This study investigated the effects of training preschool teachers to use environmental arrangement and milieu teaching in interactions with children using augmented communication systems. Three teachers were taught seven environmental strategies and four milieu teaching procedures through written materials, lecture, modeling, roleplaying, and feedback. All three teachers learned the procedures and generalized their use to two generalization settings. The teachers maintained their use of the techniques across the 3-month maintenance assessment period. The three target children showed increases in total communication and use of targets following implementation of milieu teaching by their teachers.
AlpertC. L.KaiserA. P. (1983). Milieu teaching code. Unpublished manuscript. Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
2.
BayleyN. (1969). Bayley scales of infant development. New York: The Psychological Corporation.
3.
BeukelmanD. R.MirendaP. (1992). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
4.
BzochK. R.LeagueR. (1970). Receptive-expressive emergent language scale. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
5.
CarrE. G.KologinskyE. (1983). Acquisition of sign language by autistic children: Spontaneity and generalization effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 297–314.
6.
CavallaroC. C.BambaraL. (1982). Two strategies for teaching language during free play. Journal of The Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8, 80–92.
7.
HalleJ.AlpertC. L.AndersonS. R. (1984). Natural environment language assessment and intervention with severely impaired preschoolers. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4, 35–56.
8.
HalleJ. W.BaerD. M.SpradlinJ. E. (1981) Teachers' generalized use of delay as a stimulus control procedure to increase language use in handicapped children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 387–400.
9.
HaringT. G.NeetzJ. A.LovingerL.PeckC.SemmelM. I. (1987). Effects of four modified incidental teaching procedures to create opportunities for communication. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12(3), 218–226.
10.
HemmeterM. L.KaiserA. P. (1990). Environmental influences on children's language: A model and case study. Education and Treatment of Children, 13(4), 331–346.
11.
KaiserA. P.YoderP. J.KeetzA. (1992). Evaluating milieu teaching. In WarrenS. F.ReichleJ. (Eds.), Causes and effects in communication and language intervention (Vol. 1, pp. 9–47). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
12.
KazdinA. (1982). Single-case research designs. New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
MuddJ. M.WoleryM. (1987). Training Head Start teachers to use incidental teaching. Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 11(2), 124–134.
14.
OliverC. B.HalleJ. W. (1982). Language training in the everyday environment: Teaching functional sign use to a retarded child. Journal of The Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8, 50–62.
15.
OstroskyM. M.KaiserA. P. (1991). Preschool classroom environments to promote communication. Teaching exceptional children, 23(4), 6–10.
16.
Rogers-WarrenA. K.WarrenS. F. (1980). Mands for verbalization: Facilitating the display of newly trained language in children. Behavior Modification, 4, 361–382.
17.
RomskiM. A.SevcikR. A. (1988). Augmentative and alternative communication systems: Considerations for individuals with severe intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 83–93.
18.
StutsmanR. (1948). Merrill-Palmer scale of mental tests. Chicago: C. H. Stoelting.
19.
WarrenS. F.GazdagG. (1990). Facilitating early language development with milieu intervention procedures. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(1), 62–86.
20.
WarrenS. F.McQuarterR. J.Rogers-WarrenA. K. (1984). The effects of teacher mands and models on the speech of unresponsive language-delayed children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 51, 43–52.
21.
YoderP. J.KaiserA. P.AlpertC. L. (1991). An exploratory study of the interaction between language teaching methods and child characteristics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 155–167.
