Nesrhtens…..

Data collection is a central element of early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) for preschool children, as for all other behavior analytic interventions. The collection of trail-by-trail date is just one of the elements to register, and gives useful information on children progress and quality of discrete-trail teaching.

As CBTAonline has released a behavior analytic data collection app, ABC data, for iPhone I have tried this application to collect trail-by-trail data while supervising EIBI programs for children with autism. ABC data has three customizable buttons to tap for occurrence of a response or event; and for collecting trail-by-trail data I named them “C” for correct response, “P” for prompted response and “W” for incorrect response or no response. Then you can tap start for timed data collection. After the session is finished you can email the data for more analysis in an CSV-format.

As the app then provides count, percent and occurrences per minute. You can easily analyze if the difficulties of the tasks are appropriate for the child, ineffective prompting strategies are in place, and if the child is presented with a high enough number of trails (as described by Smith, 1999).

So far I have been collecting this data when consulting the children’s team, but I could be possible to have them collect the data daily and email them to me or another consultant for analyzing and monitoring.

CBTAonling has announced the release of ABC Data Pro, with more functionality. And I´m looking forward to check this out.

Kubina, Wolfe and Kostewicz published in this number of the journal The Analysis of Verbal Behavior the work they have done on developing  General Outcome Measures (GOM) for verbal operants. They have done an impressive work on this development, and by this work done a significant contribution to the field of language assessment and intervention.

The article states several quite central points and questions regarding GOM´s that the field of Early Intensive Behavior Intervention (EIBI) for children with autism spectrum disorders could benefit from. GOM´s should:

sample relevant domains of development across the desired age range, must be sensitive to growth and change over relatively short periods of time, must be cheap and easy to administer and interpret, and must lead to (and support) evaluations of the effects of ongoing intervention efforts as well as planned variations. (Early Childhood Research Institute Measuring Growth and Development, 1998, p. 4)

Relevant and well designed GOM´s could be especially useful in EIBI in effectively and fast determine starting point for children starting EIBI, make useful evaluation tool for different EIBI programs making comparison easier and more reliable, and also be used to compare EIBI to other treatments to some extent. The development of GOM could of course not replace the rigorous data collection and analysis that characterize EIBI to day, but could be an useful addition.

Now the VB-MAPP developed by Mark Sundberg could serve some of this purpose, but as it requires extended knowledge of the analysis of behavior and verbal operants it probably do not meet the criteria for GOM stated over in the aspect of easy to administer and interpret. The VB-MAPP may not either be sensible enough to growth and change over relatively short periods of time, but is as a really useful assessment tool in both placement and tracing skill development.

When setting up and running Early Intensive Behavioral Interventions (EIBI), also often called ABA-program, data collection is one of the essential carateristics of the program. But as I get to know more programs, more program providers and consultants I discover the innumerable data collection systems used in programs based on the same foundation.

This is somewhat not surprisingly as the core feature of these programs are the analysis of behavior, and by that the data collection should be adjusted to the behavior and the envorinment relevant to the childs needs and progress. But on the other hand it would be great if most programs had more common data collection systems, to promote collaboration, research and professional sharing.

In my pratice I collect different data, based on the skills taught at the moment, and the challenges I and the teachers and trainers experience at a particular moment in the EIBI-program. And here are some of the data I collect, and some thoughts on when to use which.

More global data.
I really think it´s important to collect the more global measures of the effect of EIBI, as they are done in reserach studies. Here I think all providers should collect data on cognitive development (IQ), adaptive functioning and autism severity. I know and experience in my every day work the difficulties in doing this properly. If the data is to be used in some kind of reserach it should of course be done by clinicans indipendent of the program, and that´s taking a lot of resources. Both fiscal and time.

The main reason for doing this is of course to ensure the quality of the program as a whole, comparing group results to other program providers. And of course this data will be useful for program development and further services for each child with autism.

Data on skill development.
The importance on keeping track of the child´s skill development are recoqnized by most, if not all, ABA professionals. But how this is best done, is subject to some discussion. Some use the various assessment tools and checklists developed in the field of EIBI, such as VB-MAPP, ABLLS-R, Leaf and McEachin´s check list etc. Others have their own systems, including various flow-charts. In my opinion there are advantages with both using a assessment tool and with keep track of skill development using a individualized flow-chart.

The main advantage with using a assessment tool to keep track of skill progress is the posibility to compare children, and by that evaluate the rate of progress. Some of the assessment tools has also been developed with a norm based on normal development, which can provide information about delay, and how much children are gaining compared to their peers. But these predefined assessment tools may miss some skills, as each child may need teaching and training i highly spesific skills not included in this tool. And of course this is the main advantage of flow-charts.

But as the different assessment tools haas defferent levels of task-analysis, and different definitions of skills, each tool has it’s own strenghts and weaknesses. I personally like the VB-MAPP, as it has as I se it a strong focus on the functional use of the skills taught. But I always keep a seperate flow-chart, as eaach child needs different levels of task-analysis and often VB-MAPP and other assessment tools does not cover all skills, as skills needed for the National Day (17.mai) here in Norw

Data on progress within sessions, on aquisition of each skill and on teacher/traner skills I will cover in next post….

ScienceDaily (2009-03-31) — Two-year-olds with autism lack an important building block of social interaction that prompts newborn babies to pay attention to other people. Instead, these children pay attention to physical relationships between movement and sound and miss critical social information.

Exciting new research important both for early identification and early intervention. Looking forward to read the scientific paper..

Thomson and colleagues from University of Manitoba, has an excellent article in press in the journal Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders. It´s a review of research done on teaching individuals to deliver Discrete Trail Teaching (DTT).

The article review the components of instructing parents, para-professionals, and other professionals and bring some interesting results, but not surprisingly concluding with the need of more research.

And one of the elements this article highlight is the use of standardized measurement of the delivering of DTT. The authors presents the Discrete-Trials Teaching Evaluation Form (DTTEF) submitted for publication by Fazzio, Arnal, & Martin. The DTTEF 21 items that are field-tested to measure the application of DTT. This looks like an interesting and useful tool for supervisors and program managers to secure quality in an EIBI – program. And it´s a welcomed addition to earlier published tools for evaluating DTT.

So let´s hope more researchers use the same measurements in evaluating teaching and instruction for DTT delivering, as the field of EIBI needs efficient methods to widespread these skills.