<br />
Practiti<strong>on</strong>er Issues in Behavior Analysis SIG<br />
forwarded the survey to members of the following<br />
four special interest groups: Behavioral<br />
Medicine SIG, Crime, Delinquency, <strong>and</strong> Forensic<br />
Behavior Analysis SIG, Military <strong>and</strong><br />
Veteran SIG, <strong>and</strong> Policy SIG. Therefore, the<br />
final sample c<strong>on</strong>sisted of resp<strong>on</strong>dents from<br />
26 affiliated chapters <strong>and</strong> SIGs throughout the<br />
United States.<br />
Approximately <strong>on</strong>e week prior to the deadline<br />
stated for survey resp<strong>on</strong>ses (October 22,<br />
2010), a reminder email was sent to each organizati<strong>on</strong><br />
or special interest group for the<br />
designated c<strong>on</strong>tact pers<strong>on</strong> to distribute. Reminder<br />
emails were <strong>on</strong>ly sent to those chapters<br />
<strong>and</strong> groups that had distributed the survey<br />
at least <strong>on</strong>e week earlier.<br />
Measures<br />
C<strong>on</strong>tent validati<strong>on</strong>. A questi<strong>on</strong>naire was<br />
used as the measurement instrument for this<br />
study. For the purpose of c<strong>on</strong>tent validati<strong>on</strong>, a<br />
pending versi<strong>on</strong> of the survey was first sent to<br />
nine doctoral-level professi<strong>on</strong>als with expertise<br />
in applied behavior analysis <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Five out of nine professi<strong>on</strong>als assessed<br />
the survey items for accuracy in measuring the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tent (e.g., current collaborative behavior,<br />
variables that facilitate <strong>and</strong> inhibit collaborative<br />
behavior, <strong>and</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>als’ perspectives<br />
<strong>on</strong> collaborative behavior). Criteri<strong>on</strong> for keeping<br />
a survey item was agreement by three or<br />
more experts <strong>and</strong> no experts indicating the<br />
item should be removed. One out of five experts<br />
suggested three items for removal. Given<br />
suggesti<strong>on</strong>s for modificati<strong>on</strong>, the three items<br />
were revised rather than removed. All 23 survey<br />
items were retained in the final survey with<br />
18 modified given suggesti<strong>on</strong>s for modificati<strong>on</strong><br />
from experts in the field.<br />
Survey. Prior to sending out the final survey<br />
to participants, the primary investigator<br />
piloted the survey through SurveyM<strong>on</strong>key<br />
to assure that the settings <strong>and</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>s were<br />
operating effectively. Participants had the opti<strong>on</strong><br />
to complete any, all, or n<strong>on</strong>e of the survey<br />
items as well as re-enter the survey to change<br />
answers or complete it at another time up<br />
until the stated deadline. Participants were<br />
not able to complete the survey twice from the<br />
same IP address. Participants were not required<br />
to record any potentially identifying<br />
informati<strong>on</strong> (e.g., email address) <strong>and</strong> encrypti<strong>on</strong><br />
was added to transmit informati<strong>on</strong> privately<br />
over the Internet.<br />
The survey was designed to take participants<br />
10–15 minutes to complete. Prior to accessing<br />
the survey, a c<strong>on</strong>sent form was presented immediately<br />
up<strong>on</strong> clicking the hyperlink c<strong>on</strong>tained<br />
in the email sent to participants. Participants<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sented to the study by clicking<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 123
the “Next” butt<strong>on</strong> at the end of the c<strong>on</strong>sent<br />
form <strong>and</strong> were then granted access to the<br />
survey items. The survey comprised four secti<strong>on</strong>s:<br />
(a) demographics, (b) current collaborative<br />
behavior, (c) variables that inhibit <strong>and</strong><br />
facilitate collaborative behavior, <strong>and</strong> (d) perspectives<br />
<strong>on</strong> collaborative behavior.<br />
In the first secti<strong>on</strong>, demographics, resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
were asked to indicate their current<br />
positi<strong>on</strong>(s), highest degree, certificati<strong>on</strong>(s)/<br />
license(s), work setting(s), age range(s) of<br />
those being served, diagnoses of those being<br />
served, <strong>and</strong> number of college/university<br />
course credits <strong>and</strong> workshops/trainings with<br />
the word “collaborati<strong>on</strong>” in the title or descripti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Participants resp<strong>on</strong>ded to questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
by clicking <strong>on</strong>e or more boxes to the left of<br />
text answers when given the directi<strong>on</strong> to<br />
check all that apply or resp<strong>on</strong>ded by clicking<br />
<strong>on</strong>e of the circles to the left of text answers<br />
when given the directi<strong>on</strong> to check <strong>on</strong>e. For<br />
five out of eight questi<strong>on</strong>s, participants were<br />
also given the opportunity to select an answer<br />
of “other” <strong>and</strong> insert text.<br />
The sec<strong>on</strong>d secti<strong>on</strong>, current collaborative<br />
behavior, defined collaborati<strong>on</strong> for resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
before presenting the opportunity to<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>d to questi<strong>on</strong>s regarding the c<strong>on</strong>struct.<br />
Collaborati<strong>on</strong> was defined as the following: “A<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> involving voluntary,<br />
interpers<strong>on</strong>al interacti<strong>on</strong>s comprising of<br />
two or more professi<strong>on</strong>als engaging in communicati<strong>on</strong><br />
modalities (face-to-face meetings,<br />
e-mail, alternate means of feedback, etc.) for<br />
the purposes of shared decisi<strong>on</strong>-making <strong>and</strong><br />
problem solving toward a comm<strong>on</strong> goal. Collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
results in changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
that would not have been achieved<br />
in isolati<strong>on</strong>” (adapted from Friend & Cook,<br />
2010; Idol, Paolucci-Whitcomb, & Nevin,<br />
1995). Resp<strong>on</strong>dents were asked to use this<br />
specific definiti<strong>on</strong> of collaborati<strong>on</strong> to answer<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s that followed. Participants were<br />
asked how often they collaborated with professi<strong>on</strong>als,<br />
by what mode, to identify each of<br />
the professi<strong>on</strong>als with whom they collaborated<br />
with <strong>on</strong> a routine basis, how likely they were<br />
to provide a behavioral programming recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
to each of 12 specified professi<strong>on</strong>als,<br />
how likely they were to adopt (resulting in<br />
changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s) a behavioral<br />
programming recommendati<strong>on</strong> made by each<br />
of 12 specified professi<strong>on</strong>als, <strong>and</strong> to c<strong>on</strong>sider<br />
the degree to which they agreed with statements<br />
regarding collaborati<strong>on</strong> resulting in<br />
major, minor, or no changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
The 12 specified professi<strong>on</strong>als were<br />
as follows: board certified behavior analyst<br />
(BCBA), board certified associate behavior<br />
analyst (BCaBA), n<strong>on</strong>-certified behavior analyst,<br />
psychologist, school psychologist, general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> teacher, special educati<strong>on</strong> teacher,<br />
occupati<strong>on</strong>al therapist (OT), physical therapist<br />
(PT), speech <strong>and</strong> language pathologist<br />
(SLP), administrator (principal, supervisor,<br />
director, etc.), <strong>and</strong> health care provider. Participants<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ded to questi<strong>on</strong>s in the same<br />
way as specified in the first secti<strong>on</strong>; however,<br />
participants rated the likelihood of providing<br />
<strong>and</strong> adopting a recommendati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> a 5-point<br />
Likert-scale where 1 very unlikely <strong>and</strong> 5 <br />
very likely via clicking <strong>on</strong> the corresp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />
circle to the right of each specified professi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In additi<strong>on</strong>, participants reported the degree<br />
to which they agreed with three statements<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerning the results of collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>on</strong> a 5-point Likert scale where 1 <br />
str<strong>on</strong>gly disagree <strong>and</strong> 5 str<strong>on</strong>gly agree via a<br />
drop-down menu.<br />
The third secti<strong>on</strong>, variables that inhibit <strong>and</strong><br />
facilitate collaborative behavior, asked resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
the degree to which they agreed with six<br />
specified variables as inhibiting or facilitating<br />
the collaborative process for themselves <strong>and</strong><br />
others. The variables measured were ideology,<br />
perspectives, training of self, training of others,<br />
current c<strong>on</strong>tingencies, <strong>and</strong> time. Participants<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ded using a 5-point Likert scale<br />
where 1 str<strong>on</strong>gly disagree <strong>and</strong> 5 str<strong>on</strong>gly<br />
agree via a drop-down menu. Using the same<br />
scale <strong>and</strong> resp<strong>on</strong>se mode, resp<strong>on</strong>dents c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />
the degree to which they agreed with<br />
four statements regarding collaborati<strong>on</strong> being<br />
modeled <strong>and</strong> expected throughout their internship<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or practicum experience <strong>and</strong><br />
the degree to which they agreed with four<br />
statements regarding their perspective <strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as part of ethical resp<strong>on</strong>sibility <strong>and</strong><br />
professi<strong>on</strong>al development. No “other” resp<strong>on</strong>ses<br />
were made available for this secti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
The final secti<strong>on</strong>, perspectives <strong>on</strong> collaborative<br />
behavior, asked participants to rate importance<br />
(the degree to which collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
results in desirable outcomes <strong>and</strong>/or prevents<br />
undesirable outcomes), their experience (the<br />
quality of recommendati<strong>on</strong>s provided <strong>and</strong> ad-<br />
124 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
opted), <strong>and</strong> the value (the degree to which<br />
the tasks <strong>and</strong>/or soluti<strong>on</strong>s have changed) of<br />
collaborating with each of 12 specified professi<strong>on</strong>als.<br />
An “other” opti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> field to insert<br />
text were available for all three questi<strong>on</strong>s in<br />
this secti<strong>on</strong>. Participants resp<strong>on</strong>ded using a<br />
5-point Likert scale for importance where 1 <br />
very unimportant <strong>and</strong> 5 very important. A<br />
5-point Likert-scale was used for resp<strong>on</strong>ding<br />
for both experience <strong>and</strong> value where 1 very<br />
unproductive <strong>and</strong> 5 very productive <strong>and</strong> where<br />
1 no value at all <strong>and</strong> 5 very valuable,<br />
respectively.<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>ses were collected at the end of the<br />
survey by clicking the “D<strong>on</strong>e” butt<strong>on</strong> at the<br />
end of the last secti<strong>on</strong> of the survey.<br />
Results<br />
Demographics<br />
In total, 302 participants completed the survey.<br />
Over half of participants reported being<br />
a board certified behavior analyst (BCBA)<br />
(56%). Participants also reported holding the<br />
following positi<strong>on</strong>s: special educator (22%),<br />
n<strong>on</strong>-certified behavior analyst (19%), higher<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> (17%), psychologist (16%), board<br />
certified associate behavior analyst (BCaBA)<br />
(6%), general educator (3%), <strong>and</strong>/or school<br />
psychologist (3%). In additi<strong>on</strong>, most participants<br />
held a master’s degree (57%). Thirty<br />
percent of participants held a doctoral degree<br />
<strong>and</strong> 13% held a bachelors degree.<br />
The largest group of participants worked<br />
in the public school (38%) or private home<br />
(36%) setting <strong>and</strong> served those diagnosed<br />
with autism spectrum disorder (95%) <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
intellectual disability (74%). Participants also<br />
reported serving those with attenti<strong>on</strong> deficit<br />
hyperactivity disorder (55%), emoti<strong>on</strong>al or<br />
behavioral disorder (54%), oppositi<strong>on</strong>al defiance<br />
disorder (42%), anxiety (41%), obsessive<br />
compulsive disorder (39%), <strong>and</strong>/or depressi<strong>on</strong><br />
(36%). Participants also reported to be<br />
currently working in the university (27%), residential<br />
(25%), private school (21%), clinic/<br />
hospital (15%), supported employment (6%),<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or charter school (3%) settings. Most<br />
participants reported serving school aged children<br />
<strong>and</strong> youth 5 to 21 years old (67%) with<br />
a smaller group of participants reporting serv-<br />
ing those 21 years old or older (45%) <strong>and</strong> 0 to<br />
3 years old (32%).<br />
Training in Collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
Overall, resp<strong>on</strong>dents reported little formal<br />
pre-service or in-service collaborative training<br />
as per the study’s definiti<strong>on</strong>. The majority of<br />
participants (67%) had taken 0 courses toward<br />
a degree <strong>and</strong>/or certificati<strong>on</strong> with the<br />
word “collaborati<strong>on</strong>” in the title or course<br />
descripti<strong>on</strong>. In additi<strong>on</strong>, the largest group of<br />
participants (45%) had taken 0 workshops<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or trainings toward professi<strong>on</strong>al development<br />
units with the word “collaborati<strong>on</strong>” in<br />
the title or descripti<strong>on</strong> of the training or workshop.<br />
Participants were more likely to have<br />
attended at least <strong>on</strong>e workshop or training<br />
(57%) than have taken at least <strong>on</strong>e course<br />
(33%) <strong>on</strong> the topic of collaborati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>versely, participants moderately agreed<br />
that collaborati<strong>on</strong> was modeled throughout<br />
their internship experience (M 3.58, SD <br />
1.22). However, participants also modestly<br />
agreed that they would have appreciated more<br />
modeling of collaborati<strong>on</strong> throughout (M <br />
3.26, SD 1.25). On average, resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
disagreed that collaborati<strong>on</strong> was expected but<br />
not modeled (M 2.52, SD 1.03) <strong>and</strong> that<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> was neither expected nor modeled<br />
(M 2.05, SD 1.01).<br />
Type <strong>and</strong> Extent of Collaborative Interacti<strong>on</strong>s with<br />
Other Professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
In general, resp<strong>on</strong>dents indicated that collaborative<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s were a frequent part of<br />
their behavioral practice. The majority of participants<br />
(62%) reported that collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
with other professi<strong>on</strong>als occurred <strong>on</strong> a daily<br />
basis. Twenty three percent reported they collaborated<br />
<strong>on</strong> a weekly basis, 10% reported<br />
they collaborated <strong>on</strong> a bi-weekly basis, 2% reported<br />
they collaborated every other week,<br />
<strong>and</strong> 3% reported they collaborated <strong>on</strong> a<br />
m<strong>on</strong>thly basis. The primary modes by which<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als reported they collaborated were<br />
face-to-face (98%), e-mail (91%), <strong>and</strong> ph<strong>on</strong>e<br />
(71%). 27% reported they collaborated via<br />
texting/instant messaging, 11% reported they<br />
collaborated via video chat, <strong>and</strong> 3% reported<br />
they collaborated via blogs. The majority of<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>dents collaborated with a BCBA (78%),<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 125
Figure 1. Comparis<strong>on</strong> of the average likelihood of participants to provide or adopt a behavioral programming<br />
recommendati<strong>on</strong> to/from each professi<strong>on</strong>al. BCBA Board Certified Behavior Analyst; BCaBA <br />
Board Certified Associate Behavior Analyst; N<strong>on</strong>-Cert. N<strong>on</strong>-Certified Behavior Analyst; Psych. <br />
Psychologist; School Psych. School Psychologist; Gen. Ed. General Educator; Sp. Ed. Special<br />
Educator; OT Occupati<strong>on</strong>al Therapist; PT Physical Therapist; SLP Speech <strong>and</strong> Language<br />
Pathologist; Admin. Administrator; Health Care Health Care Provider.<br />
administrator (69%), special educator (63%),<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or speech language pathologist (55%)<br />
<strong>on</strong> a routine basis.<br />
Overall, as shown in Figure 1, professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
reported that they were more likely to provide<br />
a behavioral programming recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
to a professi<strong>on</strong>al (M 3.71, SD 1.18) than<br />
to adopt a behavioral programming recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
from a professi<strong>on</strong>al (M 3.29,<br />
SD 1.11), t(2337) 15.5, p .001, d .37.<br />
The excepti<strong>on</strong> to this was the BCBA. Participants<br />
were more likely to adopt a recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
from the BCBA (M 4.31, SD 1.12)<br />
than to provide a recommendati<strong>on</strong> to the<br />
BCBA (M 4.01, SD .89) t(241) 4.20,<br />
p .001. d .30. The degree of likelihood<br />
in providing (M 4.24, SD 1.01) versus<br />
adopting (M 3.31, SD .99) was the most<br />
pr<strong>on</strong>ounced for the special educator,<br />
t(189) 10.98, p .001. d .93. Participants<br />
were least likely to adopt a recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
from the physical therapist (PT) (M 2.90,<br />
SD 1.11), general educati<strong>on</strong> teacher (M <br />
2.92, SD .98), occupati<strong>on</strong>al therapist (OT)<br />
(M 2.95, SD 1.08), <strong>and</strong> health care provider<br />
(M 2.97, SD 1.13).<br />
BCBA resp<strong>on</strong>ses for providing recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to versus adopting recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
from other BCBAs compared to pers<strong>on</strong>s who<br />
are not BCBAs are illustrated in Figure 2.<br />
BCBAs reported that they were more likely to<br />
provide a recommendati<strong>on</strong> to another BCBA<br />
(M 4.26, SD .96) than to provide a recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
to a n<strong>on</strong>-BCBA (M 3.85,<br />
SD .66), t(135) 5.21, p .001. d .50.<br />
BCBAs reported that they were substantially<br />
more likely to adopt a recommendati<strong>on</strong> from<br />
another BCBA (M 4.24, SD .87) than to<br />
adopt a recommendati<strong>on</strong> from a n<strong>on</strong>-BCBA<br />
(M 3.16, SD .69), t(133) 14.83, p <br />
.001. d 1.38.<br />
Participants agreed that collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with other professi<strong>on</strong>als resulted in<br />
minor changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s (M <br />
3.89, SD .94). However, participants were<br />
less likely to agree that collaborati<strong>on</strong> resulted<br />
in major changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s (M <br />
3.52, SD 1.02). Participants disagreed that<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> with other professi<strong>on</strong>als resulted<br />
in no changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
(M 2.04, SD .97).<br />
Variables that Inhibit <strong>and</strong> Facilitate Collaborative<br />
Behavior<br />
Participants were more likely to rate ideology,<br />
perspectives, training of self, training of others,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tingencies, <strong>and</strong> time as inhibitors for<br />
others (M 3.57, SD .68) than for themselves<br />
(M 3.05, SD .68), t(223) 11.78,<br />
126 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 2. Likelihood of BCBAs providing recommendati<strong>on</strong>s to BCBAs compared to others (n<strong>on</strong>-BCBAs) <strong>and</strong><br />
likelihood of BCBAs adopting recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from BCBAs compared to others (n<strong>on</strong>-BCBAs).<br />
BCBA Board Certified Behavior Analyst.<br />
p .001. d .76. For example, participants<br />
reported perspectives as possible inhibitors<br />
for others (M 3.19, SD 1.09), but not for<br />
themselves (M 2.16, SD 1.27), t(222) <br />
11.51, p .001. d .87, <strong>and</strong> reported training<br />
of self as a possible inhibitor for others (M <br />
3.04, SD 1.09) but not for themselves (M <br />
2.00, SD 1.08), t(222) 11.23, p .001. d <br />
.96.<br />
Participants were less likely to rate ideology,<br />
perspectives, training of self, training of others,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tingencies, <strong>and</strong> time as facilitators for<br />
others (M 3.64, SD .79) than for themselves<br />
(M 3.84, SD .70), t(217) 4.94,<br />
p .001. d .27; however, in most instances<br />
differences in ratings were small.<br />
Extent to Which Participants View Collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as a Valuable Comp<strong>on</strong>ent of Practice<br />
Participants str<strong>on</strong>gly agreed that collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
is an <strong>on</strong>going process <strong>and</strong> part of ethical practice<br />
(M 4.62, SD .60) <strong>and</strong> that collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>tributes to skill building <strong>and</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
development (M 4.61, SD .58).<br />
Participants agreed, although less str<strong>on</strong>gly,<br />
that collaborati<strong>on</strong> is a training tool for n<strong>on</strong>certified<br />
practiti<strong>on</strong>ers (M 3.69, SD 1.27).<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>dents disagreed that collaborati<strong>on</strong> is<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly necessary when <strong>on</strong>e is not able to solve a<br />
problem <strong>on</strong> his or her own (M 1.86, SD <br />
.83).<br />
Finally, participants rated the importance<br />
(the degree to which collaborati<strong>on</strong> results in<br />
desirable outcomes <strong>and</strong>/or prevents undesirable<br />
outcomes) of collaborating with other<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als higher (M 4.00, SD .86)<br />
than ratings of the experience (M 3.22,<br />
SD .76), t(238) 11.89, p .001. d .96 or<br />
value (M 3.02, SD .86), t(236) 15.54,<br />
p .001. d 1.14 of collaborating with other<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als. Importance of collaborating<br />
with each professi<strong>on</strong>al was rated greater than<br />
experience or value of collaborating with each<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>al with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of the BCBA<br />
<strong>and</strong> BCaBA.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
The goal of this survey of behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
was to identify (a) what, if any, training<br />
behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als have received in collaborati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
(b) the type <strong>and</strong> extent of collaborative<br />
interacti<strong>on</strong>s with other professi<strong>on</strong>als;<br />
(c) variables that facilitate <strong>and</strong> inhibit collaborati<strong>on</strong>;<br />
<strong>and</strong> (d) the extent to which behavioral<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als view collaborati<strong>on</strong> as a valuable<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent of their practice.<br />
The majority of participants had little to<br />
no formal training in the area of collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as indicated by survey resp<strong>on</strong>ses. Sixty seven<br />
percent reported no coursework with collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
in the title or descripti<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> 45%<br />
reported attending no workshops with collab-<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 127
orati<strong>on</strong> in the title or descripti<strong>on</strong>. This indicates<br />
an overall lack of college <strong>and</strong> university<br />
coursework addressing collaborati<strong>on</strong> as a c<strong>on</strong>tent<br />
area, even though 62% of resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
reported collaborating with other professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
<strong>on</strong> at least a daily basis. Furthermore, collaborative<br />
skills are required as part of the task<br />
list by the BACB to obtain certificati<strong>on</strong> as a<br />
BCBA or BCaBA (C<strong>on</strong>tent Area #10: Systems<br />
Support: 10–6 “Provide behavior analysis services<br />
in collaborati<strong>on</strong> with others who support<br />
<strong>and</strong>/or provide services to <strong>on</strong>e’s clients.”).<br />
Therefore, this finding highlights a possible<br />
need to increase collaborative coursework for<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als practicing in the field. Resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
were more likely to have attended at<br />
least <strong>on</strong>e training or workshop <strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
(57%) than have taken at least <strong>on</strong>e<br />
course (33%). This suggests that professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
development providers are allocating relatively<br />
more workshops <strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong>; however,<br />
both pre-service <strong>and</strong> in-service training<br />
<strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong> appears to be lacking.<br />
Participants moderately agreed that that<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> was modeled throughout their<br />
practicum experience (M 3.58), suggesting<br />
that collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>s may have been<br />
formally or informally taught during field<br />
experiences. However, they also modestly<br />
agreed that they would have appreciated more<br />
modeling <strong>on</strong> collaborati<strong>on</strong> (M 3.26). This<br />
result indicates that many professi<strong>on</strong>als view<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> as an intrinsic part of behavioral<br />
practice, but would appreciate more modeling<br />
of collaborati<strong>on</strong> as part of their training.<br />
As the majority of participants reported that<br />
they collaborated <strong>on</strong> a daily basis, it is evident<br />
that practiti<strong>on</strong>ers are being required to collaborate<br />
often as part of service delivery to c<strong>on</strong>sumers.<br />
Given that resp<strong>on</strong>dents were most<br />
likely to collaborate <strong>on</strong> a routine basis with<br />
the BCBA, administrator, special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teacher, <strong>and</strong> speech <strong>and</strong> language pathologist,<br />
this highlights the need for collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
as a skill set especially am<strong>on</strong>g these individuals.<br />
Successful collaborati<strong>on</strong> with administrators<br />
is especially important given that administrators’<br />
granting or restricting resources may<br />
affect the success of interventi<strong>on</strong>s (Santangelo,<br />
2009).<br />
Overall, as reflected in Figure 1, resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
(with the excepti<strong>on</strong> of the BCBA) were<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sistently more likely to provide (M 3.71)<br />
than to adopt (M 3.29) behavioral programming<br />
recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from other professi<strong>on</strong>als.<br />
In general, these data suggest that<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> am<strong>on</strong>g practicing behavior analysts<br />
<strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als is a unidirecti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
process, in which behavior analysts<br />
provide recommendati<strong>on</strong>s with or without<br />
team input. This finding is unsurprising given<br />
that behaviorally trained professi<strong>on</strong>als tend to<br />
have more expertise in behavioral procedures<br />
than those from traditi<strong>on</strong>ally n<strong>on</strong>-behavioral<br />
disciplines (e.g., general educati<strong>on</strong>). However,<br />
most noteworthy is the degree of difference<br />
between providing to (likely) <strong>and</strong> adopting<br />
from (less likely) the special educator. Research<br />
indicates that behavioral interventi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
developed without teacher input may not be<br />
implemented, may be implemented inaccurately,<br />
or may be ab<strong>and</strong><strong>on</strong>ed prematurely<br />
(Peck, Killen, & Baumgart, 1989). Involvement<br />
of those who will implement the interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
in its development may be an important<br />
factor in whether the recommended<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> is actually implemented (Burgio,<br />
Whitman, & Reid, 1983). In additi<strong>on</strong>, low ratings<br />
for the degree of likelihood of adopti<strong>on</strong><br />
of recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from the physical therapist,<br />
general educator, <strong>and</strong> occupati<strong>on</strong>al therapist,<br />
indicate that collaborati<strong>on</strong> is occurring<br />
at lower levels across these professi<strong>on</strong>als <strong>and</strong><br />
their respective areas, at least in terms of behavioral<br />
programming recommendati<strong>on</strong>s. As<br />
individualized educati<strong>on</strong>al programs (IEPs)<br />
for students with disabilities require coordinati<strong>on</strong><br />
of services across multiple service providers<br />
<strong>and</strong> team decisi<strong>on</strong> making, this could<br />
have deleterious effects with respect to student<br />
achievement when teamwork am<strong>on</strong>g<br />
these professi<strong>on</strong>als is required.<br />
On the other h<strong>and</strong>, there may be c<strong>on</strong>sultative<br />
situati<strong>on</strong>s in which a collaborativedirective<br />
approach is most beneficial<br />
(Tysinger, Tysinger, & Diam<strong>and</strong>uros, 2009). A<br />
collaborative-directive approach is <strong>on</strong>e in<br />
which the c<strong>on</strong>sultant (e.g., BCBA) employs<br />
shared decisi<strong>on</strong> making <strong>and</strong> respects others’<br />
rights to reject interventi<strong>on</strong>s, while making<br />
prescriptive recommendati<strong>on</strong>s where appropriate.<br />
For instance, a BCBA might allow the<br />
special educati<strong>on</strong> teacher to select behavior<br />
targets for interventi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> accept input <strong>on</strong><br />
which interventi<strong>on</strong>s are most feasible given<br />
the teacher’s skills, classroom resources, <strong>and</strong><br />
128 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
time c<strong>on</strong>straints (Tincani, 2007), yet prescribe<br />
specific strategies that are supported by empirical<br />
evidence (e.g., story-based interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
package) <strong>and</strong> not others (e.g., facilitated communicati<strong>on</strong>)<br />
(Nati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Autism</strong> Center, 2009).<br />
On average, BCBAs were more likely to<br />
provide <strong>and</strong> to adopt recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from<br />
other BCBAs than n<strong>on</strong>-BCBAs. Most noteworthy<br />
is the difference between the likelihood<br />
of adopting from a BCBA (M 4.24)<br />
versus a n<strong>on</strong>-BCBA (M 3.16). This finding<br />
is not surprising given that participants were<br />
more likely to provide than to adopt recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
from professi<strong>on</strong>als in other disciplines,<br />
generally. However, it suggests that<br />
when BCBAs are working with a professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
with similar behavioral expertise, they are<br />
more likely to incorporate his or her recommendati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
into practice.<br />
One survey questi<strong>on</strong> asked resp<strong>on</strong>dents directly<br />
about outcomes of collaborati<strong>on</strong> (i.e., to<br />
what degree does collaborati<strong>on</strong> result in major,<br />
minor, or no changes in tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s).<br />
Although most disagreed with the<br />
statement collaborati<strong>on</strong> results in no changes<br />
(M 2.04), they did not agree str<strong>on</strong>gly that<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> resulted in major (M 3.52)<br />
or minor changes (M 3.89). The generally<br />
neutral resp<strong>on</strong>se to this item may indicate that<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als may view their efforts as “collaborati<strong>on</strong>”<br />
even when such efforts result in no<br />
changes to approaches or interventi<strong>on</strong>s, suggesting<br />
that the functi<strong>on</strong>al definiti<strong>on</strong> of collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
per this study’s definiti<strong>on</strong> (that<br />
which results in changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s)<br />
is not being implemented in actual<br />
practice.<br />
On average, participants felt more str<strong>on</strong>gly<br />
that ideology, perspectives, training, c<strong>on</strong>tingencies,<br />
<strong>and</strong> time were inhibitors for others<br />
(M 3.57) than themselves (M 3.05).<br />
While speculative, in situati<strong>on</strong>s where collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
does not result in positive c<strong>on</strong>sumer<br />
outcomes, this finding illustrates a possible,<br />
“It’s not my problem; it’s theirs” perspective<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g behavioral professi<strong>on</strong>als. In other<br />
words, they may be more likely to attribute<br />
lack of a successful collaborative outcome to<br />
skill deficits of the c<strong>on</strong>sultee, rather than a<br />
collective failure of the collaborative interacti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Collaborati<strong>on</strong> (as an aspect of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>)<br />
is a skill that requires pers<strong>on</strong>s to elicit<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses from others <strong>and</strong> initiate the prob-<br />
lem-solving process (i.e., identify the problem)<br />
(Bergan & Tombari, 1975). In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the other party specifies what the problem is<br />
<strong>and</strong> plays a major role in the development <strong>and</strong><br />
implementati<strong>on</strong> of soluti<strong>on</strong>s. Bergan <strong>and</strong><br />
Tombari found that lack of c<strong>on</strong>sultant skill<br />
(e.g., interviewing) was likely associated with<br />
the failure to initiate the problem-solving process<br />
(i.e., starting with identifying the problem).<br />
This supports a call for more training in<br />
the area of collaborati<strong>on</strong> as a bi-directi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
process to better serve c<strong>on</strong>sumers <strong>and</strong> promote<br />
successful outcomes.<br />
Overall, participants str<strong>on</strong>gly agreed with<br />
the statement that collaborati<strong>on</strong> is <strong>on</strong>going <strong>and</strong><br />
part of ethical practice (M 4.62), indicating<br />
that participants do not have a resistance to<br />
addressing better collaborati<strong>on</strong> methods <strong>and</strong><br />
approaches as part of ethical practice. Resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
also rated the importance of collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
with other professi<strong>on</strong>als as important<br />
(M 4.07), furthering the argument that participants<br />
view collaborati<strong>on</strong> as part of best<br />
practice. However, although participants<br />
rated collaborati<strong>on</strong> with other professi<strong>on</strong>als as<br />
important, they did not indicate that the use<br />
of collaborati<strong>on</strong> gained them much when<br />
used (experience) or that it had dramatic results<br />
when applied (value) when interacting<br />
with professi<strong>on</strong>als other than the BCBA,<br />
BCaBA, <strong>and</strong> n<strong>on</strong>-certified behavior analyst.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
There are three limitati<strong>on</strong>s of this study. The<br />
first limitati<strong>on</strong> is that the survey is an indirect<br />
measure of professi<strong>on</strong>als’ collaborati<strong>on</strong>. It is<br />
unclear to what extent the reports reflect actual<br />
practice. While collaborati<strong>on</strong> was defined<br />
for resp<strong>on</strong>dents as, “a comp<strong>on</strong>ent of c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong><br />
involving voluntary, interpers<strong>on</strong>al interacti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
comprising of two or more professi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
engaging in communicati<strong>on</strong> modalities for<br />
the purposes of shared decisi<strong>on</strong>-making <strong>and</strong><br />
problem solving toward a comm<strong>on</strong> goal <strong>and</strong><br />
resulting in changes to tasks <strong>and</strong> soluti<strong>on</strong>s that<br />
would not have been achieved in isolati<strong>on</strong>”<br />
(adapted from Friend & Cook, 2010; Idol et<br />
al., 1995), it is possible that participants resp<strong>on</strong>ded<br />
differently based their own subjective<br />
definiti<strong>on</strong>s of collaborati<strong>on</strong>. Related, the survey<br />
did not evaluate resp<strong>on</strong>dents’ specific collaborative<br />
behaviors. For instance, while the<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 129
survey asked resp<strong>on</strong>dents to rate the likelihood<br />
of adopting recommendati<strong>on</strong>s from<br />
other professi<strong>on</strong>als, it did not ask them to<br />
define how they would adopt a recommendati<strong>on</strong><br />
(e.g., seek input <strong>on</strong> target behaviors,<br />
modify an interventi<strong>on</strong> to meet another professi<strong>on</strong>al’s<br />
preferences). Finally, it is unclear<br />
how well this sample represents that larger<br />
sample of professi<strong>on</strong>als working in the field of<br />
applied behavior analysis. While the survey<br />
sample (302 resp<strong>on</strong>dents) is relatively large<br />
<strong>and</strong> was recruited from organizati<strong>on</strong>s representing<br />
all major demographic regi<strong>on</strong>s of the<br />
U.S., the recruitment procedures did not allow<br />
the researchers to establish the number of<br />
n<strong>on</strong>-resp<strong>on</strong>ders, introducing the possibility of<br />
sampling bias in the survey (i.e., those who<br />
chose to participate resp<strong>on</strong>ded in a manner<br />
unrepresentative of the target populati<strong>on</strong>). It<br />
is therefore possible that <strong>on</strong>ly participants<br />
with favorable views of collaborati<strong>on</strong> took the<br />
time <strong>and</strong> effort to complete the survey.<br />
Future Directi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Given the frequency with which behavioral<br />
professi<strong>on</strong>als collaborate <strong>and</strong> the dearth of<br />
research <strong>on</strong> modes of collaborati<strong>on</strong> that lead<br />
to best outcomes, an important directi<strong>on</strong> for<br />
future research is to explore effects of collaborative<br />
strategies <strong>on</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>al’s adopti<strong>on</strong><br />
of behavioral interventi<strong>on</strong>s (i.e., treatment integrity)<br />
<strong>and</strong> changes in c<strong>on</strong>sumer’s target behaviors.<br />
Specifically, researchers could compare<br />
effects of directive versus collaborative<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> critical outcome variables. Importantly,<br />
most of the survey’s resp<strong>on</strong>dents<br />
reported little to no formal collaborative training.<br />
Given the apparent importance of collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
for practicing behavior analysts, future<br />
research should examine the most<br />
effective ways to teach collaborati<strong>on</strong> skills, including<br />
the array of professi<strong>on</strong>als identified in<br />
the current study, <strong>and</strong> to explore modes of<br />
collaborati<strong>on</strong> that incorporate technology<br />
(e.g., email, video-based) bey<strong>on</strong>d traditi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
face-to-face interacti<strong>on</strong> formats.<br />
References<br />
Associati<strong>on</strong> for Behavior Analysis Internati<strong>on</strong>al. Affiliated<br />
Chapters. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from<br />
http://www.abainternati<strong>on</strong>al.org/chapters.asp<br />
BCBA <strong>and</strong> BCaBA Behavior Analyst Task List. Behavior<br />
Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong> Board. Retrieved November<br />
27, 2010, from http://www.bacb.com/index.php?<br />
page1002<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Behavior Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong> Board Guidelines for<br />
Resp<strong>on</strong>sible C<strong>on</strong>duct. Behavior Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong><br />
Board. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from http://<br />
www.bacb.com/c<strong>on</strong>sum_frame.html<br />
Bergan, J. R. (1977). Behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>. Columbus,<br />
OH: Merrill.<br />
Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> in applied settings. New York: Plenum.<br />
Bergan, J. R., Tombari, M. L. (1975). The analysis of<br />
verbal interacti<strong>on</strong>s occurring during c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Journal of School Psychology, 13, 209–226.<br />
Boutot, E. A., & Hume, K. (2010). Bey<strong>on</strong>d time out<br />
<strong>and</strong> table time: Today’s applied behavior analysis for<br />
students with autism. Positi<strong>on</strong> paper of the Council of<br />
Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>. Retrieved from http://<br />
daddcec.org/Portals/0/CEC/<strong>Autism</strong>_<strong>Disabilities</strong>/Research/Positi<strong>on</strong>_Papers/Critical-Issues-<br />
Brief-Bey<strong>on</strong>d-Time-Out-<strong>and</strong>-Table-Time-Todays-<br />
Applied-Behavior.pdf<br />
Burgio, L. D., Whitman, T. L., & Reid, D. H. (1983).<br />
A participative management approach for improving<br />
direct-care staff performance in an instituti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,<br />
16, 37–53.<br />
Car<strong>on</strong>, E. A., & McLaughlin, M. J. (2002). Indicators<br />
of beac<strong>on</strong>s of excellence schools: What do they<br />
tell us about collaborative practices? Journal of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Psychological C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>, 13, 225–<br />
229.<br />
Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2010). Interacti<strong>on</strong>s: Collaborati<strong>on</strong><br />
skills for school professi<strong>on</strong>als (6 th ed.). Upper<br />
Saddle River, New Jersey: Pears<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Galloway, J., & Sheridan, S. M. (1994). Implementing<br />
scientific practices through case studies: Examples<br />
using home-school interventi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Journal of School Psychology, 32, 385–413.<br />
Her<strong>on</strong>, T. E., & Harris, K. C. (2001). The educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultant: Helping professi<strong>on</strong>als, parents, <strong>and</strong> students<br />
in inclusive classrooms (4 th ed.). Austin, TX:<br />
Pro-Ed.<br />
Hundert, J., & Hopkins, B. (1992). Training supervisors<br />
in a collaborative team approach to promote<br />
peer interacti<strong>on</strong> of children with disabilities<br />
in integrated preschools. Journal of Applied Behavior<br />
Analysis, 25, 385–400.<br />
Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., & Doering, K. (2003).<br />
Collaborative teaming to support students at risk<br />
<strong>and</strong> students with severe disabilities in general<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classrooms. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 69,<br />
315–332.<br />
Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Liboir<strong>on</strong>, N., & Bae, S.<br />
(2004). Collaborative teaming to support preschoolers<br />
with severe disabilities who are placed<br />
130 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
in general educati<strong>on</strong> early childhood programs.<br />
Topics in Early Childhood Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 24, 123–<br />
142.<br />
Idol, L., Paolucci-Whitcomb, P., & Nevin, A. (1995).<br />
The collaborative c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> model. Journal of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Psychological C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>, 6, 329–<br />
346.<br />
Kelleher, C., Riley-Tillman, T., & Power, T. J.<br />
(2008). An initial comparis<strong>on</strong> of collaborative<br />
<strong>and</strong> expert-driven c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> treatment integrity.<br />
Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Psychological C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
18, 294–324.<br />
Levy, S. E., M<strong>and</strong>ell, D. S., & Shultz, R. T. (2009).<br />
<strong>Autism</strong>. Lancet, 374, 1627–1638.<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Autism</strong> Center. (2009). Nati<strong>on</strong>al St<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
Project-Addressing the need for evidence based practice<br />
guidelines for autism spectrum disorders. R<strong>and</strong>olph,<br />
MA: Nati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Autism</strong> Center.<br />
Nati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>ference of State Legislatures. (2011).<br />
Insurance coverage for autism. Denver, CO: Author.<br />
Retrieved from Nati<strong>on</strong>al C<strong>on</strong>ference of State Legislatures<br />
website: http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid<br />
18246<br />
Nevada Legislature. (2012). Chapter 641 – Psychologists,<br />
licensed behavior analysts, licensed assistant<br />
behavior analysts <strong>and</strong> certified autism behavior<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>ists. Retried from the Nevada<br />
Legislature website: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/<br />
nrs/NRS-641.html<br />
Noell, G. H., & Witt, J. C. (1999). When does c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong><br />
lead to interventi<strong>on</strong> implementati<strong>on</strong>?<br />
Critical issues for research <strong>and</strong> practice. The Journal<br />
of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 33, 29–35.<br />
Peck, C. A., Killen, C. C., & Baumgart, D. (1989).<br />
Increasing implementati<strong>on</strong> of special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> in mainstream preschools: Direct <strong>and</strong><br />
generalized effects of n<strong>on</strong>directive c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 197–210.<br />
Putnam, R. F., H<strong>and</strong>ler, M. W., Ramirez-Platt, C. M.,<br />
& Luiselli, J. K. (2003). Improving student busriding<br />
behavior through a whole-school interventi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(4),<br />
583–590.<br />
Ray, K. P., Skinner, C. H., & Wats<strong>on</strong>, T. (1999).<br />
Transferring stimulus c<strong>on</strong>trol via momentum to<br />
increase compliance in a student with autism: A<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong> of collaborative c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
School Psychology Review, 28, 622–628.<br />
Ratz<strong>on</strong>, N. Z., Lahav, O., Cohen-Hamsi, S., Metzger,<br />
Y., Efraim, D., & Bart, O. (2009). Comparing<br />
different short-term service delivery methods of<br />
visual-motor treatment for first grade students in<br />
mainstream schools. Research in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>,<br />
30, 1168–1176.<br />
Santangelo, T. (2009). Collaborative problem solving<br />
effectively implemented, but not sustained: A<br />
case study for aligning the sun, the mo<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
stars. Excepti<strong>on</strong>al Children, 75, 185–209.<br />
Shann<strong>on</strong>, G. S., & Bylsma, P. (2004). Characteristics of<br />
improved school districts: Themes for research. Olympia,<br />
WA: Office of the Superintendent of Public<br />
Instructi<strong>on</strong>, retrieved August 20, 2010, from<br />
http://www.k12.wa.us/research/pubdocs/District<br />
Improvementreport.pdf<br />
Sheridan, S. M., & Colt<strong>on</strong>, D. L. (1994). C<strong>on</strong>joint<br />
behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>: A review <strong>and</strong> case study.<br />
Journal of Educati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Psychological C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
5, 211–228.<br />
Sheridan, S. M., Kratochwill, T. R., & Elliott, S. N.<br />
(1990). Behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> with parents <strong>and</strong><br />
teachers: Delivering treatment for socially withdrawn<br />
children at home <strong>and</strong> school. School Psychology<br />
Review, 19, 33–52.<br />
Sheridan, S. M., Welch, M., & Orme, S. F. (1996). Is<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> effective? A review of outcome research.<br />
Remedial <strong>and</strong> Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 17, 341–<br />
354.<br />
Shook, G. L., & Favell, J. E. (2008). The Behavior<br />
Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong> Board <strong>and</strong> the professi<strong>on</strong> of<br />
behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1,<br />
44–<str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />
Shook, G., & Neisworth, J. (2005). Ensuring Appropriate<br />
Qualificati<strong>on</strong>s for Applied Behavior Analyst<br />
Professi<strong>on</strong>als: The Behavior Analyst Certificati<strong>on</strong><br />
Board. Excepti<strong>on</strong>ality, 13, 3–10.<br />
Tincani, M. (2007). Bey<strong>on</strong>d c<strong>on</strong>sumer advocacy:<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> spectrum disorders, effective instructi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> public schooling. Interventi<strong>on</strong> in School <strong>and</strong><br />
Clinic, 43, 47–51.<br />
Travers, J., Tincani, M., Krezmien, M. (2011). A<br />
multiyear nati<strong>on</strong>al profile of racial disparity in<br />
autism identificati<strong>on</strong>. The Journal of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Advance <strong>on</strong>line publicati<strong>on</strong>. doi: 10.1177/<br />
0022466911416247<br />
Tysinger, P., Tysinger, J. A., & Diam<strong>and</strong>uros, T.<br />
(2009). Teacher expectati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the directiveness<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinuum in c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>. Psychology in the<br />
Schools, 46, 319–332.<br />
Virués-Ortega, J. (2010). Applied behavior analytic<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> for autism in early childhood: Metaanalysis,<br />
meta-regressi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> dose–resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
meta-analysis of multiple outcomes. Clinical Psychology<br />
Review, 30, 387–399.<br />
Vismara, L. A., & Rogers, S. J. (2010). Behavioral<br />
treatments in autism spectrum disorder: What do<br />
we know? Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6,<br />
447–468.<br />
Wickstrom, K. F., J<strong>on</strong>es, K. M., LaFleur, L. H., &<br />
Witt, J. C. (1998). An analysis of treatment integrity<br />
in school-based behavioral c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
School Psychology Quarterly, 13, 141–154.<br />
Received: 23 September 2011;<br />
Initial Acceptance: 28 November 2011;<br />
Final Acceptance: 15 February 2012<br />
Collaborative Training, Practice, <strong>and</strong> ABA / 131
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 2013, <str<strong>on</strong>g>48</str<strong>on</strong>g>(1), 132–141<br />
© <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Impact of Online Training Videos <strong>on</strong> the<br />
Implementati<strong>on</strong> of M<strong>and</strong> Training by Three Elementary<br />
School Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
Emaley B. McCulloch<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> Training Soluti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Mary Jo No<strong>on</strong>an<br />
University of Hawaii at Manoa<br />
Abstract: With the number of students with autism <strong>and</strong> related developmental disabilities increasing <strong>and</strong> a<br />
lack of trained professi<strong>on</strong>als, soluti<strong>on</strong>s are needed to provide training <strong>on</strong> a large scale. Alternative training<br />
approaches need to be developed so that paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als can access training in an efficient <strong>and</strong> effective way.<br />
One such possibility is <strong>on</strong>line training. A multiple baseline design across participants was used to evaluate the<br />
impact of <strong>on</strong>line training videos (OTV) <strong>on</strong> the implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training with three paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
in a public school setting. The three paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als were of Hawaiian ancestry, ages 32, 34, <strong>and</strong> 42 years.<br />
Three elementary aged students with autism <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities also participated in the study. They<br />
were ages, 6, 8, <strong>and</strong> 10 years, <strong>and</strong> also of Hawaiian ancestry. All participants lived in a rural area of Hawaii.<br />
After the OTVs, the percentage of correct implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training increased for all paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
participants <strong>and</strong> maintained over time. Improvements in accurate teaching were also accompanied by increases<br />
in the rate of sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>ing by the students. Results support the use of <strong>on</strong>line training as an effective<br />
alternative to inservice training for paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als.<br />
The number of children diagnosed with autism<br />
spectrum disorders (ASD) served under<br />
the Individuals with <strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act<br />
(IDEA) has increased by more than 500% in<br />
the last decade (United States Government<br />
Accountability Office, 2005). Over the past 20<br />
years, there has been an increase of 123% in<br />
the number of paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als employed in<br />
the educati<strong>on</strong>al system to help meet that need<br />
(Legislative Review & Investigati<strong>on</strong>s Committee<br />
2006). Unfortunately, the number of students<br />
with disabilities served under IDEA is<br />
growing at a greater rate than the growth of<br />
trained staff (United States Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2000).<br />
Many of the services provided to students<br />
with ASD in public schools are delivered by<br />
paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als. Despite this fact, a scarcity<br />
of research exists evaluating the effectiveness<br />
of paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als in improving outcomes<br />
for children with disabilities, including stu-<br />
Corresp<strong>on</strong>dence c<strong>on</strong>cerning this article should<br />
be addressed to Emaley McCulloch, 2800 Woodlawn<br />
Dr., #175, H<strong>on</strong>olulu, HI 96822. E-mail: emaley@<br />
autismtrainingsoluti<strong>on</strong>s.com<br />
dents with ASD (Marks, Schrader, & Levine,<br />
1999; Young, Simps<strong>on</strong>, Myles, & Kamps, 1997).<br />
Many paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als are not adequately<br />
trained in evidence-based interventi<strong>on</strong>s to<br />
support children with disabilities. Rural areas<br />
experience increased challenges in providing<br />
training opportunities for paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
(Pickett & Gerlach, 2003). When training is<br />
available, it’s usually unstructured <strong>and</strong> not<br />
competency based (Pickett & Gerlach, 2003).<br />
The methods of applied behavior analysis<br />
(ABA) have been dem<strong>on</strong>strated to have positive<br />
effects in teaching individuals with disabilities<br />
over the last 40 years (Eldevik et al.,<br />
2009; Howard, Sparkman, Cohen, Green, &<br />
Stanislaw, 2005). In 2010, the Nati<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Autism</strong><br />
Center c<strong>on</strong>ducted the Nati<strong>on</strong>al St<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
Project <strong>and</strong> produced a set of st<strong>and</strong>ards for<br />
effective, research-validated educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> behavioral<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> for children with ASD.<br />
The overwhelming majority of established interventi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
identified was developed in the<br />
behavioral literature <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>on</strong>strated the<br />
applicati<strong>on</strong> of ABA procedures.<br />
An important aspect of ABA interventi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
is the implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training procedures.<br />
M<strong>and</strong> training is a technique used to<br />
132 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
teach individuals functi<strong>on</strong>al communicati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Teaching m<strong>and</strong>s (requests) is a pivotal goal in<br />
most treatment plans for students with autism<br />
(Sundberg & Michael, 2001). Teaching students<br />
to m<strong>and</strong> for items/activities has many<br />
benefits. For students with autism <strong>and</strong> related<br />
disabilities, m<strong>and</strong> training has been effective<br />
in decreasing problem behaviors such as self<br />
injury <strong>and</strong> aggressi<strong>on</strong> (Carr & Dur<strong>and</strong>, 1985;<br />
Winborn, Wacker, Richman, Asmus, & Geier,<br />
2002), increasing vocabulary <strong>and</strong> sp<strong>on</strong>taneous<br />
speech (Arntzen & Almas, 2002; Knapczyk,<br />
1989), <strong>and</strong> increasing social interacti<strong>on</strong>s with<br />
parents, teachers, <strong>and</strong> peers (Sundberg, Loeb,<br />
Hale, & Eigenheer, 2002). A limited number<br />
staff trained in implementing ABA <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
m<strong>and</strong> training may result in limited opportunities<br />
for learning valuable communicati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> social skills (Lerman, Vorndran, Addis<strong>on</strong>,<br />
& Kuhn, 2004).<br />
Research has dem<strong>on</strong>strated ways to successfully<br />
train staff in m<strong>and</strong> training procedures.<br />
Laski, Charlop, <strong>and</strong> Schreibman (1988) dem<strong>on</strong>strated<br />
that discussi<strong>on</strong>, modeling, <strong>and</strong> invivo<br />
coaching was effective in promoting<br />
m<strong>and</strong> training am<strong>on</strong>g staff <strong>and</strong> parents, however,<br />
lengthy instructi<strong>on</strong>s were required. In<br />
2010, Nigro-Bruzzi <strong>and</strong> Sturmy used behavioral<br />
skills training (BST) to train staff to implement<br />
m<strong>and</strong> training with students with autism.<br />
The training c<strong>on</strong>sisted of 30 to 60 min<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s of instructi<strong>on</strong>s, video modeling, roleplay<br />
rehearsal, <strong>and</strong> performance feedback.<br />
Training resulted in increases in staff performance<br />
in m<strong>and</strong> training <strong>and</strong> in unprompted<br />
m<strong>and</strong>s by children. Although effective, each<br />
trainee required <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e time with an experienced<br />
behavior analyst, which may not be<br />
possible in many situati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Online training in ABA principles, including<br />
video dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong>s of procedures being<br />
implemented, might be <strong>on</strong>e soluti<strong>on</strong> to overcoming<br />
the barriers associated with paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
training <strong>and</strong> professi<strong>on</strong>al development.<br />
Online training <strong>and</strong> educati<strong>on</strong> has<br />
been found to be effective in many disciplines,<br />
including business, health care, computer science,<br />
<strong>and</strong> medicine (Ruiz, Mintzer, & Leipzig,<br />
2006; U.S. Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Office<br />
of Planning, Evaluati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> Policy Development,<br />
2009). Online training offers learners<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol over the learning sequence <strong>and</strong> pace<br />
of instructi<strong>on</strong>, allowing them to tailor their<br />
experiences to meet their pers<strong>on</strong>al learning<br />
objectives.<br />
One study investigated the use of an <strong>on</strong>line<br />
training tool in the field of ABA <strong>and</strong> autism.<br />
Granpeesheh et al. (2009) examined the effectiveness<br />
of an <strong>on</strong>line training tool to teach<br />
the academic knowledge of ABA treatment for<br />
children with autism with a group of newly<br />
hired service providers. This <strong>on</strong>line training<br />
presented the informati<strong>on</strong> through text,<br />
voice-over, <strong>and</strong> occasi<strong>on</strong>al video clips. Performance<br />
of participants who received e-learning<br />
training was compared to the performance of<br />
a group who received traditi<strong>on</strong>al classroom<br />
training. Results showed knowledge of ABA<br />
principles <strong>and</strong> procedures increased substantially<br />
for both groups, suggesting that e-learning<br />
can be similarly successful at teaching<br />
foundati<strong>on</strong>al c<strong>on</strong>cepts as traditi<strong>on</strong>al classroom<br />
training. One questi<strong>on</strong> that this study<br />
did not address was whether the <strong>on</strong>line training<br />
affected the quality of the clinicians’ implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of the principles when actually<br />
teaching students. The current research study<br />
evaluated the impact of <strong>on</strong>line videos <strong>on</strong> the<br />
direct applicati<strong>on</strong> of ABA principles in the<br />
classroom.<br />
The purpose of this single-subject study was<br />
to evaluate the impact of <strong>on</strong>line training videos<br />
(OTV) <strong>on</strong> paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als’ use of m<strong>and</strong><br />
training procedures with students with ASD<br />
<strong>and</strong> related disabilities within a special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
setting. We also examined the impact of<br />
the <strong>on</strong>line training <strong>on</strong> the students’ frequency<br />
of m<strong>and</strong>s (requests).<br />
Method<br />
Setting <strong>and</strong> Participants<br />
The setting for this study was a special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
classroom <strong>on</strong> a public elementary school<br />
campus in a rural part of Hawaii. A special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> teacher supervised the classroom,<br />
including five educati<strong>on</strong>al aids/paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als.<br />
The classroom had nine students<br />
(ages 6 to 10 years) coming <strong>and</strong> going<br />
throughout the day. There were two large tables<br />
for group instructi<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> six partiti<strong>on</strong>ed<br />
desks for <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e instructi<strong>on</strong>. There was<br />
also a computer area, play area with toys <strong>and</strong><br />
books, <strong>and</strong> a sensory area with therapy balls<br />
<strong>and</strong> s<strong>and</strong>/water table.<br />
Online Training Videos / 133
Staff participants. The three participants,<br />
Autumn, Rebecca, <strong>and</strong> Molly were female, of<br />
Hawaiian ancestry, <strong>and</strong> ages 26, 34, <strong>and</strong> 46<br />
years, respectively. Rebecca <strong>and</strong> Molly had a<br />
high school diploma <strong>and</strong> Autumn had bachelor’s<br />
degree in business. N<strong>on</strong>e of the participants<br />
had had any previous training in ABA<br />
or m<strong>and</strong> procedures. Each participant worked<br />
<strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e with a student who attended at<br />
least part-day in the special educati<strong>on</strong> classroom.<br />
Student participants. Three elementary special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> students participated in the<br />
study. All student participants had goals <strong>on</strong><br />
their individualized educati<strong>on</strong> plan (IEP) that<br />
specifically focused <strong>on</strong> increasing requests/<br />
m<strong>and</strong>s. Ezra was a 6-year-old boy with autism<br />
<strong>and</strong> of Hawaiian ancestry. Ezra participated<br />
part-day in a special educati<strong>on</strong> first grade<br />
classroom with supports. Although Ezra used<br />
sentences to communicate, he engaged in limited<br />
m<strong>and</strong>s with teachers <strong>and</strong> peers. Ezra also<br />
had problem behaviors that included running<br />
away, task refusal, <strong>and</strong> hitting others. Autumn<br />
worked with Ezra.<br />
Adam was an 8-year-old boy with developmental<br />
delays who was of Hawaiian ancestry.<br />
Adam also spent part of his day in a special<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> classroom. He dem<strong>on</strong>strated moderately<br />
good social skills with adults <strong>and</strong> peers.<br />
He had language delays <strong>and</strong> unintelligible<br />
speech. Molly worked with Adam.<br />
Maile, a 10-year-old girl with developmental<br />
delays who was of Hawaiian ancestry, participated<br />
part-day in a special educati<strong>on</strong> classroom.<br />
Although Maile used speech to communicate,<br />
her language was delayed, she used<br />
short phrases, <strong>and</strong> her speech was difficult for<br />
others to underst<strong>and</strong>. Rebecca worked with<br />
Maile.<br />
Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al Behavior Definiti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training procedures<br />
by the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als was operati<strong>on</strong>ally defined<br />
as the participants’ applicati<strong>on</strong> of the<br />
following comp<strong>on</strong>ent skills with his or her<br />
student:<br />
1. “Sanitize” the envir<strong>on</strong>ment: The paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
blocks access to or removes motivating<br />
items/activities, keeping them out<br />
of reach while leaving these items or activities<br />
in view for the student to see.<br />
2. Prompt/require m<strong>and</strong>: The paraprofessinal<br />
requires a m<strong>and</strong> or provides a prompt<br />
for a m<strong>and</strong> before motivati<strong>on</strong> decreases<br />
(i.e., before the student moves away/looks<br />
away from the item).<br />
3. Reinforce: The paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al gives the<br />
student the desired item/activity within<br />
3 sec of a student’s m<strong>and</strong>.<br />
Student Behavior Definiti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
The student’s behavior being observed was<br />
sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s. A sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong> was<br />
defined as any verbal utterance/word that resulted<br />
in obtaining an item/activity.<br />
Observati<strong>on</strong> Procedures <strong>and</strong> Interobserver<br />
Agreement<br />
All sessi<strong>on</strong>s were observed in the classroom<br />
during <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e instructi<strong>on</strong> with the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al-student<br />
participant dyad for 15<br />
min per sessi<strong>on</strong>. Data were collected alternately<br />
for paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> student using<br />
partial interval recording. The 15-min observati<strong>on</strong><br />
was broken into thirty, 30-sec intervals.<br />
If a comp<strong>on</strong>ent skill (sanitize the envir<strong>on</strong>ment,<br />
require m<strong>and</strong>/prompt, or reinforce)<br />
for the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al occurred within the<br />
30-sec interval, the interval for that comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
skill was scored “yes.” If the comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
skills did not occur within the interval, the<br />
interval was scored “no.” The percentage of<br />
occurrences over total intervals was graphed<br />
for all comp<strong>on</strong>ents for the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al.<br />
Student data were collected using partial<br />
interval recording as well. If a sp<strong>on</strong>taneous<br />
m<strong>and</strong> occurred with the 30-sec interval, the<br />
interval was scored “yes.” If no sp<strong>on</strong>taneous<br />
m<strong>and</strong>(s) occurred with in the 30-sec interval,<br />
the interval was scored “no.” The percentage<br />
of occurrences over total intervals was<br />
graphed for student percentage of sp<strong>on</strong>taneous<br />
m<strong>and</strong>s.<br />
Before the study began, a sec<strong>on</strong>d observer<br />
was trained in data collecti<strong>on</strong> methods by reviewing<br />
the definiti<strong>on</strong>s of the dependent measures<br />
<strong>and</strong> practicing identifying the behavior<br />
in prerecorded videos of m<strong>and</strong> training with<br />
n<strong>on</strong>participants. The sec<strong>on</strong>d observer was a<br />
paid research assistant with a Master’s degree<br />
134 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
TABLE 1<br />
Interobserver Reliability Results for Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> Student Participants<br />
Sessi<strong>on</strong><br />
in Educati<strong>on</strong>. The sec<strong>on</strong>d observer <strong>and</strong> the<br />
researcher practiced data collecti<strong>on</strong> with videos<br />
until interobserver reliability agreement<br />
of 80% or better across three observati<strong>on</strong> sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
was achieved. The sec<strong>on</strong>d observer independently<br />
collected data <strong>on</strong> the dependent<br />
measures 41% of the sessi<strong>on</strong>s. For each skill<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent <strong>and</strong> sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s, the observer’s<br />
records were compared to the first<br />
observer’s records to determine agreement<br />
<strong>on</strong> the occurrence or n<strong>on</strong>occurrence of resp<strong>on</strong>ses.<br />
The total number of agreements plus<br />
disagreements was divided by the number of<br />
agreements <strong>and</strong> the quotient was multiplied<br />
by 100% to obtain the percentage of interobserver<br />
agreement for each sessi<strong>on</strong> (Kennedy,<br />
2005, p. 114). The sec<strong>on</strong>d observer independently<br />
collected data <strong>on</strong> the participant<br />
<strong>and</strong> student behavior during 53%, 38%, <strong>and</strong><br />
31% of the sessi<strong>on</strong>s for Rebecca, Autumn, <strong>and</strong><br />
Molly, <strong>and</strong> their students respectively. Interobserver<br />
agreement averaged 84% for the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als’<br />
data <strong>and</strong> 84% for the students’<br />
data across all sessi<strong>on</strong>s (see Table 1).<br />
Experimental Design<br />
Rebecca <strong>and</strong> Maile Molly <strong>and</strong> Adam Autumn <strong>and</strong> Ezra<br />
Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al Student Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al Student Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al Student<br />
4 93 70 83 85<br />
6 69<br />
8 69 86 84 80 96 93<br />
11 73 87 73 100 96<br />
12 78 93 96 87<br />
14 83 82 53 91 80<br />
17 83 100<br />
19 97 87 73 73 78 80<br />
Average 81% 87% 79% 78% 91% 85%<br />
A multiple baseline design across participants<br />
was utilized because the interventi<strong>on</strong> was<br />
knowledge-based <strong>and</strong> could not be reversed.<br />
To determine a functi<strong>on</strong>al relati<strong>on</strong> between<br />
the dependent variable <strong>and</strong> the independent<br />
variable, data were collected <strong>on</strong> the accuracy<br />
of the implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training <strong>and</strong><br />
the frequency of m<strong>and</strong>s used by the participat-<br />
ing students during baseline <strong>and</strong> post-interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Experimental C<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Baseline. During baseline, the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
were observed working with their students<br />
during <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e instructi<strong>on</strong> for 15<br />
min each. The participants were told to do<br />
what they would normally be doing during<br />
that <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e time with their student. Typical<br />
<strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e activities during observati<strong>on</strong><br />
times included art activities, math less<strong>on</strong>s, toy<br />
play, <strong>and</strong> worksheets. Dependent measures<br />
of m<strong>and</strong> training (sanitize the envir<strong>on</strong>ment,<br />
prompt/require m<strong>and</strong>, <strong>and</strong> reinforce) <strong>and</strong><br />
student sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s were recorded as<br />
described above. Baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s c<strong>on</strong>tinued<br />
until there were stable <strong>and</strong> level data.<br />
Interventi<strong>on</strong>. Once baseline data were stable<br />
for the first paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al participant,<br />
access to the OTV was given. The OTV interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>sisted of: a) a pretest of 20 questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
to determine a baseline of knowledge;<br />
b) 18, 2 to 6 min high-definiti<strong>on</strong>, documentary-style<br />
videos with classroom dem<strong>on</strong>strati<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
studio produced voice-over, <strong>and</strong> supporting<br />
graphics <strong>and</strong> text (<strong>Autism</strong> Training Soluti<strong>on</strong>s,<br />
2010); c) a competency check following each<br />
2 to 6 min video; d) a post-test (identical to<br />
the pre-test); e) a certificate of completi<strong>on</strong><br />
for participants achieving 88% accuracy <strong>on</strong><br />
the post-test; f) a return to a specific point in<br />
the training program where the participant<br />
didn’t dem<strong>on</strong>strate mastery followed by a re-<br />
Online Training Videos / 135
peat of the post-test; <strong>and</strong> g) a self-evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />
checklist to self-m<strong>on</strong>itor the use of m<strong>and</strong>training<br />
procedures during classroom applicati<strong>on</strong><br />
of m<strong>and</strong> training (Carb<strong>on</strong>e, Zecchin, &<br />
O’Brien, 2009). The videos showed teachers<br />
using the methods within classroom settings.<br />
They also showed teachers implementing the<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong> in several different ways. Teachers<br />
were given a timeframe (3–4 days) to complete<br />
OTV. Once a participant completed<br />
OTV <strong>and</strong> met criteri<strong>on</strong> (88% accuracy) <strong>on</strong> an<br />
associated post-test, she was directed to download<br />
<strong>and</strong> print a self-management checklist<br />
of the m<strong>and</strong> training procedures. She was told<br />
to use this in subsequent classroom teaching<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s to self-evaluate in the applicati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
m<strong>and</strong> training. These procedures were the<br />
same for all participants.<br />
Molly went through the modules twice <strong>and</strong><br />
was not able to meet criteri<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> either posttest<br />
with 88% accuracy. Although she received<br />
a score of 50% <strong>on</strong> the post test score in Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />
to Verbal Behavior <strong>and</strong> 74% <strong>on</strong> the posttest<br />
of M<strong>and</strong> Training, the researchers moved<br />
her into the post-interventi<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> because<br />
she had taken the OTV course twice.<br />
Autumn met criteri<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the post-tests <strong>on</strong><br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong> to Verbal Behavior <strong>and</strong> M<strong>and</strong> Training<br />
with 95% <strong>and</strong> 89% accuracy, respectively;<br />
<strong>and</strong> Rebecca passed the post-tests with 89%<br />
<strong>and</strong> 89% accuracy, respectively. Both Autumn<br />
<strong>and</strong> Rebecca took the post-test <strong>on</strong>ce. The sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
thereafter were c<strong>on</strong>sidered post-interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Post-Interventi<strong>on</strong>. Post-interventi<strong>on</strong> data were<br />
collected in the same way that data were collected<br />
during baseline. Follow-up sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
were recorded 5 <strong>and</strong> 8 weeks after the postinterventi<strong>on</strong><br />
c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> to see if effects maintained.<br />
Results<br />
Figure 1 presents the percentage of intervals<br />
with correct implementati<strong>on</strong> of m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ents pre- <strong>and</strong> post-training. Rebecca’s<br />
baseline was somewhat stable with scores of<br />
0%, 23%, <strong>and</strong> 0% with a mean of 8%. Maile’s<br />
sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s in baseline were 0%,<br />
45%, <strong>and</strong> 0% with mean of 15%. Rebecca<br />
completed the OTV in 2 days <strong>and</strong> reported<br />
that she spent about five hours completing the<br />
<strong>on</strong>line training. Immediately after training Rebecca’s<br />
data jumped from 0% to 42%. Rebecca’s<br />
data followed an upward trend across all<br />
post-training sessi<strong>on</strong>s. This was also reflected<br />
in her self-evaluati<strong>on</strong> scores that increased<br />
from 8% to 100%. There was no immediate<br />
effect in Maile’s data for sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s<br />
but her data followed an increasing trend with<br />
variability ranging from 6% to 73%.<br />
Autumn’s baseline scores showed variability<br />
with an initial high score of 80% <strong>and</strong> an immediate<br />
decrease to 10% <strong>and</strong> 0% (see Figure<br />
1). Ezra’s sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s also had an initial<br />
high score of 80%, <strong>and</strong> then dropped to<br />
65% <strong>and</strong> 0%. Both paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> student<br />
data showed a dramatic downward trend<br />
in baseline. Autumn completed the <strong>on</strong>line<br />
training across 3 days, 1 day at school <strong>and</strong> the<br />
other 2 at her home over a weekend. She<br />
reported that the training took her about<br />
three hours. Autumn’s score jumped from 0%<br />
in baseline to 86% immediately after interventi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Her self-evaluati<strong>on</strong> scores increased from<br />
33% to 69% across post-interventi<strong>on</strong> sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
After 4 sessi<strong>on</strong>s of stable data, there was some<br />
variability <strong>and</strong> decrease in her scores, which<br />
subsequently increased <strong>and</strong> maintained in follow-up<br />
sessi<strong>on</strong>s. Ezra’s data closely mimicked<br />
Autumn’s data, with an immediate change<br />
from 0% to 93% after interventi<strong>on</strong>. Ezra’s<br />
data also showed similar variability <strong>and</strong> inc<strong>on</strong>sistency<br />
mirroring Autumn’s data, with a final<br />
increase to the 90–100% range. Baseline data<br />
overlapped with post training data for both<br />
paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>and</strong> student.<br />
Molly’s baseline remained fairly stable with<br />
scores between 0%–25% across nine sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
(see Figure 1). Adam’s sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s<br />
remained low in baseline ranging from<br />
0–45% with a mean of 18%. Molly participated<br />
in the OTV across 6 days during <strong>and</strong><br />
directly after the school day. Molly reported<br />
that the training took her about eight hours<br />
because she had to go back <strong>and</strong> review modules<br />
when she didn’t meet criteri<strong>on</strong>. She never<br />
met the criteri<strong>on</strong> of 88% after viewing the<br />
training twice, however, she was advanced to<br />
the post-interventi<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> of the study.<br />
In the post-interventi<strong>on</strong> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>, Molly’s<br />
data immediately jumped from 18% to 53%<br />
(see Figure 1). Subsequent sessi<strong>on</strong>s displayed<br />
a higher level of performance with a mean of<br />
50% <strong>and</strong> a subtle increasing trend. Adam’s<br />
136 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Figure 1. Percentage of Comp<strong>on</strong>ents Completed Correctly for Rebecca (top), Autumn (middle), Molly<br />
(bottom) <strong>and</strong> Sp<strong>on</strong>taneous M<strong>and</strong>s for Maile (top), Ezra (middle) <strong>and</strong> Adam (bottom). Breaks in data<br />
path indicate teacher or student absence.<br />
m<strong>and</strong>ing also immediately jumped from 0%<br />
to a 50% <strong>and</strong> followed a similar level <strong>and</strong><br />
trend as Molly’s data. Adam’s post-interventi<strong>on</strong><br />
mean was 54%. Both Molly <strong>and</strong> Adam’s<br />
data remained stable into the follow-up sessi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong><br />
Overall, OTV combined with the self-management<br />
checklist seemed to have functi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol over the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als’ implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
of m<strong>and</strong> training procedures. OTV<br />
Online Training Videos / 137
seemed to increase the use of m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ents during observed <strong>on</strong>e-to-<strong>on</strong>e sessi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
As a result, the degree to which the<br />
paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als were using m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
procedures seemed to be directly related to<br />
the percentage of intervals the students were<br />
sp<strong>on</strong>taneously m<strong>and</strong>ing. In other words, the<br />
students’ m<strong>and</strong>ing behaviors increased when<br />
the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als were implementing the<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ents of m<strong>and</strong> training (sanitizing the<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ment, prompting/requiring m<strong>and</strong>,<br />
<strong>and</strong> reinforcing).<br />
Before interventi<strong>on</strong>, Rebecca interacted<br />
with Maile by asking her many questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
about pictures <strong>and</strong> objects during <strong>on</strong>e-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>on</strong>e<br />
teaching sessi<strong>on</strong>s (What is this? Can you draw<br />
with cray<strong>on</strong>s?). Rebecca also gave her a lot of<br />
directi<strong>on</strong>s (“Show me the big <strong>on</strong>e”). After interventi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Rebecca c<strong>on</strong>tinued to ask her<br />
questi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> give directi<strong>on</strong>s, but she also<br />
started using the comp<strong>on</strong>ents of m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
(sanitizing the envir<strong>on</strong>ment, prompting/<br />
requiring m<strong>and</strong>s before giving items to students,<br />
<strong>and</strong> reinforcing m<strong>and</strong>s immediately).<br />
Rebecca reported that after interventi<strong>on</strong>, it<br />
took time <strong>and</strong> practice to implement m<strong>and</strong><br />
training procedures because she wasn’t sure<br />
what Maile would be motivated enough to<br />
m<strong>and</strong> for.<br />
Autumn’s baseline scores showed variability<br />
with an initial high score of 80% <strong>and</strong> an immediate<br />
decrease to 10% <strong>and</strong> 0%. This initial<br />
high score might have been the result of reactivity.<br />
For example, before the initial observati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
the lead teacher, who had some training<br />
in teaching m<strong>and</strong>s, mistakenly told<br />
Autumn that she was being observed <strong>and</strong><br />
should provide opportunities for Ezra to make<br />
requests. This may be the cause of the initial<br />
high percentage of m<strong>and</strong>s <strong>and</strong> m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent skills. She was then told to do<br />
what she normally does during that <strong>on</strong>e-to<strong>on</strong>e<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong> time. Subsequent baseline sessi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
showed a decrease in m<strong>and</strong>s.<br />
After Autumn completed OTV, her implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
scores immediately increased <strong>and</strong><br />
maintained for 4 sessi<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> then decreased<br />
significantly. On the day both Autumn <strong>and</strong><br />
Ezra’s scores decreased, Autumn <strong>and</strong> the<br />
classroom teacher reported that due to an<br />
issue in the home, Ezra was not resp<strong>on</strong>ding to<br />
instructi<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> participating less in activities<br />
that he normally enjoyed. During sessi<strong>on</strong>s 9<br />
<strong>and</strong> 10, Ezra engaged in several tantrums. It’s<br />
important to note that Autumn <strong>and</strong> the other<br />
paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als hadn’t had any training in<br />
behavior management. Thus when Ezra’s<br />
problem behaviors increased, Autumn may<br />
not have been able to implement m<strong>and</strong> training<br />
effectively. Unfortunately, stable data were<br />
not achieved in the post-interventi<strong>on</strong> phase.<br />
Molly viewed the trainings two times <strong>and</strong><br />
wasn’t able to meet the criteri<strong>on</strong> of 88% accuracy.<br />
She c<strong>on</strong>sistently missed the same comp<strong>on</strong>ents<br />
of m<strong>and</strong> training, which were to prompt<br />
the m<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> immediately reinforce. The<br />
change in level of data was mostly due to her<br />
increased ability to sanitize the envir<strong>on</strong>ment.<br />
This <strong>on</strong>e step of m<strong>and</strong> training was able to<br />
make a significant difference in implementati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> Adam’s number of sp<strong>on</strong>taneous<br />
m<strong>and</strong>s. Adam’s m<strong>and</strong>s closely mimicked Molly’s<br />
data, suggesting a relati<strong>on</strong>ship between<br />
the m<strong>and</strong> training <strong>and</strong> sp<strong>on</strong>taneous m<strong>and</strong>s.<br />
Limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
The first limitati<strong>on</strong> is that individuals who<br />
d<strong>on</strong>’t have experience using <strong>on</strong>line technologies<br />
may be resistant to adopting this method<br />
of training. One of our initial participants,<br />
who was in her sixties <strong>and</strong> had little experience<br />
with computers, dropped out of the<br />
study <strong>on</strong>ce the <strong>on</strong>line training was introduced<br />
to her. She had difficulty navigating <strong>and</strong> logging<br />
into the system <strong>and</strong> reported that the<br />
training was “stressful” for her. Another limitati<strong>on</strong><br />
that was uncovered was the school’s<br />
inability to provide time to complete the training.<br />
Participants had to complete the training<br />
outside of worktime. The school system also<br />
did not provide any incentives for the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
to complete trainings or increase<br />
their skills. The classroom teacher expressed<br />
interest in c<strong>on</strong>tinuing to use <strong>on</strong>line<br />
staff training, but even when the training was<br />
offered free of charge, he wasn’t sure how to<br />
get the staff to complete training without compensati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
If <strong>on</strong>line trainings are adopted in<br />
the schools, schools may need to reallocate<br />
some of the cost-savings into providing incentives<br />
for the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als to complete<br />
trainings <strong>on</strong> their own time.<br />
A theoretical limitati<strong>on</strong> is that there is a lack<br />
of literature that provides examples of an operati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
definiti<strong>on</strong> for a m<strong>and</strong>. One of the<br />
138 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
defining characteristics of a m<strong>and</strong> is that there<br />
must be a motivati<strong>on</strong> or motivating operati<strong>on</strong><br />
present before the verbal behavior occurs<br />
(Sundberg, Loeb, Hale & Eigenheer, 2002).<br />
Since motivati<strong>on</strong> is not easily observed, it was<br />
not part of this study’s operati<strong>on</strong>al definiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of a m<strong>and</strong>. After reexaminati<strong>on</strong>, more careful<br />
c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> of including an operati<strong>on</strong>al definiti<strong>on</strong><br />
of motivati<strong>on</strong> may be needed in future<br />
studies of m<strong>and</strong>s. Students may evoke m<strong>and</strong>s<br />
but not access to the item or activity they<br />
requested. In turn, this may have limited the<br />
frequency of true m<strong>and</strong>s being recorded.<br />
Recommendati<strong>on</strong>s for Future Research<br />
One of the limitati<strong>on</strong>s of greatest significance<br />
within this study was the degree to which the<br />
findings can be generalized. External validity<br />
will need to be addressed in future studies.<br />
Because the study was a single-subject, multiple<br />
baseline design across participants design,<br />
this study suggests that OTV was effective for<br />
the paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als who participated in the<br />
study. Additi<strong>on</strong>al replicati<strong>on</strong> studies should<br />
be c<strong>on</strong>ducted to determine if there would be<br />
similar results with other populati<strong>on</strong>s. Other<br />
topics related to the outcomes of professi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
development <strong>and</strong> the outcomes of student<br />
learning as a direct result should be investigated.<br />
The interventi<strong>on</strong> in this study was a treatment<br />
package <strong>and</strong> did not include a comp<strong>on</strong>ent<br />
analysis to determine the effectiveness<br />
of OTV without the self-evaluati<strong>on</strong> checklist.<br />
Substantial research indicates that self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring/self-evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />
strategies are powerful<br />
interventi<strong>on</strong>s in their own right (c.f., Allen &<br />
Blackst<strong>on</strong>, 2003; Plavnick, Ferreri, & Maupin,<br />
2010; Richman, Riordan, Reiss, Pyles, & Bailey,<br />
1988). It would be useful to know if the<br />
results of the study would have been similar<br />
without the self-evaluati<strong>on</strong> checklists.<br />
More research is needed across other populati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>and</strong> other teaching methods to assess<br />
whether <strong>on</strong>line training is an effective training<br />
tool for paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als. Will paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
perform better with a blended approach<br />
of OTVs <strong>and</strong> in-vivo coaching? Would<br />
paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als perform better if they had<br />
training initially in behavior management before<br />
learning teaching procedures? What ratio<br />
of <strong>on</strong>line learning <strong>and</strong> in-vivo coaching is<br />
most effective? Would other <strong>on</strong>line technology<br />
features, such as social media <strong>and</strong> forums,<br />
increase the effectiveness <strong>and</strong> positive attitudes<br />
of <strong>on</strong>line training?<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
Although the majority of research indicates<br />
that classroom lecture <strong>and</strong> workshop-style inservice<br />
trainings have little impact <strong>on</strong> paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
performance (Lamb, 1993), schools<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinue to rely heavily <strong>on</strong> this method of<br />
training. Training methods that have been<br />
found to be effective, such as <strong>on</strong>-the-job<br />
coaching, video modeling, <strong>and</strong> verbal feedback<br />
(Van Oorsouw, Petri, Embregts, Bosman<br />
& Jahoda, 2009) are difficult for schools to<br />
implement due to lack of resources <strong>and</strong> available<br />
trainers (Lerman, Vorndran, Addis<strong>on</strong>, &<br />
Kuhn, 2004). Online training can be offered<br />
to teachers <strong>and</strong> paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als in a costeffective<br />
<strong>and</strong> efficient manner outside of the<br />
school day. It is self-paced <strong>and</strong> customized to<br />
meet individuals’ needs. C<strong>on</strong>sequently; it may<br />
be a viable alternative to traditi<strong>on</strong>al workshops<br />
<strong>and</strong> inservice training. It also provides paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
<strong>and</strong> teachers the foundati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
knowledge to maximize the time they are<br />
able to spend with behavioral specialists who<br />
collaborate with them <strong>and</strong> provide <strong>on</strong>-the-job<br />
coaching. This study is the first study that<br />
investigated the applicati<strong>on</strong> of knowledge<br />
gained from <strong>on</strong>line professi<strong>on</strong>al development<br />
in the field of special educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> may set<br />
the stage for future research.<br />
In spite of the limitati<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>on</strong>line training<br />
was shown to be an effective tool in training<br />
these paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als to implement m<strong>and</strong><br />
training procedures. If the schools that implement<br />
<strong>on</strong>line training underst<strong>and</strong> the limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>and</strong> provide incentives for the teachers<br />
to complete the trainings, <strong>on</strong>line training may<br />
offer a more efficient means by which paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als<br />
<strong>and</strong> teachers can be trained in<br />
evidenced-based interventi<strong>on</strong>s. While future<br />
research is clearly needed in the area, overall,<br />
it appears that OTVs, such as the <strong>on</strong>e investigated<br />
in this study, have great potential.<br />
References<br />
Allen, S. J., & Blackst<strong>on</strong>, A. R. (2003). Training<br />
preservice teachers in collaborative problem solv-<br />
Online Training Videos / 139
ing: An investigati<strong>on</strong> of the impact <strong>on</strong> teacher<br />
<strong>and</strong> student behavior change in real-world settings.<br />
School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 22–51.<br />
Arntzen, E., & Almas, I. K. (2002). Effects of m<strong>and</strong>tact<br />
verses tact-<strong>on</strong>ly training <strong>on</strong> the acquisiti<strong>on</strong> of<br />
tacts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 419–<br />
422.<br />
<strong>Autism</strong> Training Soluti<strong>on</strong>s (Versi<strong>on</strong> 1.0) (<strong>on</strong>line<br />
learning management system). H<strong>on</strong>olulu HI<br />
Carb<strong>on</strong>e, V, J., Zecchin, G., & O’Brien, L. (2009)<br />
Vocal M<strong>and</strong>ing Evaluati<strong>on</strong> Form. Retrieved from<br />
http://www.drcarb<strong>on</strong>e.net/pdf/TeachingM<strong>and</strong>s<br />
Vocal.pdf<br />
Carr, E. G., & Dur<strong>and</strong>, V. M. (1985). Reducing<br />
behavior problems through functi<strong>on</strong>al communicati<strong>on</strong><br />
training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,<br />
18, 111–126.<br />
Eldevik, S., Hastings, R. P., Hughes, J. C., Jahr, E.,<br />
Eikeseth, S., & Cross, S. (2009). Meta-analysis of<br />
early intensive behavioral interventi<strong>on</strong> for children<br />
with autism. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent<br />
Psychology, 38, 439–450.<br />
Granpeesheh, D., Tarbox, J., Dix<strong>on</strong>, D. R., Peters,<br />
C. A., Thomps<strong>on</strong>, K., & Kenzer, A. (2009). Evaluati<strong>on</strong><br />
of an eLearning tool for training behavioral<br />
therapists in academic knowledge of applied<br />
behavior analysis. Research in <strong>Autism</strong> Spectrum Disorders.<br />
doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2009.07.004<br />
Howard, J. S., Sparkman, C. R., Cohen, H. G.,<br />
Green, G., & Stanislaw, H. (2005). A comparis<strong>on</strong><br />
of intensive behavior analytic <strong>and</strong> eclectic treatments<br />
for young children with autism. Research in<br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 26, 359–383.<br />
Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educati<strong>on</strong>al<br />
research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pears<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Knapczyk, D. R. (1989). Generalizati<strong>on</strong> of student<br />
questi<strong>on</strong> asking from special class to regular class<br />
settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22,<br />
77–83.<br />
Lamb, M. (1993). The C<strong>on</strong>sequences of INSET.<br />
Oxford Journals, 49(1), 72–80.<br />
Laski, K. E., Charlop, M. H., & Schreibman, L.<br />
(1988). Training parents to use the natural language<br />
paradigm to increase their autistic children’s<br />
speech. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,<br />
21, 391–400.<br />
Legislative Review & Investigati<strong>on</strong>s Committee.<br />
(2006). School paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als. General Assembly.<br />
Retrieved October 13, 2011 from http://www.<br />
cilu.org/Docs/School_Paraprofessi<strong>on</strong>als_%20Briefing_<br />
Report.pdf<br />
Lerman, D. C., Vorndran, C. M., Addis<strong>on</strong>, L., &<br />
Kuhn, S. C. (2004). Preparing teachers in evidence-based<br />
practices for young children with<br />
autism. School Psychology Review, 33, 510–526.<br />
Loiac<strong>on</strong>o, V., & Allen, B. (2008). Are special educati<strong>on</strong><br />
teachers prepared to teach the increasing<br />
number of students diagnosed with autism? Journal<br />
of Special Educati<strong>on</strong>, 2, 120–127.<br />
Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999).<br />
Paraeducators experiences in inclusive settings:<br />
Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Excepti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Children, 65, 315–328.<br />
Nigro-Bruzzi, D., & Sturmey, P. (2010). The effects<br />
of behavioral skills training <strong>on</strong> m<strong>and</strong> training by<br />
staff <strong>and</strong> unprompted vocal m<strong>and</strong>s by children.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 757–761.<br />
Plavnick, J. B., Ferreri, S. J., & Maupin, A. N. (2010).<br />
The effects of self-m<strong>on</strong>itoring <strong>on</strong> the procedural<br />
integrity of a behavioral interventi<strong>on</strong> for young<br />
children with developmental disabilities. Journal<br />
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 315–320.<br />
Pickett, A. L., & Gerlach, K. (Eds.). (2003). Supervising<br />
paraeducators in educati<strong>on</strong>al settings: A team<br />
approach (2nd ed.). Austin: PRO-ED.<br />
Richman, G. S., Riordan, M. R., Reiss, M. L., Pyles,<br />
D. M., & Bailey, J. S. (1988). The effects of selfm<strong>on</strong>itoring<br />
<strong>and</strong> supervisor feedback <strong>on</strong> staff performance<br />
in a residential setting. Journal of Applied<br />
Behavior Analysis, 21, 401–409.<br />
Ruiz, J. D., Mintzer, M. J., & Leipzig, R. M. (2006).<br />
The impact of e-learning in medical educati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Academic Medicine, 81, 207–212.<br />
Sundberg, M. L., & Michael, J. (2001). The benefit<br />
of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior for children<br />
with autism. Behavior Modificati<strong>on</strong>, 25, 698–<br />
724.<br />
Sundberg, M. L., Loeb, M., Hale, L., & Eigenheer,<br />
P. (2002). C<strong>on</strong>triving establishing operati<strong>on</strong>s to<br />
teach m<strong>and</strong>s for informati<strong>on</strong>, The Analysis of Verbal<br />
Behavior, 18, 15–29.<br />
United States Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>. (2000).<br />
Executive Summary--Twenty-Sec<strong>on</strong>d Annual Report to<br />
C<strong>on</strong>gress <strong>on</strong> the Implementati<strong>on</strong> of the Individuals with<br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong> Educati<strong>on</strong> Act. Retrieved October 27,<br />
2006, from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/<br />
annual/osep/2000/preface.doc<br />
U.S. Department of Educati<strong>on</strong>, Office of Planning,<br />
Evaluati<strong>on</strong>, <strong>and</strong> Policy Development. (2009).<br />
Evaluati<strong>on</strong> of evidence-based practices in <strong>on</strong>line learning:<br />
A meta-analysis <strong>and</strong> review of <strong>on</strong>line learning<br />
studies. Retrieved from www.ed.gov/about/offices/<br />
list/opepd/ppss/reports.html.<br />
United States Government Accountability Office.<br />
(2005). Special educati<strong>on</strong>: Children with autism.<br />
Report to the Chairman <strong>and</strong> Ranking Minority Member,<br />
Subcommittee <strong>on</strong> Human Rights <strong>and</strong> Wellness, <strong>and</strong><br />
Committee <strong>on</strong> Government Reform, House of Representatives.<br />
Retrieved February 23, 2005, from http://<br />
www.gao.gov/new.items/d05220.pdf<br />
Van Oorsouw, W. M., Embregts, P. J., Bosman,<br />
A. M., & Jahoda, A. (2009). Training staff serving<br />
clients with intellectual disabilities: A meta-analysis<br />
of aspects determining effectiveness. Research<br />
in <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>, 30, 503–511.<br />
140 / Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-March 2013
Winborn, L., Wacker, D. P., Richman, D. M., Asmus,<br />
J., & Geier, D. (2002). Assessment of m<strong>and</strong> selecti<strong>on</strong><br />
for functi<strong>on</strong>al communicati<strong>on</strong> training packages.<br />
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 295–<br />
298.<br />
Young, B., Simps<strong>on</strong>, R. L., Myles, B. S., & Kamps,<br />
D. M. (1997). An examinati<strong>on</strong> of paraprofes-<br />
si<strong>on</strong>al involvement in supporting inclusi<strong>on</strong> of students<br />
of autism. Focus <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> Other <strong>Developmental</strong><br />
<strong>Disabilities</strong>, 12, 31–38.<br />
Received: 9 November 2011;<br />
Initial Acceptance: 11 January 2012;<br />
Final Acceptance: 4 June 2012<br />
Online Training Videos / 141
DADD Statement <strong>on</strong> the use of the term Intellectual Disability<br />
The Board of Directors for the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
endorses the use of the term “intellectual disability” to replace any previous term used<br />
to describe the populati<strong>on</strong> of students with significant limitati<strong>on</strong>s in intellectual<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> adaptive behavior as manifested in the developmental period. This<br />
acti<strong>on</strong> is: (1) c<strong>on</strong>sistent with the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g>’s movement away from the use of the term<br />
“mental retardati<strong>on</strong>” over the past decade; (2) in alignment with the adopti<strong>on</strong> of the<br />
term intellectual disability by the field’s primary diagnostic <strong>and</strong> classificati<strong>on</strong> systems;<br />
(3) adheres to changes in federal law with regard to nomenclature; <strong>and</strong> (4) reflects<br />
current c<strong>on</strong>ceptualizati<strong>on</strong>s of disability as manifesting as a state of functi<strong>on</strong>ing that<br />
exists within the fit between the pers<strong>on</strong>’s capacities <strong>and</strong> limitati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>and</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>text in<br />
which the pers<strong>on</strong> functi<strong>on</strong>s. The adopti<strong>on</strong> of the term intellectual disability implies an<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing of disability c<strong>on</strong>sistent with an ecological <strong>and</strong> multidimensi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
perspective <strong>and</strong> requires that society resp<strong>on</strong>ds with interventi<strong>on</strong>s that focus <strong>on</strong><br />
individual strengths <strong>and</strong> that emphasize the role of supports u to improve human<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing. Although some c<strong>on</strong>fusi<strong>on</strong> f has arisen in the field with regard to the use of<br />
the term intellectual disability (reflecting a single state of functi<strong>on</strong>ing) or intellectual<br />
disabilities (suggesting multiple types of states of functi<strong>on</strong>ing), DADD agrees with the<br />
use of the term intellectual disability, in the singular, to reflect a single state of<br />
functi<strong>on</strong>ing characterized by significant limitati<strong>on</strong>s in intellectual functi<strong>on</strong>ing <strong>and</strong><br />
adaptive behavior, though with the underst<strong>and</strong>ing that intellectual disability can vary<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g students by severity of intellectual impairment <strong>and</strong> in the type, intensity, <strong>and</strong><br />
durati<strong>on</strong> of supports needed by a pers<strong>on</strong> n to functi<strong>on</strong> in typical, integrated<br />
envir<strong>on</strong>ments <strong>and</strong> c<strong>on</strong>texts.
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
Editorial Policy<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong> focuses <strong>on</strong> the<br />
educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> welfare of pers<strong>on</strong>s with autism <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities.<br />
ETADD invites research <strong>and</strong> expository manuscripts <strong>and</strong> critical review of the<br />
literature. Major emphasis is <strong>on</strong> identificati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> assessment, educati<strong>on</strong>al programming,<br />
characteristics, training of instructi<strong>on</strong>al pers<strong>on</strong>nel, habilitati<strong>on</strong>, preventi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
community underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> provisi<strong>on</strong>s, <strong>and</strong> legislati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Each manuscript is evaluated an<strong>on</strong>ymously by three reviewers. Criteria for acceptance<br />
include the following: relevance, reader interest, quality, applicability,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tributi<strong>on</strong> to the field, <strong>and</strong> ec<strong>on</strong>omy <strong>and</strong> smoothness of expressi<strong>on</strong>. The review<br />
process requires two to four m<strong>on</strong>ths.<br />
Viewpoints expressed are those of the authors <strong>and</strong> do not necessarily c<strong>on</strong>form to<br />
positi<strong>on</strong>s of the editors or of the officers of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />
Submissi<strong>on</strong> of Manuscripts<br />
1. Manuscript submissi<strong>on</strong> is a representati<strong>on</strong> that the manuscript is the author’s<br />
own work, has not been published, <strong>and</strong> is not currently under c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> for<br />
publicati<strong>on</strong> elsewhere.<br />
2. Manuscripts must be prepared according to the recommendati<strong>on</strong>s in the<br />
Publicati<strong>on</strong> Manual of the American Psychological Associati<strong>on</strong> (Sixth Editi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
2009).<br />
3. Each manuscript must have a cover sheet giving the names <strong>and</strong> affiliati<strong>on</strong>s of<br />
all authors <strong>and</strong> the address of the principal author.<br />
4. Research studies, including experimental (group <strong>and</strong> single-subject methodologies),<br />
quasi-experimental, surveys, <strong>and</strong> qualitative designs should be no more<br />
than 20–30 typewritten, double-spaced pages, including references, tables,<br />
figures, <strong>and</strong> an abstract.<br />
5. Graphs <strong>and</strong> figures should be originals or sharp, high quality photographic<br />
prints suitable, if necessary, for a 50% reducti<strong>on</strong> in size.<br />
6. Five copies of the manuscript al<strong>on</strong>g with a transmittal letter should be sent to<br />
the Editor: Stanley H. Zucker, Mary Lou Fult<strong>on</strong> Teachers College, Box 871811,<br />
Ariz<strong>on</strong>a State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1811.<br />
7. Up<strong>on</strong> receipt, each manuscript will be screened by the editor. Appropriate<br />
manuscripts will then be sent to c<strong>on</strong>sulting editors. Principal authors will<br />
receive notificati<strong>on</strong> of receipt of manuscript.<br />
8. The Editor reserves the right to make minor editorial changes which do not<br />
materially affect the meaning of the text.<br />
9. Manuscripts are the property of ETADD for a minimum period of six m<strong>on</strong>ths.<br />
All articles accepted for publicati<strong>on</strong> are copyrighted in the name of the<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>.<br />
10. Please describe subjects (or any other references to pers<strong>on</strong>s with disabilities)<br />
with a people first orientati<strong>on</strong>. Also, use the term intellectual disability<br />
(singular) to replace any previous term used to describe the populati<strong>on</strong> of<br />
students with significant limitati<strong>on</strong>s in intellectual functi<strong>on</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> adaptive<br />
behavior as manifested in the developmental period.
Search the entire archives of<br />
Educati<strong>on</strong> <strong>and</strong> Training in <strong>Autism</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong><br />
at<br />
http://daddcec.org/Publicati<strong>on</strong>s/ETADDJournal.aspx<br />
Visit the official Website of the<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Divisi<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Autism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>:<br />
http://www.daddcec.org