1. Teaching Social Skills in an Authentic Environment Rebecca Hartzell, Candace Gann, and Carl Liaupsin University of Arizona

2. The problem InclusionProximity IEP social minutes Social skills interventions (Bauminger et al., 2003; Hauck et al., 2005; Taylor, 2004)

3. Three parts Natural setting Direct instruction Prompting (Ault & Griffen, 2013; Craig-Unkefer et al., 2002; Demchak, 1990; Humphreys et al., 2013; Strain et al., 1979)

4. The purpose Effects, generalization and maintenance of intervention employing brief social lessons with a prompting/fading procedure for social engagement in the natural, integrated lunchroom setting for three elementary age students with developmental disabilities

5. Single Subject Research Design Methods

6. Participant: Mary 8 years old Down Syndrome Avoid social interactions Aggressive social behaviors Speech difficulty Standard score of 79 on SSRS social skills subscale

7. Participant: Chantelle 7 years old Process of evaluation for ASD Avoided contact with peers Limited social contact Low audibility Standard score of 67 on SSRS social skills subscale

8. Participant: Beatrice 7 years old ASD Often attempted to socialize Often aggressive Wanderer Standard score of 64 on SSRS social skills subscale

9. Setting

10. Behavioral Definitions Target behavior: Social engagement Verbal interaction or active listening with peers utilizing eye contact, body language, and tone of voice. Measured: Verbalizations Audible, on-topic ‘talking’ within conversational turn

11. Design and Data Collection Multiple baseline design Functionally irreversible intervention Phases Baseline, intervention, and maintenance Generalization Data collection 20 minute sessions 15-second momentary time sampling for social engagement Event recording for verbalizations (prompted vs. unprompted)

12. Reliability IOA: Social Engagement 32% of sessions 95.6% agreement IOA: Verbalizations 25% of sessions 96.5% agreement IOA: Generalization 27% of sessions 98.6% agreement IOA: Treatment Integrity 32% of sessions 97% agreement

13. Control Group Goal level for participants

14. Thirty Control Participants Randomly selected from among peers attending same lunch period 15-second momentary time sampling for 20 minute sessions IOA: 33% of sessions, 97% agreement Social engagement data averaged 44% of intervals (range = 7 – 70%)

15. Procedures The “How to”

16. Session 1 Introduction to intervention Feelings about socializing Overview of expectations expectations “Friend Paper”

17. Sessions 2-5 Brief lessons on eye contact, body language, audibility, and subject topics Use visual examples Bad and good examples Have student identify which examples were “good/bad” Challenge Friend Paper

18. Subsequent Sessions Focus on all elements of engaging with peers (eye contact, body language, audibility, and topic choice) Quiz students on different elements during transition period to lunch

19. Prompting Prompting would occur every minute Eye contact Face peer Use audible voice Prompt something germane to subject in discussion OR use conversation starter if student is not communicating conversation starter conversation starter

20. Reinforcement Typically developing peer places sticker on “Friend Paper” Motivate typically developing peers to be patient with peers with social needs

21. First Fade 50% social engagement over 4 sessions Prompt faded to every 2 minutes Participant stops receiving a sticker for communicating with peer Student receiving intervention was able to give typically developing peers a sticker for being a good friend

22. Additional Fading Second Fade 50% social engagement over 4 sessions Prompt faded to every 4 minutes Final Fade 50% social engagement over 4 sessions End prompting

23. Maintenance Three months after intervention conclusion Sustainability of efficacy after prolonged periods of no prompting in social setting

24. It worked! Results

25. MCB Baseline Avg. 1%2%1% Rng. 0-2%0-7%0-3% Intervention Avg 62%73%36% Rng. 20-93%50-97%17-72% TI 98% Fading P 2m 70%81%NA P 4m NA66%NA P -- NA69%NA Maintenance Avg. 47%50%25% Rng. 30-68%40-62%16-37% Social Engagement 86 88 123 125 127

26. MCB Baseline Avg. 1% 3% Rng. 0-3% 0-8% Intervention Avg 26%51%15% Rng. 0-58%3-100%0-38% Maintenance Avg. 55%NA44% Rng. 30-75%NA33-58% Generalization 124 126

27. Verbalizations MCB Baseline Avg. 010 Rng. 0-10-40-1 Intervention P. Avg. 644 P. Rng. 0-132-91-7 U. Avg. 12165 U. Rng. 3-225-271-10

28. Bring it back full circle Discussion

29. Summary Results support the use of prompting within an integrated setting GeneralizationMaintenance Social validity (IRP-15) Anecdotal reports (McIntosh & Mackay, 2008)

30. Extended Research Currently no studies that combine the elements in this study Addresses need for social skills instruction taught in social settings, despite decreased “free play” in the school (Hauck et al., 2005) Intervention resulted in strong generalization and maintenance of skills (Hauck et al., 2005; Sturmey, 1997; Taylor, 2004)

31. Limitations Incomplete fading of prompts Generalization control group data was not collected Verbalization data was not taken daily

32. Next Step Additional disability categories and ages Schools with full inclusion model Generalization to classroom setting, extra- curricular activities, etc. Full year intervention that would allow for complete fading

33. References Ault, M. J., & Griffen, A. K. (2013). Teaching with systems of least prompts: An easy method for monitoring progress. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 45(3), 46-53. Bauminger, N., Shulman, C., & Galit, A. (2003). Peer interaction and loneliness in high functioning children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(5), 489-507. Craig-Unkefer, L. A., & Kaiser, A. P. (2002). Improving the social communication skills of at-risk preschool children in a play context. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 3-13. Demchak, M. (1990). Response prompting and fading methods: A review. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94 (6), 603-615. Hauck, M., Fein, D., Waterhouse, L., & Feinstein, C. (1995). Social initiations by autistic children to adults and other children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25(6), 578-593. Humphreys, T., Polick, A., Howk, L., Thaxton, J., & Ivancic, A. (2013). An evaluation of repeating the discriminative stimulus when using least-to-most prompting to teach intraverbal behavior to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(2), 534-538. McIntosh, K., & MacKay, L. D. (2008). Enhancing generalization of social skills: Making social skills curricula effective after the lesson. Beyond Behavior, 18(1), 18-25. Strain, P. S., Kerr, M. M., & Ragland, E. U. (1979). Effect of peer-mediated social initiations and prompting/ reinforcement procedures on the social behavior of autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9(1), 41-54. Sturmey, P. (1997). Introductory remarks: Long-term follow-up of behavioral interventions for challenging behaviors in persons with developmental disabilities. Behavioral Interventions, 12(4), 157-162. Taylor, S. J. (2004). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive environment. Research & Practice for Person with Severe Disabilities, 29(4), 218-230.

34. The End

35. Expectations Looking at our friends Facing our friends when they talk Speaking loudly enough for our friends to hear us Talking to our friends about things they like to talk about, too

36. Conversation Starters Ask your friend what they will do tonight when they get home. Ask your friend what they did over the weekend/last night. Ask your friend what they have in their lunch today. Ask your friend what they are going to do in class today.