on-the-job training of special education staff

7/27/2019 On-The-job Training of Special Education Staff

1/11

Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice - 1213) Sum mer 2101-2110 '*2012 Educational Consultancy and Research Centerwww.edam.com.tr/estp -

O n - t h e - j o b T r a in i n g o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n S t a f f : T e a c h i n gt h e S i m u l t a n e o u s P r o m p t i n g S t r a t e g i e s

Sezgin V URAN 'Anadolu University

Seray OLAY GLIlk Emek Special Education and

Rhabilitation Center

AbstractThe aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of staff training on discrete-trial teaching IDTTI. Multiplebaseline design across subjects was used in order to analyze the effect of the training program on the educa-tors' performance on probing and intervention implementation. For teaching these two skills, presentation ofan information man ual, live model and error correction including feedback giving through video were used. Theresults showed that the percentage of correct response related to probing and training skills through simul-taneous promp ting was 100% among all pa rticipants. Students who were instructed by these educators alsoreached 80-100% correct responding level in terms of the s kill taught. F ollow-up data was collected 4-8 weeksafter the com pletion of the process and it was seen that the participants pa rtially maintained the skills acquired.Social validity data.was collected in order to assess opinions of the participants about the survey.

KeywordsStaff Training . Simultaneous Prom ptings. D iscrete-Trial Teaching, Individuals with D evelopmental Disabilities.

The success of individuals w ith developm ental dis-abities depends on the effective and proper useof appropriate teaching methods as we as thechanges and ad aptations of the attitudes of the peo-ple who play active roles in the chd's education,such as peers, staff and parents. Staff members areindividuals who interact with chdren with devel-opmental disabities and provide services to them(Sturmey, 2008). Considering this relationship, theeffectiveness and significance of training these staffmem bers have become an imp ortant current issue.

a Sezgin VURAN. Ph.D.. is currently department chair

Staff Training: A Review of th e LiteratureIn the existing literature, there are many stud-ies on the effects of staff member training ona staff's performance and the performances ofthe individuals with developmental disabilitiesto whom the staff provides service. Most of thestudies aim to teach discrete-trial teaching, anevidence-based practice, to staff members work-ing with children who suffer from developmentaldisabilities (Belfiore, Fritts, & Herm an, 2008; Dib& Sturmey, 2007; Fazzio, Martin, Arnal, & Yu,2009; Koegel, Russo, & Rincover, 1977; LeBlanc,Ricciardi, & Luiselli, 2005; Ryan & Hemmes,2005; Sarokoff & Sturmey, 2004, 2008; Thiessen


2/11

E D U C A T I O N A L S C I E N C E S : TH E O R Y & P R A C T I C E

lus preferences (Lavie & Sturmey), have beenconducted to gain information and skills to staffmember.In staff training, there are four main methods: th ehandbook, which presents related informationthrough a trainer's written notes; modeling, whichtrains the staff via live performances or videos; re -hearsal, which encourages trainees to apply theirskills; and feedback, which is the trainer's explana-tions of the staff's performance through written,oral or graphic acc ounts (Sturmey, 2008).In most of the studies investigating the effective-ness of staff tra ining me thod s, at least two of thesemethod s were used together (Dib 8c Sturmey, 2007;Koegel et al., 1977; Lavie & Sturmey, 2002; Leb-lanc et al., 2005; Ryan & Hemmes, 2005; SarokofiF8c Sturmey, 2004, 2008; Schepis, Reid, wnbey, &Parsons, 2001), yet in only one study was the ef-fectiveness of self video modeling (in which theparticipants watch themselves) examined (Belfioreet al., 2008). The teaching m ethod s in staff trainingplay a significant role in creating the desired effectson the stafif and the individuals taught by the staff.In addition, these methods are expected to be effi-cient in terms of time and effort. These features areinvolved in the desired characteristics of staff tr ain-ing (Sturmey, 2008).In Turkey, the discrete-trial approach was apphed invarious studies. The approach was condu cted usingerrorless teaching methods, which are based on theidea that students learn skills and concepts moreeasy from their correct responses and exercisesrather than the errors through teaching (Tekin-lftar8cKircaali-lftar, 2004). Simultaneous prompting isone such teaching method. Researchers themselvesemploy this method in the studies applying simul-taneous prompting (eluc, 2007; Dogan, 2001;Fetko, Schuster, Harley, & C olhns, 1999; Gibson &Schuster, 1992; MacFarland-Smith, Schuster, & Ste-vens, 1993; Parker & Schuster, 2002; Parrot, Schus-ter, Collins, & Gassaway, 2000; Schuster & Griffen,1993; Sewe, Co ins, Hem meter, & Schuster, 1998;Shigleton, Schuster, Morse, & CoUins, 1999; Toper,2006; Ycesoy, 2002). on ly in one study was the in-tervention conducted with siblings without devel-opmental disabities (Tekin & Kircaah-tftar, 2002).

sions, defining the response interval, identifying theindividual's response, determining the data record-ing method, and making other necessary changes inthe process (Tekin-tftar 8c Ku-caah-tftar, 2004). Ad-ditionally, probing sessions are also conducted to testwhether or not leaming occurs because the individualdoes not have the opportunity to react independentlyduring the teaching through simultaneous promp tingprocess (Morse 8c Schuster, 2004). Therefore, prob-ing becomes as important for the trainer as teachingthrough simultaneous prompting.Although there has been an increase in the num berof studies employing errorless teaching methodsso far, in practice, these methods are not used asaccurately and as often as required by educators,who mostly prefer to use traditional methods. Thispractice affects chdren who cannot learn throughtraditional methods, the teachers teaching suchchdren and the parents who cannot reahze theexpected changes in their Chdren's development.However, the use of these methods can becomewidespread by educating many instructors aboutthe knowledge and skill required of different teach-ing methods by implementing systematic stafftraining programs.This study differs from other staff training researchwithin the existing hterature in that it is the firststudy on the effectiveness of such staff training inTUrkey. In addition, it aims to teach the educatorswho w ork with individuals suffering from develop-mental disabities, the skill of using simultaneousprompting (SP) vrithin the form of discrete-trialteaching (D TT ). Thus, this study intends to analyzethe effectiveness of staff training by considering theperformances of inchviduals taught by these train edstaff members. Moreover, in this study, as an errorcorrection method, comparing in vivo modelingand self video m ode ling are used as different fromtraditional methods.

PurposeThe aim of this study is to analyze the effectivenessof the staff's train ing, which taug ht three educatorsworking at a special education and rehabihtationcenter the teaching through SP within the form of


3/11

. VURAN . OLAY GOL / On-tt ie - job Training of Speciat Education Staff : Teacti ing t l ie Simuttaneous Prom pting Strateg ies

-If the skills of probing and teaching through SPwithin the form of DTT can be taught to threeeducators, will these skills continue four and eightweeks later after the initial implem entation?-Is the apphed staff training effective at aiding thestudents' learning?-W hat are the educators' opinions abou t the training?

MethodParticipantsIn this study, two groups of participants were in-volved. The first group consisted of three educatorsworking at the center where this study was con duct-ed, whe the second group involved three studentswith dev elopmental disabUities taught by said ed uca-tors. The participants in the first group volunteeredfor th e study after a meeting presenting the aim andscope of the stud y with all the ed ucators at the center.In addition, as a secondary criterion for selection,those who did not have any knowledge and experi-ence about teaching through simultaneous prompt-ing were selected using interviews. In these inter-views, aU of the participants explained that they gen-erally use the direct teaching method and that theyhave difficulty with co ntrolling any behavioral p rob-lems during teaching. Furthermore, they confirmedthat they did not have any knowledge or experienceregarding errorless teaching m ethods.The three selected volunteer educators working aspedagogues and educationists in the center have thefollowing features. All three participants are w omen,26 years old and graduated from Hacettepe Univer-sity, Department of Chd Development and Educa-tion in 2008. They have worked for approximatelytwo years in the special education and rehabihtationcenter as educators. All of the pa rticipants have taughtand worked with chdren diagnosed with pervasivedevelopmental disorders, m ental retardation, physicalretardation and specific learning disabities.The participants in the second group are the stu-dents who were taught by the selected educatorsand who could not know the nam es of the objectsin the show n pictu res. The profiles of these stud ents

years at special education and rehabihtation cen-ters. Me tin was seven years old and had receivedspecial education and s uppo rt services since he wastwo years old. He had been diagnosed as sufferingfrom moderate mental retardation at Bakent Uni-versity Hospital. Hasan was seven years old anddiagnosed as suffering from moderate mental re-tardation at Sami Ulus Chd Hospital. He has beentraining at special education and rehab ihtation cen-ters for abou t three years.All of the students in the study could react whenthey were called by name, show their attention tothe speaker with gestures, mimic m ovements, iden-tify the named object among other pictures, obey

, single- or two-staged instructions, make sentencesconsist of only one word, and express their needswith such se ntences. However, they were limited intheir abihty to name objects or the pictures of ob-ject, use motion verbs and make sentences vrith twoor more words. The target behaviors to be studiedwith the students were chosen after examining thestudents' Individualized Education Programs anddiscussing vrith their parents and educators. After-wards, "Student vriU identify the name of object inthe shown picture" was selected as the primary tar-get behavior to be taught to the students.

Research De signTo examin e the effectiveness of the staff train ing onthe educators' probing and teaching, multiple probedesigns derived from multiple baseline designswere adapted in this study. Multiple probe designsare preferred if the participants cannot perform thetarget behavior and changing the student's environ-ment after collecting the baseline data would haveno effect or if collecting th baseline data for thesecond and third dependent variables over a longperiod of time is impossible. Following this meth-od, potential problems du ring research can be min -imized (Horner & Baer, 1978). In this study, mul-tiple probe design across subjects in which probingdata is coected intermittently (Richards, Taylor,Ramasamy, & Richards, 1999) was selected to avoidmaking any changes to both the educators' and th estudents' course schedules at the center.


4/11

E D U C A T I O N A L S C I E N C E S : T H E O RY & P R A C T I C E

variable was the educators' abihty to execute theprobing and teaching process for three consecu-tive sessions at a 95 % or greater accuracy level. Theother dependent variable was the students' abityto name the correct picture among three differentpictures w ithin five second s.The first independent variable of the study was thestaff training the educators had undergone to gainthe abity to teach process using SP within the formof DTT. The staff training consisted of a multi-stageprocess involving the presentation of the informationmanual, error correction such as in vivo modelingand video feedback. The staff tra ining was conductedby first researcher who had doctorate and graduatedegrees vrith over 25 years of general teaching e xperi-ence and over 20 years of teaching apphed behavioranalysis courses at the undergraduate and graduatelevel. The second indep ende nt variable was the teach-ing process using SP within the form of DTT.

Definition s of Target BehaviorsThe target behaviors expected from the educators atthe probing sessions included the foowing: Preparing equipment Presenting attention-grabbing promp ts to draw

an individual's attention before teaching Providing skis instructio n, to teach the indi-

viduals the skls needed to react appropriatelyto the stimti

Waiting for the individual's reaction for three-five seconds

After the first trial, recording bo th correct andincorrect reactions

Waiting for 2 seconds between trials Passing to ano ther trial Ending the session when the decided probing

trials are completed Reinforcing the individual's participation

The target behaviors expected from the educa-tors at the teaching sessions through simultane-ous prompting include the foowing:

Preparing equipm ent for teaching

Presenting controlling prom pting right after thetarget stimuh

Presenting 12 trials for each stimuh with a wait-ing time of 0 seconds

W aiting for the student's reactio n for three-fiveseconds Reinforcing the individual's correct reactions Ignoring the individual's incorrect or absent re-

actions Repeating the trial once mo re Recording the individual's reaction Waiting for two seconds between the trials Ending the session 12 trials are completed Reinforcing the individual's participation Enacting a probing session before starting anr

other sessionMeanwhe, the students were expected to identifythe correct picture of three different pictures show nwithin five seconds. For Hasan, "fork, spoon, andplate" were determined to be the target behaviors;for Bulent, "horse, elephant, and monkey." For Me-tin, "fork, spoon, and plate" were initiay targeted,but Metin reached the target at the end of baselinephase in which the educator received the summa-ry information. As a result, "pomegranate, apple,pear" were determined as target behaviors for Me-tin for the stage in which the information manualwas presented to the educator.

SettingThe study was conducted in a special educationand rehabitation center in which a total of 288students were diagnosed with developmental dis-abihties, pervasive developm ental disorder, specificlearning disabihty, and mental and physical retar-dation. Every student attending the center receivedeither two-hour individual tutoring sessions andone-hour group learning sessions or two-hour in-dividual tutoring sessions only. There are fourteeneducators, three psychologists, five physical thera-pists and nine support staff members in the center.


5/11

V U R AN . O L A Y G O L / O n - t h e - j o b Training of Special Education Staff: Teaching th e Simultaneous Prompting Strategies

cards depicted the pictures of the objects to betaught, and pencs and data recording charts pre-pared the students for learning the picture-iden-tification skills that were to be utized during theprobing and teaching sessions.

Research ProcessThe research process consists of a basehne, inter-vention and following phases, as explained in thefoowing paragraphs.

Baseline Phase for the EducatorsAt the baseline phase, d ata for tw o different skills werecollected the skill of probing and the skl of present-ing SP within the form of DTT. In the interviewsbefore implementation, the educators explained thatthey did not know anything about teaching throughSP within the form of DTT. Thus, at the baselinephase, the educators were first given sum mar y infor-mation explaining how to carry out probing sessions(App. A). After reading this summary, the educatorswere asked to collect probing data related to theirstudents' picture-identification skills during the thre econsecutive sessions. After a one-hour break, thesame implem entation process was repeated for teach-ing through SP vrithin the form of DTT. The summaryinformation used in this process is presented in Ap-pendix B. The educators were expected to performa total of 12 trials, wherein they were to collect dataregarding each target behavior four times per sessionduring the probing and teaching process. The baselinesessions continued unt at least three continuous andconsistent data sets were collected. Through su mm aryinformation, we were able to observe the effects of thisinformation on the educators' performance.

Baseline Phase for the StudentsThe data that was collected by the educators at thesessions conducted after the information man ual (thesessions in which high -at least 70%- treatment reh-abihty was ensured) was accepted as the baseline datavrith respect to the skls to be taught to the studen ts.

teaching through SP within the form of DTT to-gether. To that end, information manual, which in-cluded detailed explanations and examples on howto probe and teach through SP within the form ofDTT, was distributed to the educators. Afterwards,the educators were asked to read the manuals, andthe interventionist explained the difficult sections,of the manual. The educators were given time torevise the manual, and when they felt ready, theywere asked to teach picture-identification skls tothe students using their nevrfound metho ds.The educators were asked to perform three ses-sions with respect to picture-identification skisat a time, as one probing and one teaching session,and at each session, they were to teach three targetbehaviors. In sum, they performed total of 12 tri-als, vrith four trials per target behavior. A on e-ho urbreak was given between each session. At manualphase, the educ ators were expected to reach at least95 % accuracy of correct responses levels for threeconsecutive sessions. Since the first and secondeducators' coid no t satisfy this criterion , they pro -ceeded to the error correction phases in which invivo m odehng and video feedback were presented.Although the third educator reached the criterion,she was allowed to participate in the error correc-tion phase because she was the last participant andwanted to see her errors.During die video feedback process, we watched thevideos of the educators' performances, and after se-lecting the best performances, we watched them withthe educators. Afterwards, in vivo modeling with re-spect to the probing and teaching process were pre-sented. During this time, an adult accompanied thefirst researcher and posed as a model for all scenar-ios likely to be encountered during the probing andteaching process. The educators were then asked tocompare the self video model and the in vivo model,find their errors and offer suggestions to correct theseerrors. This process was repeated unt the educatorsachieved respond ing levels of 95 % accuracy.

FoUow-upThe foUow-up sessions were carried out four andeight weeks after implementation was completed.


6/11

E D U C A T I O N A L S C I E N C E S : TH E O R Y & P R A C T I C E

Interobserver ReliabilityThe data for interobserver rehabihty was collectedfrom 25% of all of the sessions. The video record-ings for all of the sessions were given ntmibers, andthrough random assigning, the videos to be watchedwere selected Then the data for interobserver rehab-ity was coectedfirom he firstand second researchersby watching the videos independently. Wh e calculat-ing the coefficient of interobse rver reKabity, the for-mula of [Agreement/ (Agreement + EHsagreement)] x100 was used. The data for hiterobserver rehabity ispresented in Table 1.

Treatment ReliabilityIn this study, two different treatm ent rehabihty datasets regarding the first researcher and educators'training sessions were coected. To check to whatextent the first researcher's training comphed withthe plan, reliabihty data was coected from 20%of all of the sessions. These sessions provided datastabity. For this purpose, the behaviors expectedfrom the interventionist during the p repared imple-mentation plan were determined, and the observerswere informed about these behaviors. To calculatethe treatment reliability coefficient, the formula of[Observed practitioner behavior / Planned practi-tioner behavior] x 100 was used. As a result, treat-men t rehabity w as calculated to be 100%.However, to evaluate to what extent the educatorscarried out teaching through SP within the form ofDTT per the plan, the rehabihty data on the prob-ing and teaching sessions conducted by the educa-tors was coected after considering all the sessionsin baseline and intervention phas. The obtaineddata is presented in Table 2.

Social VaUdityTo evaluate the soc ial validity of the study, right af-ter the first follow-up session, the educators wereasked, "What are your opinions about the train-ing process presented to you?" Their answers weresubmitted in an envelope to the center's secretary.Thus, by analyzing the anecdotes taken from theeducators' opinions and the diaries kept by the sec-ond researcher during the implem entation process,the social vahdity data were coected.

FindingsEffectiveness Data on Trained StaffSince the educators in this study explained that theydid not have any knowledge or experience aboutteaching through SP within the form of DTT, summ a-ry information was presented to them at the baselinephase, at which point the baseline data was gatheredAt the baseline phase, mean co rrect response percent-ages on both probing and teaching skills were deter-m ine d These averages are given in Table 3.According to the data, au educators showed pro g-ress in both probing and teaching through simul-taneous prompting after the presentation of the in-formation manual. However, after error correction,au participants reached 100 % correct responselevels for at least one session of both probing andteaching. Even du ring foow-up sessions four-eightweeks later, we were able to detect that they hadkept 98-100% of their acquired skis. The partici-pants' progress throughout each phase of the prob -ing and teach ing process is illustrated in F igure 1.

Table I.The Data for Interobserver Reliability

ICrkanProb ing (%) Inter ventio n (%)

99 9999 100100 95

99 98

SevUProbing (%)

9310094 -9997

Intervention (%)9495979996

aglaProbing (% )

10 0100989398

Intervention (%)9910010 098 .97


7/11

VURAN. OLAY G OL / On-the-job Training of Special Education Staff: Teaching the Simultaneous Prompting Strategies

The baseline data for the students' picture-identifica-tion skills was collected during the sessions foow-ing the presentation of the information manual tothe educators. With regard to the students' picture-identification skis, we observed that the first studentprogressed fixjm 2,6% to 47%, the second student pro-gressed fro m 36% to 83%, and the third student pro-gressed fro m 80% to 100%. However, at the follow-upsessions conducted four-eight weeks later, we realizedthat Bulent cotd not retain his skls, as he achievedonly a 25% correct performance. But we also observedthat Metin continued to average around 79%, andthat Hasan averaged around 91%. In other words,both students had permanently learned the picture-identification skill. The students' performances arelustrated in Figure 2.

Findings on Social ValidityThe findings on social vahdity were obtained by an-alyzing the data fromAe educators' opinions aboutthe process and the second researcher's research di-aries. Once the educators' opinions were examined,we reahzed that they had expressed fewer opinionsabout the process and more opinions about themethods. The educators generally believed the fol-lovring: they had benefited a lot from trainin g; theyreached successful results more quickly thanks tothis method; and they had improved in their abihtyto monitor the students' performances. Moreover,they explained that they could allocate more tim e toteaching because they now followed a definite plan.They also reahzed th e significance of reinforcementduring the teaching process, and they became ac-custom ed to keeping reco rds. However, with regardto the training process, the educators emphasizedthat the error correction was the phase where theyhad received the most benefit. Furthermore, theeducators claimed that they "could evaluate theirperformances better and realize their mistakes" af-ter in vivo modeling.

0080604 0200

0080604 020

o n 19070 -60 '5040302010 -0

yV

9*nr CO IBe ttOB

ran

* * * * *

Stvil

'

M l*9202122332425262728

Figure 1.Figure on the Participants' Skills of Probing and Teaching throughPrompting

When the second researcher's diaries were ex-amined, we saw that two of the educators usedexpressions such as, "I did not know what to do.I panicked," at the phase during which summaryinformation was presented. In addition, theylooked quite worried during the first implementa-tion process (in w hich baseline data was collected).However, after the presentation of the informationmanual, they felt more relaxed and became moreconfident du ring the implem entation process. Oneof the educators articulated her opinion about thisphase by saying, "OK, now everything is de ar .I b e-came relaxed". The second researcher wo rked at thesame center as the educators. After the implemen-tation process, the educators sometimes discussedother students with whom they had carried outteaching through simultaneous prompting. For ex-ample, Sena asked the second researcher to observeher lesson, during which she conducted teachingthrough simitaneous prompting to a student withWh ams syndrome. The second observer accepted

Table 3.


8/11

E D U C A T I O N A L S C I E N C E S ; T H E O RY & P R A C T I C E

her offer and recorded her lesson. As a result, it wasfound that she had performed the metho d at a 90%accuracy level.

100so< 04 02 0

0

B x e U

IOC -|eo .60

20 .

ine Intecvcntion

/

//

100 180 04020

0

Bulent

*

Matin

** *

Huan

1 3 3 7 9 II 13 13 17 19 21 23 23Figure 2.Figure on the Students' Skill of Naming Shown Picture

Conclusions and DiscussionThis study examined the effectiveness of staff train-ing given to educators on teaching through SPwithin the form of DTT as well as the effect of thisteaching process on the chdren's performances.The findings of the study indicated that educa-tors could meet the criteria for teaching throughSP within the form of DTT through staff train-ing. In addition, the chdren, who were taught bythese trained educators, were also able to acquirethe target behaviors. These findings are consistentwith the results of the studies, in which the staffmembers acquired the ski of presenting discrete-trial teaching and the effects of their teachings onthe chdren's performances were examined (Dib &Sturmey , 2007 ; Sarokoff & Sturmey, 2008).Whe teaching through simitaneous prompting,individuals do not have the opportimity to reactindependently. Thus, probing sessions are enactedin order to test whether learning occurred or not

baseline) was collected. We aimed t o teach the edu-cators the necessity of enacting probing sessionsduring teaching through simultaneous promptingwhe also monitoring clearly the chdren's prog-

Although there was no change in the educators'performances for teaching through simultane-ous prompting at the baseline, the basehne datafor probing indicated that the second participantprogressed fTom 60% to 86%, and the third par-ticipant progressed from 15% to 88% . This in-crease could be due to the probing and teachingtrials having simar steps; also, there is a transfereffect for simar steps explained in the summariesof both skills. In addition, there are fewer and lesscomphcated steps during the probing process, theparticipants had teaching skills and multiple test-ing also had an effect. Although all of these factorscontributed to learning probing skills, they did nothelp the educators reach the target criterion in thestudy. This study indicated that the target criterioncould be reached with less effort throu gh staff tra in-ing, where the information manual and the errorcorrection methods were presented. In contrast totraditional methods, the use of in vivo modelingand self video modeling practices helped the edu-cators to evaluate their own performances and torealize their errors more easy. With this method,the educators gained awareness about their ownimplementation fiaws, which averted the need forother people to point out the errors. Thus, the edu-cators were able to reach the 95% correct responsecriterion for three co nsecutive sessions.In the existing hterature, the studies on staff train-ing generally adopted traditional methods, yet videomodeling practices were used only in Belfiore et al.(2008) study. In that study, video m odeling practicessuch as self video modeling were used during stafftraining, and the findings simarly showed that theeducators had acquired the skl of using discrete-trial teaching at the criterion level. Furthermore, inthe present study, we observed that the students whohad been taught by the educators utilizing teachingthrough simultaneous prompting had shown prog-ress. Two students reached 100% correct response lev-els and kept their acquired skills after the implementa-tion process. On e student (Bulent) reached a 75% cor-


9/11

V U R A N . OLAY O O L / On-the- job Training of Special Education Staff : Teaching the Simultaneous Prompting Strategies

more sessions with high treatment rehabity couldhave been conducted, the student could have reachedthe 100% correct response level and acqu ired the skillpermanently. Another student. Metin, performed thefirst target behavior at 100% in th e first sbc sessionsbecause his educator had been teaching at over 70%treatment rehabity level during the baseline sessionsprior to the presentation of summ ary information. Atthe e nd of the foowing sbc sessions. Metin p erformedthe target behavior at 100% an d acquired his skl per-manently. The educator working with Hasan taughtnine sessions at 65% and over treatment rehabitylevel during the basehne sessions; at the end, Hasanreached 100% correct response level and later contin-ued to achieve a 91% accuracy level. These findingsindicate that the students who hacl been taught withhigh treatm ent reUabity learned better and acquiredtheir skills perm anently.In sum, the staff training program, w hich included theinformation manu al, in vivo modeling a nd self videomodehng, was effective at both improving the edu-cators' teaching skls through SP within the form ofDTT and at teaching the students the target behaviors.

i.e., their pe rformances. There are three pictures inthe attached envelope. After putting these pictureson the table, you will evaluate whether or not thechd know s the names of the objects on the pictu re.Be sure not to give prom pting, an d after each reac-tion, mark the correct and independent reactionson the data recording form. Record the reactionsgiven as a result of prom pts as wrong reactions.During each probing session:1. Ensure that the chd pays attention.2. Present the correct materials.

. 3. Give the appropriate instructions for the chd'scorrect reaction.

4. Wait for the chd's reac tion.5. Continue until the 12 teaching trials are com-

pleted.6. M ark the results on the evaluation table.7. Inform us when you complete the trials.8. En d the session when the trials are com pleted.9. Reinforce the participation.

SuggestionsIn further studies, the effectiveness of implem entation can be ex-

amined by giving more detaed summ ary infor-mation

the effectiveness of in vivo mod ehn g and selfvideo modeling can be compared

training educators on different teaching meth odscan be attempted

staff mem bers working at different positions canbe trained

a study with sma groups can be designed.On the other hand, in further ap phcations, throughwidespread staff training, larger population can bereached.

Appendix A.

Appendix B.Teaching the picture-identification skill through SPwithin the form of DTTYou wi teach the chdr en w ith developmen tal chs-abihties the picture-identification ski through SPwithin th e form of DTT. There are three pictures inthe attached envelope. After putting these pictureson the table, you wi teach the chd the nam es ofthe objects on the picture . You vri name one of thepictures. Try to teach the names of three picturesaccorciing to the foowing steps:Summ ary of the stepsArrange the necessary materialsDecide on the results foowed with wrong and cor-rect reactionsAt each trial:1. Ensure that the chd pays attention.


10/11

E D U C A T I O N A L S C I E N C E S : T H E O RY & P R A C T I C E

5. Once the chd reacts correctly, give the previ-ously determined feedback or reward for thecorrect reaction.6. After wron g reactions, teach once more.7. Continue unt 12 teaching trials are completed.8. M ark the results on the evaluation table.9. Inform us when you complete the trials.10. This study wl take 10-15 min utes.

References/KaynakaBelfiore, P. I., Fritts, K. M., & He rm an , B. C. (2008 ). The role ofprocedu ral integrity: Using self-monitoring to enhance discretetrial instruction (DTI). Focus on Autism and Other Develop-mental Disabilities, 23, 9 5 - 1 0 2 .elik, S. (2007). Zihinsel yetersizlik gsteren ocuklara kavramgretiminde dogrudan gretim ve efzamanlt ipucuyla gretiminetkililik ve verimliliklerinin karfilaftinlmasi. Yayunlanmami;yksek lisans tezi, Anadolu Oniversitesi, Egitim Bilimleri Ens-t i ts , Eski^ hi r .Dib, N., & Sturmey, P. (2007). Reducing s tuden t stereotypy byimproving teachers ' implementation of discrete-tr ial teaching.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 339-343 .Dogan, O. S. (2001). Zihin zrl ocuklara adt sylenen mes-lege ait resmi seme becerisinin gretiminde efzam anh ipucuylagretimin etkililigi. Yayimlanmami; yksek l isans tezi , Anadoluniversitesi, Egitim B im le En sti ts, Eski;ehir .Fazzio, D., Martin , G. L., Arn al, L., & Yu, C. T. (2009). I nstr uc-ting university students to conduc t discrete-tr ials teaching withchildren with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders,3, 57-66.Fetko, K. S., Schuster, J. W, Harley, D. A., & CoUins, B. C.(1999). Using of simultaneous p rom pting to teach a chained vo-cational task to young adults with severe intellectual disabilities.Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmen-tal Disabilities, 34 (3), 318-329.Gibson, A. N., Sc Schuster, J. W. (1992). The use of simultan eousprompting for teaching expressive word recognition to presc-h o o l children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education,12(2), 247-267.Homer, R. D., & Baer, D. M. (1978). Multiple-probe technigue:A variation on the m ultiple baseline design. Joumal Applied Be-havior Analysis, II , 189-196.Koegel, R. L, R usso, D. C , & Rincover, A. (1977). Assessing andtraining teachers in the generalized use of behavior modificati-o n with autistic children. Joumal of Applied Behavior Analysis,0 ,197-205.Lavie, T., & Sturmey, P. (2002). Training slaff to conduct a pai-red-s t imulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavi-or Analysis. 35,209-2X1 .UB lan c, M . P., Ricciardi, J.N., & Luiselli, J.K. (2005 ). Im prov ing

Morse, T. E., 8t Schuster, J . W. (2004). Simultaneou s prom pting:A review of literature. Education and Training in DevelopmentalDisabilities, 39, \S3-\6.Parker, M. A., 8t Schuster, J. W. (2002). Effectiveness of sim ul-taneous prompting on the acquisit ion of observational and ins-tructive feedback stimuli when teaching a heterogen eous g roupof high school students. Education and Training in Mental Re-tardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 89-104.Parro t, K. A., Schuster, J. W , Co llins, B. C , & Gassaway, L J.(2000). Simultaneous prompting and instructive feedbackwhen teaching tasks. Joumal of Behavioural Education, 10,3-19 .Richa rds, S. B., & Taylor, R. L, Ram asamy, R., 8t Rich ards, R. Y.(1999). Sin^ subject research: Application in Educa tional andclinical settings. Wadswor th : Thompson Learning.Ryan, C. S., 8t Hem mes , N. S. (2005). Post-training discrete tr i-al teaching performance by instructors of young children withautism in early intensive behavioral intervention. The BehaviorAnalyst Today,6(l), 1-12.Sarokoff, R. A., & Sturmey, P. (2004). The effects of behavioralskil ls training on staff implementation of discrete-tr ial teac-h ing , /ournol of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37 , 535-538 .Sarokoff, R. A., 8i Sturm ey, R (2008 ). The effects of ins truc tion s,rehearsal , modeling, and feedback on acquisit ion and genera-lization of staff use of discrete trial teaching and student cor-rect responses. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2 (1) ,125-136.Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., Ownbey, J., & Parsons, M. B.(2001). Training support staff to embed teaching within natu-ral routines of young children with disabilities in an inclusivepreschool. Joumal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34,313-327.Schuster, J. W , & Griffen, A. K. (1993). Teach ing a chaine d taskwi th a s imul taneous prompt ing p rocedure . Joumal of Behaviou-ra l Education, 3,299-315.Singleton, D. K., Schuster, J. W., Morse, T. E., & Collins, B. C.(1999). A comparison of antecedent prompt and test and si-mul taneous prompt ing procedures in teaching grocery wordsto adolescents with mental retardation. Education and Trai-ning in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 34,182-199.Sturmey, P (2008). Best practice methods in staff training. InJ.K. Luiselli, D.C. Russo, W.R Christian 8c S. M. WUczynski(Eds.), Effective practices for children with autism (pp. 159-178).USA: Oxford University Press.Swell, T. I, Collins, B. C , He mm eter, M. L., & Schuster, J. W.(1998). Using simultaneous prompting within an activity-ba-sed format to teach dressing skil ls to preschoolers with deve-lopmenta l delays. Joumal of Early Intervention, 21 (2), 132-145.Tekin, E., & Kircaali-lftar, G. (2002). Comparison of effecti-veness and efficiency of two response prompting proceduresdelivered by sibling tutors. Education and Training in MentalRetardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 283-299.Tekin-tftar, E., 8! Kircaali-tftar, G.(20 04). zel egitimdeyanlifsizgretim yntemleri (2. bs). Ankara: Nobel Yaymevi.Thiessen, C, Fazzio, D., Arnal, L , M artin, G. L , Yu, C. T, & Ke-ilback, L. (2009). Evaluation of a self-instructional manual forconducting discrete-tr ials teaching with children with autism.Behavior Modification, 33, 360-373.Toper, . (200 6). Hafif dzeyde zihinsel yetersizligi olan gren-cilere renk isimlerinin gretiminde efzamanh ipucuyla gretimin


11/11

Copyright of Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice is the property of EDAM- Education Consultancy

Limited and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the

copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for

individual use.

on-the-job training of special education staff

Documents