The Effect of Listener Emersion on the Number of Learn Units to Criterion on Listener programs

1. The Effect of Listener Emersion on the Number of Learn Units to Criterion on Listener programs Gili Rechany M.A. BCBA Shema Kolainu – Hear Our Voices January 6, 2005

2. Literature Review • According to Greer, 1987,1994 “The most conspicuous functions of verbal behavior for the student in school settings are those in which the student responds partially or wholly to verbal and nonverbal stimuli presented by the teacher (p.160)”. • The listener repertoire of the student is one of the crucial repertoires that determine whether or not the student will be able to responds correctly and consistently to the verbal stimuli presented by the teacher (Greer, 2002). • Listener emersion, like Verbal immersion, Writer immersion and Reader immersion are tactics that are used in the CABAS model to teach fluent verbal repertoires (Greer, 2002b).

3. Abstract • The effect of listener emersion training on learn units to criterion was investigated. • Three school age children participated in the study. They were 6-8 years old boys diagnosed with autism. • A pre-probe/post-probe design was used to show the relationship between listener emersion (independent variable) and the number of learn units to criterion completed by the students (dependent variable). • During treatment 2 programs were suspended for each student. The student met mastery criterion and fluency criterion on all four-listener emersion lists, and only then were the programs re-implemented. • Results showed that all three students decreased the learn units required for criterion on both programs after listener emersion training was completed.

4. Method • Participants • Participant A, B and C were all in the same classroom at Shema Kolainu- hear our voices, a center for children with Autism. • The participants ages ranged between 6 and 8. • All three participants are speakers and emerging reader/writers, but are unreliable listeners • Setting- Shema Kolainu- Hear Our Voices • All sessions were conducted in the participants’ classroom. • The students are in a self-contained class for students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. • he classroom’s ratio is 6:1:4 - six children, one teacher and four teaching assistants.

5. Methods • Materials • 2 program from each participants portfolio were suspended: • Participant A – Teacher Actions and Numbers • Participant B - Objects and Aleph Bais • Participant C – Preposition and Memory • Data sheets were used to record the learn units during the programs and during listener emersion. • Four lists with 4 commands and 1 nonsense statement were used. • A timer was used for all fluency sessions.

6. Methods Data Collection • Independent variable: Listener emersion • Dependent variable: Learn units to criterion on Listener programs. Interobserver Agreement • Interobserver agreement was calculated by the number of agreements divided by the number of disagreements times 100. Interobserver agreement was taken for 37% of all sessions resulting in 100% interobserver agreement Design • A pre-probe/post-probe design was used to show the relationship between the independence and the dependent variable.

7. Procedure • Pre Probe. The mean number of learn units to criterion were calculated for two programs pre listener emersion. • Listener Emersion. Four lists that included 4 commands and 1 nonsense statements. • The correct response for the nonsense statement would be sitting still with no movement. An example of a nonsense statement used is “show me chaka laka”, the student will need to sit still immediately after it was presented. • The other 4 commands included : “Show me clapping, point to the door…” Correct responses for these commands would be the correct behavior within two seconds of the antecedent. • Once mastery of the list was completed the list was trained to a rate of 45 responses per minute. When both mastery and fluency of list one was achieved the student began list 2, followed by list three, and lastly by list four. • When the student completed both criterion for all four lists the suspended programs were resumed. • The reinforcements presented for the completion of each list were based on the classroom contingencies. • Post Probe. The mean number of learn units to criterion were calculated for two programs post listener emersion.

8. Results Participant A • Program: Actions • Pre listener emersion had a mean of 260 learn units to criterion in his Actions program • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 80 learn units to criterion. • Program: Numbers • The same results happened in the Number program, pre listener emersion had a mean of 600 learn units to criterion • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 60 learn units to criterion

9. Graph- Participant A

10. Results Participant B • Program: Objects • Pre listener emersion had a mean of 420 learn units to criterion in his Actions program • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 120 learn units to criterion. • Program: Aleph Bais • The same results happened in the Number program, pre listener emersion had a mean of 240 learn units to criterion • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 60 learn units to criterion

11. Graph- Participant B

12. Results Participant C • Program: Preposition • Pre listener emersion had a mean of 560 learn units to criterion in his Actions program • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 80 learn units to criterion. • Program: Memory • The same results happened in the Number program, pre listener emersion had a mean of 560 learn units to criterion • Post listener emersion the number of learn units to criterion went down to 120 learn units to criterion

13. Graph- Participant C

14. Discussion • The results show a functional relationship between the implementation of listener emersion and the mean number of learn units to criterion pre and post the tactic was implemented. • Participant A • Constant acquisition rate of all four lists. Fluency criteria mastered rapidly for list four. • Participant B • Following mastery and fluency of list 2 showed an increase in rate during the training sessions for list 3 and 4 • Participant C • A decrease in Learn unit to criteria for all lists was noted between each list.