To encapsulate my practicum experience, I’ve decided to compile an overall summary rather than a daily or weekly journal. Because my services did not differ much from day to day, I believe an overall statement that encompasses what I did in relation to course material is a more logical and valuable approach. I viewed a large collection of videos that are a good representation of a specific disorder in addition to what is being done to enhance their capabilities and standard of living.
I. I conducted my practicum at the site, Summit Educational Services. Summit is a non-profit organization that offers assistance to children and adolescents with developmental disabilities. The staff provides an array of services that address dimensions of family support, after-school programs, parent training and home based services. With the collaboration of these services, Summit intends to provide children with developmental disabilities with the skills necessary to be successful, contributing individuals. Classroom education focuses on the needs of this demographic, highlighting their strengths while addressing the deficits at hand.
I acted as a student research assistant. During the required hours, I observed, collected and recorded data for the MSSC study in which the purpose and variables I am unaware of. In order to ensure fidelity as I lent my assistance to this study, I did not know the rationale until after its conclusion. These hours were to completed at the Summit research lab using the program labeled Procoder. This program allowed me to view a number of videos, which displayed brief intervals of Summit classroom settings serving children with autism spectrum disorder. The behavior of the children was quite variable in that they range in age, gender and cognitive abilities, demonstrating high functioning capabilities as well as severe deficits. The videos were taken at times of structured teaching as well as unstructured, playtime. Prior to collecting what was later considered accurate, reliable data, a series of steps were completed. They are as follows:
a) Study a list of operational definitions of various behaviors to be later observed
a. Followed by a test to ensure my knowledge of the behaviors: I was instructed to clearly define what constitutes each behavior without error.
b) Follow and become familiar with a set of instructions on how to use Procoder, including:
a. How to open media files and watch intervals of 15s while recording the behaviors of a specific child in the MSSC study
b. How to enter information into data sheets
c. How to appropriately name each file, including the video number, child’s name and observer’s name
c) Learn to calculate inter-rater reliability
d) Using the previously studied behaviors, I watched a set of specific videos. Once completed, I calculated the percentage of agreement between the data I collected with that of three other student research assistants. Where discrepancies exist, we discussed what the actual recordings were by collectively viewing the videos and coming to a consensus based on the provided definitions.
e) Once ambiguities were eliminated, I continued to watch the collection of actual videos. They were divided based on classroom and included a list of children’s names and pictures to avoid confusion. Every 5th video was a reliability check with a video previously coded. I proceeded with an agreement calculation.
The behaviors I was to code are referred to as attending, greeting, requesting, responding to a question, turn taking and blocking; each of which had specific elements, including a duration of time in seconds that the behavior must take place in order to be recorded. Also, the definitions included an example of what the behavior would look like when executed and an example of what did not fall under the category for each.
II. During the initial steps of my practicum, I immediately found aspects of courses I have taken being brought to life. This was the first opportunity I have had to employ my knowledge of both basic material from early prerequisite psychology courses and those that are more narrow in topics and detail-specific. At the smallest level of my practicum, my introductory psychology courses have aided me by providing a foundational type of knowledge consisting of basic terminology and the roots of psychology studies. For example. it was not until this experience that I realized the importance of operational definitions in research. When myself along with three other research assistants began coding videos, we were met with the obstacle of coming to a consensus as to what actually meets the criteria for the six behaviors we were to record. Even with clear definitions, there was a great degree of ambiguity between the observers, reflecting the need for inter-rater agreement. The definitions, after undergoing necessary modifications to eliminate vagueness became “attending”, which was a way of judging whether or not the child made some eye contact towards the communicator for two seconds or longer, “requesting”, which included using an appropriate form of communication to ask for information, help, an activity or item, “greeting”, which included either initiation or a response, “responding to a question”, which constituted any answer to a posed question, “labeling”, which can occur in an expressive or receptive form and the last, “turn taking” which constitutes engaging in the same activity with another person for an allotted amount of time and/or taking or receiving an item from another person. With these final descriptions, we were able to observe and record the behaviors we viewed with little error.
Once coding was underway, I found that aspects of Dr. Servoss’ statistics class were beneficial. Although I did not actually enter and interpret data into SPSS, I used a program in which the data was organized into meaningful ways; each fifteen-second interval was separated with corresponding boxes labeled with the name of each behavior. It was my responsibility to enter values (0,1) into each box depending on whether or not the behavior was present during that time. The next step was to compare these results with those of another observer who coded the same video. The significance of reliability in this study was clear; to ensure that each observer was essentially “on the same page”, we calculated this using the formula for inter-rater agreement, which yielded a percentage that determined whether we were accurately coding the videos within a margin of acceptable error.
With a more in-depth analysis of the population at hand, I found that Dr. Thomeer’s course, Autism and Developmental Disabilities provided me with an extensive familiarity of the disorder. With this, I found myself viewing the videos with a more analytical mind rather than had I been completely uninformed of the deficits I was observing. In this particular course, we discussed the core impairments in children with autism as seen in the diagnostic criteria, yet even more so, we discussed the variability in the way these deficits are manifested into behaviors of differing individuals. As aforementioned, in the collection of videos, I was able to see children of varying ages with both high and low functioning. Each behaved in ways that reflected the core deficits of children with autism spectrum disorders, however, no two children exhibited them the same. I saw an array of behaviors from self-injurious actions to what may be considered self-stimulating behaviors to the apparent lack of reciprocal communication that is a characteristic of all children with ASD. Children often engaged in repetitive behaviors that may appear nonsensical to some, however, reflect their interests; children often engaged in play in ways unlike a typical developing child. Rather than use a car to drive or pretend that there is a racetrack present which is common, I saw one child who was continuously preoccupied with the wheels of a toy car. He repeatedly spun the wheels and took them apart, ignoring all other parts of the toy. During the course, we repeatedly discussed the lack of symbolic play that children with autism display which may be rooted in their lack of the ability of abstract thought.
Where communication and language deficits are concerned, I saw children who, with prompts, were able to communicate quite effectively to those who were nonverbal, relying solely on a communication device. These devices, I learned, allow children to press buttons that corresponding to specific phrases or words which ultimately aids in the ability to request, respond and label- all of which are important components of the learning process. As the material in this course made apparent, the impairments faced by children with autism spectrum disorders make the education that takes place in typical classrooms nearly impossible. Instead, a different set of teaching strategies is generally employed to teach this demographic. In the videos, I saw several methods being utilized. Children with autism, for example, are said to benefit from a strong use of visuals and to a higher degree than typical children, focus on irrelevant distracters in a classroom. The structure of the rooms is one aspect that really stood out; each child had his or her own “cubby” where their materials were located prior to initiation of the task; relating to course material, I assumed that this was an intention to maintain the routine and schedule that children with autism prefer. The use of dividers in the room keeps the possibility of focusing one’s attention on irrelevant stimuli minimal, which may aid in on-task performance. Also, the use of labels and visuals was immediately apparent. The use of evidence-based practices was a repetitive theme throughout the course, suggesting that various methods are often employed without the support of efficacy that would come from a random clinical trial. Teachers in the classrooms, however, relied mostly on interventions that we have studied in which gains have been seen in terms of the core deficits of children with autism. These include components of applied behavior analysis, discrete trial teaching and more specifically, the picture exchange communication system (PECS). The use of this program was quite common, appearing in almost every video I viewed that took place during structured teaching periods. Its aim is to promote communication during learning by allowing the child to discriminate between items, label items or request something with a simple exchange of a picture that represents that object.
Seeing as though this was a practicum for my school psychology major, Dr. Lopata’s school psychology class came up frequently as expected. More so than anything else, the administrative side of school psychology is what I saw in action. It was clear that there was a group of professionals whether teachers, aids or speech therapists that each child met with daily. The collaboration that I witnessed is undoubtedly a critical facet of treating children with autism, or any disorder that impairs one’s functioning for that matter. Considering the core deficits of this demographic, however, suggests that professionals in various areas are required to create the most valuable, individually specific intervention. With that said, it appeared that each child had a specific plan that was to be carried out. For example, one specific video showed a teacher stating that a particular child needed to spend more time learning to use his fork to eat; it was evident that this was part of his individualized education plan or IEP, which emphasized the areas in which he needed assistance and had not yet mastered. Related to specific plans to be carried out, it also became quite clear that task-analysis played a great role in the classroom activities- that is that each task was meticulously broken down into steps to allow for better understanding. This addresses the tendency for children with autism to fail to understand instructions due to how they are stated. Breaking down components of a task that may seem incredibly simple to a typically developing child, like washing hands for example, creates a clear guideline of what the behavior entails. In doing so, this creates a type of mastery level learning in which one step must be executed successfully before the next and the subsequent completion of the action.
Correspondingly, Dr. Kermis’ course regarding typical development of children and Dr. Sanders’ child psychopathology course provided me with a foundation to approach projects like this one with a strong awareness. In order to assess abnormality, one might say that normal functioning must be first considered. More specifically, in Dr. Kermis’ class we discussed developmental milestones and levels of functioning that are appropriate to specific age groups. These include areas of motor and intellectual abilities along with adaptive and social functioning. As the DSM diagnostic criteria suggests, children with autism fail to meet the proposed achievements of typical children, which was quite evident.
At the very basic level, my entire practicum emphasized aspects of Dr. Sanders’ Behavior Modification course. Behavior modification plans begin with the identification of desired or problem behaviors and subsequently rely on reinforcement to get a desired outcome. Documenting progress and feedback are critical ingredients in the mix; without both, evaluation of the effectiveness of a plan is not possible. In compiling the data that I did over a number of months, I provided researchers with a way of addressing the behaviors of a group of children whether at baseline, during treatment or post intervention. Again, I was blind to the purpose and variables of the study. The use of positive reinforcement in the classroom was high in the videos I observed. Aside from a few incidents in which physical restraints were necessary to prevent a child from hurting himself, reinforcement allowed classrooms to run quite smoothly by providing incentives for satisfactory work and effort. Token economy strategies were employed throughout the entire class day. This strategy refers to a form of positive reinforcement that promotes desired behaviors by providing incentives that represent the opportunity for exchange. In the classes I viewed, stickers were provided depending on whether a target behavior was met or not. At the end of an activity, these could be traded in for toys or a privilege such as playtime on the computer. From what I saw, this system was quite effective in promoting target behaviors; the common ones I saw were on-task behavior, a quiet voice and keeping hands and feet to one’s self. When children failed to meet these standards during an activity, teachers and aids provided continuous feedback by reminding them of the rules and letting them know when they were not following them. As a system of modification, it was apparent that the token system provided a degree of structure to the class using a method of rewards rather than punishment. A more general source of reinforcement was the use of praise. Every incidence in which a child performed a desired behavior, an adult in the classroom provided verbal praise; for example, “Good job sitting in your chair” or “I like the way you are looking at me when I’m talking” were common phrases used by teachers and aids.
Additionally, they often relied on the use modeling to promote target behaviors. When a child failed to do as he was instructed, several prompts typically followed the initial demand. Generally a least-to-most approach was taken; this means that prior to physically moving one’s hands in the movement necessary to execute an action, a teacher would repeat the instruction and/or model the action. For example “this is how you stand up” followed by the act of standing up would prompt a child to imitate. From what I saw, this appeared to be an effective strategy.
At the conclusion of my practicum hours, I am satisfied with the opportunity that I had to be part of a research study. More importantly, I feel as though my knowledge was enhanced regarding a particular disordered population regarding how education is approached. With this said, the broad field of school psychology is one that is all the more enticing to me. I feel that this experience will assist me for it showed me what skills are advantageous in working with a team of individuals toward a similar goal on a project. These include effective communication and a willingness to learn; both of which aid in the achievement of a successful collaboration, a significant aspect of the field. I leave this experience with a sense of responsibility regarding deadlines and feedback, which will certainly be valuable to me in the future, especially as I leave Canisius College with the intent on furthering my education and experience. I look forward to upcoming endeavors in which the aforementioned skills will be of use to me and ultimately, I can be successful in enhancing my knowledge and capabilities, making me an attractive candidate for positions and graduate schools.
As I evaluate the goals that I set prior to completing this responsibility, I am satisfied in the degree to which I was able to reach each. With this position, I was able to achieve each of these goals. Specifically, I acquired a deeper understanding and appreciation of the importance of data collection and documentation, which were my sole duties. Emphasis on reliability and validity in this particular study are reflected in my assistance as an agent of fidelity.
They were as follows:
1. With this project, I hope to see aspects of course material in action and ultimately, to gain a sense of how research studies are conducted, specifically those strongly reflecting my interest in the field of school psychology.
2. I anticipate concluding the project with a greater interest in the research aspect of psychology and a more critical view of the significance of evidence based practices used in serving a unique population.
3. I hope to learn how to communicate effectively and work efficiently within a team of individuals.
By contributing to a project run by an organization of such quality, I finished with a sense of accomplishment and increased enthusiasm for furthering my education and ultimately, work in the field of school psychology.
