Autism Intervention

Jaclyn Bober 1

Autism Intervention Research

Jaclyn Bober Y420- Educational Research September 30, 2008

Jaclyn Bober 2 The purpose of this research was to work with and study students who have autism. This was done through interventions designed to reduce their stereotypy behaviors (hand flapping, rocking back and forth, etc), also known as repetitive motor behaviors. Secondly, the study aimed to increase the student’s social initiations and interactions. The overlying questions for this experiment were “Does an intervention package including peer training, direct social initiation training, and self-monitoring lead to increased social interactions and ensuing interactions?” and “Does the intervention package lead to a collateral decrease in repetitive motor behavior?” (Loftin et al, 2007). To answer these questions, the researchers studied three students who were identified by school personal to have Autism Spectrum Disorder. Each were male and between the ages of nine and ten who exhibited many repetitive motor behaviors and lack of social interaction with others (Loftin et al, 2007). When working with these three students, the study always remained within a school setting. The intervention took place during recess and lunch (a fifty minute time period) at an elementary school in Indiana (Loftin et al, 2007). Each day the researchers took a five minute observation of the students’ stereotypy behaviors, social initiation and social interaction. They observed and collected data for 10 seconds (s) and then recorded the data for the next 10 s. This continued for 15 intervals. For this experiment social initiation was defined as “…the participant starting an interaction with a peer(s) with whom there has not been an interaction during the previous 5 s”, social interaction was defined as “…any verbal or gestural behavior directed towards the child with autism or the peer within 5 s after an initiation or an ensuing response” (Loftin et al, 2007). Lastly, the repetitive motor behaviors were defined based on the individual students’ behavior.

Jaclyn Bober 3 In order to work with the students, the researchers made sure that their tests were socially valid. They did this by administering a survey, and receiving needed parental, school, and governmental consent. Also, prior to data collection, the researchers spent time gathering information on the participant’s behaviors in multiple settings. To collect data the researchers worked with the students in peer training, social initiation instruction and self-monitoring. Within peer training the researchers worked to reinforce the child with autism to make eye contact and initiate play with others (Loftin et al, 2007). During the social initiation instruction the researchers worked with the students to have conversations based on a specific topic (Loftin et al, 2007). These conversations were initiated during the lunch period. The self-monitoring section of the research was based on a target goal for each student. The goal was to initiate a conversation with a peer. The student counted their interactions individually with a counter on their wrist. Each time they initiated a conversation from scratch, it counted and positively reinforced (Loftin et al, 2007). Each of the data collections involved direct interactions and observations. After the data was collected, the researchers calculated each of the three sections separately. In all three cases the student’s social interactions and social initiations increased, and the repetitive motor behaviors decreased (Loftin et al, 2007). After the sessions were over, the researchers returned to see if the skills which were taught had continued. In all three cases they had continued, but not at the rate of the original self-monitoring process. To answer the initial questions, yes, social training did increase the amount of interaction and initiation, as well as decreasing stereotypy behaviors. While the results were not ideal, they did show that with continued work, the strategies used were effective for students with autism.

Jaclyn Bober 4 While the work was effective for the students, the study was limited. The students had “off” days and the environment was not always consistent. Loftin et al (2007) mentioned that there were days when the conversation partners were absent, the school played music in the cafeteria, etc. These environmental changes made an impact for the students who have autism. Furthermore, the research was done with humans. This was a barrier for the researchers due to the fact that they could not manipulate every situation. They chose students that had very similar profiles, but they only chose three participants. This is not a very large sample size for a social experiment. They did gather a fair amount of data, but the study should be repeated for reliability. Looking at the data that was collected, despite the limitations of the study, one can see that this research was worthwhile. Researchers understand that socialization is the key deficit for students who have autism. Anyone who has read about autism knows that it remains misunderstood by science and that students are being diagnosed daily. This study adds applicable knowledge of autism to the education world. These students are in the classroom and they need to be receiving proper services. Since scientists know little about the origins of this disorder, learning how to work effectively with this population is imperative. The questions proposed by Loftin and his research team improve educator’s abilities to help this population. Taking the original questions to the next level by using them in future studies would be important research. The researchers should go to another school, another environment, and study more students who have been identified with autism. They should expand on this study and see how reliable the data is when compared with numerous students. If their methods are as highquality as they seem within the originals set of data, they should remain reliable when expanded

Jaclyn Bober 5 to other students. This study has capabilities of breakthroughs in working with students that are misunderstood. After working with students who have been identified with autism, I understand the frustration and confusion that occurs daily. The social piece that is important to all humans is a weakness for this population of students. Students with autism may better understand concepts which are logical and methodical. Unfortunately, understanding others emotions and talking about them is often not methodical. Many times, when given directions in a step-by-step order, students who have autism are able to learn. A valuable lesson that I have learned from this study is that it is possible make socialization logical and method based. The researchers taught the students how to socialize step-by-step. They walked up to a person, they said hello, they asked a question, they responded, etc. These are steps which the students were able to follow. By recognizing the student ability to follow steps, the researchers’ methods were more affective. As a future educator of students with special needs, finding strategies to help students learn is valuable and important.

Jaclyn Bober 6 Works Cited Loftin, R.L., Odom, S.L., & Lantz, J.F. (2007). Social interactions and repetitive motor behaviors. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 38, 1124-1138.