ARW Action Research - Amy R Wagner

Amy R. Wagner, LCSW, BCaBA
University of West Georgia
 Children with autism require precise teaching
 Paraprofessionals are often primary educators
 Paraprofessionals are often not provided with
sufficient development opportunities
 Short term mastery criteria typically guides instruction
 CDC reports 1 in 88 children with autism
 Vast empirical evidence relating early intensive
intervention to child achievement.
 Lovaas (1987 ) – 47% of experimental group vs 2% of
control group
 Similar results replicated by Sallows and Guptner
 By age 7, 48% in regular education 1st and 2nd grade classes.
 Individuals with autism often struggle with
generalizing skills (Wehman, 2009)
 Cowan and Allen (2007) present evidence that
combining intensive teaching procedures and
naturalistic teaching procedures promotes
 Moreover, these two procedures are well documented
in the behavior analytic literature
 Skinner and Keller (1950’s)
 Saville, Lambert and Robertson (2011) – interteaching
 Reed and Parsons (2000)
 LeBlanc, Ricciardi, Luiselli (2005) – abbreviated
performance feedback
 Binder (2003) and Weiss (2010) – fluency
 Catania et al. (2009), Moore and Fisher (2007) and
Collins et al. (2009) – video modeling
 Coordination of teaching strategies, focused on IEP
objectives will accelerate student learning and skill
 Fluent teaching skills will impact student performance
 Efficient and less costly staff development methods are
more likely to be implemented
To evaluate the effects of a video modeling protocol on
staff and student performance
 Design of an effective, efficient staff development tool
 Consistency in which staff use teaching strategies as
 Impact of those teaching strategies on student
 Student achievement of IEP targets
 3 paraprofessionals currently working in a classroom with
children with autism
 Paraprofessionals trained to use discrete trial instructional
skills through video modeling
 Instructions and approximately 10 minutes of videos during
each of the video modeling phases
 Protocol excerpted from LeBlanc, Ricciardi, Luiselli (2005)
 Student instructional trials linked to IEP objectives
 Feedback provided to participants on accuracy of protocol
 Indirect measures of student achievement collected from
teacher assessment
 Data analyzed using a ABC experimental design with
 IOA of 96% gathered from a sample of 25%
 Baseline and intervention performance data collected
for all staff participants
 Performance measured as adherence to protocol
 Improvements shown in 83% of student targets with
baseline data
 All three students showed some improvement
Baseline Av
Intervention Av
 Study was conducted with veteran staff - BL data was high
 No webcam available for feedback
 Researcher had no control over data collection
 Protocol did not focus on accuracy of data collection
 Behavior analysts did not conduct competency checks on data
 Variability in student data:
 Reinforcement preference or satiation
 Insufficient trials
 Non-compliance
 Data validity and reliability
 Quality of videos
 Staff feedback sheet not comprehensive - insufficient
training given to behavior analysts
 Classroom logistics required staff participant to be
assigned to specific students. This clouded
conclusions about generalization
 Insufficient number of targets due to mastery prior to
 Due to time constraint, only one BL data point and two
intervention data points – study needs to be extended.
Multiple baseline for future research.
 Data trends given the time constraints, veteran staff,
and variability in student data
 Dissertation…
Catania, C. N., & Almeida, D. (2009). Video modeling to train staff to
implement discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 42(2), 387-392
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Retrieved from
Collins, S., Higbee, T. S., Salzberg, C. (2009). The effects of video
modeling on staff implementation of a problem-solving intervention
with adults with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 42(4), 849-854.
Cowan, R. J., & Allen, K. D. (2007). Using naturalistic procedures to
enhance learning in individuals with autism: A focus on generalized
teaching within the school setting. Psychology in the Schools, 44(7), 115. doi: 10.1002/pits.20259
Leblanc, M., Ricciardi, J. N., & Luiselli, J. K. (2005). Improving discrete
trial instruction by paraprofessional staff through an abbreviated
performance feedback intervention. Education and Treatment of
Children, 28(1), 76-82.
Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and
intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(1), 3-9.
Moore, J. W., & Fisher, W. W. (2007). The effects of video modeling on
staff acquisition of functional analysis methodology. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 40(1), 197-202.
Reid, D. H., & Parsons, M. B. (2000). Organizational Behavior
Management in Human Service Settings. In J. Austin & J. E. Carr (Eds.),
Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 275-294). Reno, NV:
Greenwood: Context Press.
Sallows, G. O., & Graupner, T. D. (2005). Intensive behavioral treatment
for children with autism: Four-year outcome and predictors. American
Journal on Mental Retardation, 110(6), 417-438. Retrieved from
Saville, B. K., Lambert, T. , & Robertson, S. (2011). Interteaching: Bringing
behavioral education to the 21st century. The Psychological Record,
61(1), 153-166. Retrieved from EBSCOhost
Wehman, P., Smith, M. D., & Schall, C. (2009). Autism & the transition to
adulthood: Success beyond the classroom. Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Brookes Publishing Co.
Weiss, M. J., Pearson, N., Foley, K., & Pahl, S. (2010). The importance of
fluency outcomes in learners with autism. The Behavior Analyst Today,
11(4), 245-251.

similar documents