Literacy skills are important for accessing all areas of academic content as well as for increasing quality of life. The use of shared stories to teach early literacy skills to students with extensive support needs, including students with autism, is an evidence-based practice. This project extends the research by examining the effects of systematic instruction, including constant time delay and a modified system of least prompts, paired with an iPad2® to teach grade-appropriate literature in a shared story format for students with limited verbal ability. The participants in this intervention were four elementary-aged male students with autism and limited to no verbal ability. A 10-step task analysis was developed to guide the shared story process. Results indicated that the participants were able to increase the number of independent correct responses on the task analysis from baseline to intervention. Study limitations and implications for future research are discussed.
BayleyN. (1993). Bayley scales of infant development (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
3.
BloomB. S.EngelhartM. D.FurstE. J.HillW. H.KrathwohlD. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals; Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York, NY: Longmans.
4.
BortoliT.Arthur-KellyM.MathisenB.ForemanP.BalandinS. (2010). Where are teachers’ voices? A research agenda to enhance the communicative interactions of students with multiple and severe disabilities at school. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32, 1059-1072.
5.
BrowderD. M.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.FlowersC.BakerJ. (2012). An evaluation of a multicomponent early literacy program for students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 237-246.
6.
BrowderD. M.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.SpoonerF.MimsP. J.BakerJ. N. (2009). Using time delay to teach picture and word recognition to identify evidence-based practice for students with severe developmental disabilities. Exceptional Children, 75, 343-364.
7.
BrowderD. M.GibbsS.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.CourtadeG. R.MrazM.FlowersC. (2009). Literacy for students with severe developmental disabilities: What should we teach and what should we hope to achieve?Remedial and Special Education, 30, 269-282.
8.
BrowderD. M.GibbsS.CourtadeG.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.LeeA. (2007). Early literacy skills builder. Verona, WI: Attainment.
9.
BrowderD. M.LeeA.MimsP. J. (2011). Using shared stories and individual response modes to promote comprehension and engagement in literacy for students with multiple, severe disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 339-351.
10.
BrowderD. M.MimsP. J.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.LeeA. (2008). Teaching elementary students with multiple disabilities to participate in shared stories. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 33, 3-12.
11.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF. (2014). More content, more learning, more inclusion. In BrowderD. M.SpoonerF. (Eds.), More language arts, math, and science (pp. 3-14). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
12.
BrowderD. M.TrelaK.JimenezB. (2007). Training teachers to follow a task analysis to engage middle school students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities in grade-appropriate literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 206-219.
13.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.AlgozzineB. (2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392-408.
14.
BurtonC. E.AndersonD. H.PraterM. A.DychesT. T. (2013). Video self-modeling on an iPad to teach functional math skills to adolescents with autism and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 28, 67-77.
15.
CollinsB. C. (2012). Systematic instruction for students with moderate and severe disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
16.
CooperJ. O.HeronT. E.HewardW. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
17.
CoyneP.PishaB.DaltonB.ZephL. A.SmithN. C. (2012). Literacy by design: A universal design for learning approach for students with significant intellectual disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 162-172.
18.
DouglasK. H.WojcikB. W.ThompsonJ. R. (2012). Is there an app for that?Journal of Special Education Technology, 27, 59-70.
19.
DoyleP. M.WoleryM.AultM. J.GastD. L. (1988). System of least prompts: A literature review of procedural parameters. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 13, 28-40.
20.
DrascowE.WoleryM.HalleJ.HajaghamohseniZ. (2011). Systematic instruction of students with severe disabilities. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 516-531). New York, NY: Routledge.
21.
EdyburnD. (2007). Technology-enhanced reading performance: Defining a research agenda. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 146-152.
22.
EnglemannS.OsbornJ. (1999). Language for learning: Teacher’s guide. Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
23.
HornerR. D.BaerD. M. (1978). Multiple-probe technique: A variation of the multiple baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 189-196.
24.
HudsonM. E.TestD. W. (2011). Evaluating the evidence base of shared story reading to promote literacy for students with extensive support needs. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 36, 34-45.
25.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, PL 108-466, 20 U.S.C. § 1400, H.R. 1350.
26.
JacksonL. B.RyndakD. L.WehmeyerM. L. (2008-2009). The dynamic relationship between context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a research-based practice. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 33-34, 175-195.
27.
JohnstonJ. M.PennypackerH. S. (1980). Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
JohnstonJ. M.PennypackerH. S. (2008). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
JusticeL. M. (2002). Word exposure conditions and preschoolers’ novel word learning during shared storybook reading. Reading Psychology, 23, 87-106.
30.
KagoharaD. M.van der MeerL.RamdossS.O’ReillyM.LancioniG. E.DavisT. N.. . . SigafoosJ. (2013). Using iPods® and iPads® in teaching programs for individuals with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 147-156. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.07.027
31.
KnightV.McKissickB. R.SaundersA. (2013). A review of technology-based interventions to teach academic skills to students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 2628-2648. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1814-y
32.
MechlingL. C. (2011). Review of twenty-first century portable electronic devices for persons with moderate intellectual disabilities autism spectrum disorder. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 479-498.
33.
MimsP. J.BrowderD. M.BakerJ. N.LeeA.SpoonerF. (2009). Increasing comprehension of students with significant intellectual disabilities and visual impairments during shared stories. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 409-420.
34.
MimsP. J.HudsonM. E.BrowderD. M. (2012). Using read-alouds of grade-level biographies and systematic prompting to promote comprehension for students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 27, 67-80.
35.
National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
36.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org
37.
National Institute for Literacy. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC: Author.
38.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub.L. No. 107-110, 115, § 1425, 20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq. (2006).
39.
PullenP. D.JusticeL. M. (2003). Enhancing phonological awareness, print awareness, and oral language skills in pre-school children. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 87-98.
40.
SchoplerE.ReichlerR. J.RennerB. R. (1980). The Childhood Autism Rating Scale. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
41.
SkotkoB. G.KoppenhaverD. A.EricksonK. A. (2004). Parent reading behaviors and communication outcomes in girls with Rett syndrome. Exceptional Children, 70, 145-166.
42.
SmithB. R.SpoonerF.WoodC. L. (2012). Using embedded computer-assisted explicit instruction to teach science to students with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 433-443.
43.
SnellM. E. (Ed.). (1983). Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
44.
SnellM. E.GastD. L. (1981). Applying time delay procedure to the instruction of the severely handicapped. The Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6, 3-14.
45.
SpoonerF. (1984). Comparisons of backward chaining and total task presentation in training severely handicapped persons. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19, 15-22.
46.
SpoonerF.KnightV. F.BrowderD. M.SmithB. R. (2012). Evidence-based practices for teaching academic skills to students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 374-387. doi:10.1177/0741932511421634
47.
SpoonerF.McKissickB. R.HudsonM. E.BrowderD. M. (2014). Access to the general curriculum for students in general education classes. In AgranM.BrownF.HughesC.QuirkC.RyndakD. (Eds.), Equity and full participation for individuals with severe disabilities: A vision for the future (pp. 217-234). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
48.
TawneyJ. W.GastD. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
49.
TouchetteP. (1971). Transfer of stimulus control: Measuring the moment of transfer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 223-232.
50.
WoleryM.AultM.DoyleP. (1992). Teaching students with moderate to severe disabilities: Use of response prompting strategies. New York, NY: Longman.
51.
WoleryM.BaileyD. B.SugaiG. M. (1988). Effective teaching: Principles and procedure of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
52.
WoleryM.HolcombeA.CybriwskyC.DoyleP. M.SchusterJ. W.AultM. J.GastD. L. (1992). Constant time delay with discrete responses: A review of effectiveness and demographic, procedural, and methodological parameters. Research and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 239-266.
53.
ZakasT.SchreiberL. (2010). Building with stories. Verona, WI: Attainment.
