No abstract

This study investigated the effects of a peer-mediated intervention on the social interaction of five triads comprised of preschoolers with autism and their typical peers. Strategies thought to facilitate interaction were selected based on analyses of a descriptive data base. Peers were taught to attend to, comment on, and acknowledge the behavior of their classmates with disabilities. These are behaviors preschoolers typically exhibit frequently, but that do not obligate responses to the same extent as questions and requests do. The ABCB reversal designs revealed that improved rates of social interaction during play were dearly associated with the peer intervention for 4 of the 5 children with autism. This intervention offers an alternative peer-intervention package for increasing interaction between children with and without disabilities.

We examined the effects of a peer-mediated intervention package that taught typically developing children to be more aware of communicative attempts to classmates with disabilities, to use a small set of facilitative strategies ("Stay, play, talk"), and to distribute strategy use across the school day. A multiple baseline design across subjects was instituted with two cohorts of preschool children. Following baseline observations, a total of 8 target children with moderate development disabilities were eventually paired with trained peers who received "buddy training." One trained peer were taught facilitative strategies and encouraged to use them during classroom activities, consistent improvements in social interaction on the part of the trained peers and target children were demonstrated. Similar or more frequent interactions were demonstrated when trained peers were reassigned to different target children during generalization probes. In addition, treatment effects were revealed when comparing sequential analyses applied to the specific communicative behaviors across experimental conditions, in changes in target children's sociometric ratings, and in social validity judgments of videotapes from before and after treatment. This peer intervention approach has promise for improving the communicative interaction and social integration of children with disabilities attending inclusive preschools.

The promotion of friendship development for children with disabilities is now considered a primary educational goal. Peer-mediated interventions have been used successfully to increase social interaction between children with and without disabilities, although implementation has usually been restricted to play time. We investigated the effects of alternative strategies that included pairing four children with disabilities with several trained peers (“buddies”) during a variety of activities across the school day and teaching interaction skills to both children with and without disabilities. Interactions between children with and without disabilities increased significantly after peer training; supplemental dyadic training resulted in minimal increases in responsiveness on the part of children with disabilities. This intervention appears to be a useful approach for promoting peer interactions, a prerequisite for the development of friendships in integrated preschools.

An exploratory study was conducted to compare 2 naturalistic language intervention methods: milieu teaching and responsive interaction. Classroom teachers implemented the treatment methods in 6 classrooms. Thirty-six children were matched on 4 pretreatment language measures and assigned to 1 of the 2 treatments. No main effects for treatment were found. However, milieu teaching was more effective than responsive interaction in facilitating receptive language and expressive vocabulary, if the children began intervention with relatively low receptive or expressive language levels. In contrast, responsive interaction was more effective than milieu teaching in facilitating receptive language and expressive vocabulary if the children began intervention with relatively high receptive or expressive language levels. The explanations for these results suggest several directions for future research and highlight the increasingly common finding that no 1 intervention is superior for all children.