Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.
A Glorious Mess: Implementing Evidence-BasedSocial Skills Interventions in Public School SettingsJill Locke1, Mark Kretzma...
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5

A Glorious Mess: Implementing Evidence-Based Social Skills Interventions in Public School Settings 4_25_13 David Mandell

405 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Veröffentlicht in: Gesundheit & Medizin
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

A Glorious Mess: Implementing Evidence-Based Social Skills Interventions in Public School Settings 4_25_13 David Mandell

  1. 1. A Glorious Mess: Implementing Evidence-BasedSocial Skills Interventions in Public School SettingsJill Locke1, Mark Kretzmann2, Connie Kasari2 & David S. Mandell11University of Pennsylvania 2University of California, Los AngelesMeasures• Social Network Centrality (Cairns et al., 1988).Students identified classroom groupmembership, resulting in four categorizations ofsocial network integration: isolated (0), peripheral(1), secondary (2), and nuclear (3).• Playground Observation of Peer Engagement(Kasari, Rotheram-Fuller, & Locke, 2005) is a timed-interval behavior coding system that examineschildren’s engagement with peers on the playground.(coded as a percentage of time spent in variousengagement states).• Fidelity of implementation. Yes/No completionof each intervention component (scored as apercentage of completed steps) and a 1-5 Likertrating (not well to very well) of the quality ofimplementationProcedures• School personnel and children were randomized inpairs to immediate treatment or waitlist control.• Hands-on training during the lunch period for 6weeks (2x/week)• Social Networks and POPES conducted atbaseline, exit, and follow-up• Fidelity of implementation rated by coach atbaseline, midpoint, and exitIntervention Implementation• Included didactics, modeling, rehearsal, in vivocoaching and homework for school staff• Focused on facilitating opportunities for children toengage in conversations, activities and play gameswith peers in the cafeteria and on the playground.Methods Continued ResultsChallenges to ImplementationDiscussion and Future DirectionsContactJill Locke, Ph.D.jlocke@upenn.edu• To conduct a randomized pilot of a modifiedevidence-based social skills intervention withschool personnel.Participants• 9 children with ASD (mean age = 8.4; SD = 1.3)• 6 classrooms; 2 schools• fully included in a regular education 1st-5thgrade classroom for at least 80% of theschool day• 9 school staff members (5 district employed one-to-one assistants, 3 noon-time aides, 1 busattendant)• Mean age 48.6 years old; SD = 9.7• 5 African American; 4 Caucasian• 72 classmates (mean age = 8.4 years; SD = 1.6)Objectives• Social impairment is a core deficit of ASD.• Kasari et al., (2012) found that peer-mediatedinterventions improved the social inclusion ofchildren with ASD, but gains did not sustain.• School personnel did not continue the interventionpost-study because the manual was developed forexperienced intervention researchers.• In this study, we addressed these challenges bymodifying the Kasari et al. (2012) intervention forschool personnel to implement.• Modifications included: modules that addressstrategies for working with children with ASD, astep-by-step breakdown of the developmentalsequence of engagement and strategies to facilitateengagement in the cafeteria/on the playground.BackgroundThis study was funded by an AutismScience Foundation Postdoctoral FellowshipNo COI00. Exit Follow-upSocialNetworkCentralityWaitlist Immediate TreatmentEnd of WaitlistSuggests the need to:• Intervene at the staff and school levels• Work with schools to address school-levelbarriers to implementation and sustainability• Develop implementation strategies that willallow schools the flexibility to adaptintervention components that fit the needs oftheir students, staff, and resources. Exit Follow-up%TimeWaitlist Immediate TreatmentSolitary Engagement00. Exit Follow-up%TimeWaitlist Immediate TreatmentJoint EngagementEnd of WaitlistEnd of WaitlistMethodsBaseline Midpoint ExitAssessing Playground 42.5 77.5 55Transitioning to an Activity 0 55 77.5Facilitating an Activity 0 67.5 67.5Participating in the Activity 10 55 77.5Fostering Conversation 0 35 57.5Directing Peers in Vivo 0 42.5 57.5Direct Social Skills Instruction 32.5 62.5 77.5Addressing Problem Behaviors 10 42.5 57.5Quality of Implementation 1.9 3.9 4.0Percentage of Staff Using Strategy During InterventionBarriers that prevented the use and sustainabilityof the intervention:• Staff-level• Unclear roles during recess/lunch• Lack of incentives and administrativesupport for aides• School-level• Staff reassignment and turnover• Loss of recess (in favor ofacademics, detention policies, inclementweather)• Availability of resources(playground, playgroundequipment, indoor space)