Teaching Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability to Independently Access and Use Point-Of-View Video Models for Virtual Instruction

Abstract

Online instructional delivery has always been viewed as beneficial due to its flexibility in settings and times, but the Covid-19 pandemic produced an essential need for the ability to engage in learning without direct contact with others. For students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability (ASD and ID) who have extensive support needs, developing the skills required to engage with online content is critical for utilizing and interacting with distance learning platforms and resources. Using a visual task analysis, least-to-most prompting, and reinforcement, students with ASD and ID can be taught to use technological devices for virtual instruction without adult support. By teaching students to access and use point-of-view video modeling for online instructional delivery, teachers can facilitate skills their students need to access evidence-based practices and meet diverse learning goals and objectives.

Keywords

autism spectrum disorder intellectual disability virtual learning video modeling point-of-view video modeling visual task analysis response prompting

Mr. Davidson is a special education teacher that works with students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Intellectual Disability (ID) who receive most of their academic instruction in a separate classroom. When his school quickly moved to remote learning during the Covid-19 pandemic, Mr. Davidson had to learn how to teach his students in a virtual environment through trial and error. He knew that disruptions in routines were going to be a significant challenge for his students and their families, and he struggled with converting a typical daily schedule that operated on rotations and a reinforcement schedule to a similar online format.

After Mr. Davidson contacted his families and told them how to access the online class, he was inundated with calls and emails from his students' families. Families reported experiencing increased challenging behaviors due to difficulties students had following the steps to access the school’s online learning platform and disrupted routines. As a result, Mr. Davidson scheduled daily individual online meetings with both a caregiver and the student to provide instruction and support in accessing online learning and reinforcing productive behaviors. Although Mr. Davidson was eventually pleased by his students’ progress and even noticed that one student preferred the online learning environment, he knew that he needed to focus on teaching the skills to access online learning when instruction moved back to in-person in case something similar happened again.

Since his school has moved back to in-person learning, Mr. Davidson wants to teach his new students to independently access and use the school’s online learning platform to independently engage in virtual learning so demands placed upon students’ families and caregivers can be reduced if remote learning is required in the future. Additionally, the ability to access and engage in virtual learning will allow his students to continue to make progress with Individualized Education Plan (IEP) goals and objectives. Learning to independently access and utilize online learning could also benefit his students when they leave the K-12 setting because they would have access to learning materials across their lifespan to support future personal learning and vocational goals.

Virtual Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic

The move to virtual learning due to the Covid-19 pandemic resulted in increased challenges in learning for students with ASD and ID (Francom et al., 2021; Hurwitz et al., 2021; Stenhoff et al., 2020; Long et al., 2021). Based on a survey of 106 special education teachers who worked with students with ASD, Hurwitz et al. (2021) found that instructors felt online learning was more overwhelming than traditional in-person learning because virtual learning required more innovation and adaptations. Francom et al. (2021) conducted a survey study and found teachers identified that information and training in distance and online learning were the areas in which they needed the most support. Hurwitz et al. (2021) found that while students with ASD and extensive support needs often struggled with virtual learning, some preferred the online format.

Many teachers had to learn ‘on the fly’ how to utilize virtual learning platforms (e.g., Google Classroom, Canvas, Seesaw) to deliver instruction to their students during the pandemic. For teachers who worked with students with ASD and ID with extensive support needs, the changes in routine and instructional delivery created additional challenges related to planning instruction that was engaging, accessible, and evidence-based (Stenhoff et al., 2020). Online learning also removed the ability to use certain prompting strategies, like hand-over-hand and physical prompting, and introduced barriers related to reinforcement schedules.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, educators’ initial frustration stemmed from the forced and immediate demand to learn a new instructional delivery format with little training or support. However, educators were later exasperated because they were learning a new format while teaching their students and families how to access and engage with online learning tools. Although many teachers experienced struggles comparable to Mr. Davidsons’ and may prefer to go back to the way things were before Covid-19, there is no guarantee that similar situations will not occur in the future.

Further, online learning has the potential to provide students with ASD and ID individualized instruction that can be accessed without an instructor physically present. Once individuals learn how to access and engage with the content, extended learning opportunities exist for students during school breaks, at various times, across varied locations, and after they have graduated and moved on from the K-12 setting. Despite the many benefits of online learning, there is little value if the students and their families do not know how to access and use the online learning platform.

Mr. Davidson Prepares to Return to In-Person Learning

Mr. Davidson will have six students between 7 to 10 years old who have varied skills related to using technological devices for academic instruction and will receive individualized instruction based on the state’s alternate standards. Two students, Felicia and Chris, are individuals with Level 3 ASD based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) and Mild or Moderate ID. Both students have significant behavioral and communication support needs. Mr. Davidson has two paraeducators in his classroom to support instruction. Like other teachers, he will be using the virtual learning platform that his school purchased (e.g., Google Classroom, Canvas), and the students will have laptop computers that they will use at school and home. Beyond teaching his new students how to access online learning, he needs to decide what instructional methods and materials will be used to enable them to utilize the online platform.

Video Modeling

The National Clearinghouse on Autism Evidence and Practice (NCAEP) defines video modeling as an evidence-based practice that is a video-recorded target skill or behavior demonstration that is shown to a student to enable him or her to learn or engage in a target behavior or skill (Steinbrenner et al., 2020). Video modeling is a video-based intervention (VBI) that is based on Bandura’s social learning theory, which demonstrated that children learn various skills through observing others rather than just by personal experience. He also found that children will imitate behaviors, whether or not reinforcement is available, and engage in behaviors in settings other than where they originally observed them (Bandura, 1977; Bellini & Akullian, 2007; Delano, 2007; Morlock et al., 2015).

Video modeling types can vary as evidenced in Table 1 and have been used to teach academic and social skills to students with ASD and ID (Mason et al., 2013; Park et al., 2019). In the literature, video modeling is typically paired with additional evidence-based strategies such as prompting, reinforcement, or a task analysis (Carrero & Fuller, 2021; Moore et al., 2013; Reyes et al., 2022). Video modeling is beneficial in reducing distractions, allowing for instruction to be individualized across students with differing cognitive abilities, and providing a model for a new skill that can be watched or paused as many times as is necessary for individual understanding (Hughes & Yakubova, 2016; Mason et al., 2013; Park et al., 2019).

Table 1.

Video Based Interventions.

Point-of-view video modeling	Video self-modeling	Video modeling using others	Video prompting
Definitions
The video is recorded from the perspective of the student as if he or she is completing the task independently. The point-of-view video model focuses on what the student would see when completing the task and unrelated stimuli are not included in the video (Mason et al., 2013).	The student watches a video of him or herself engaging in a target behavior that is not part of his or her current repertoire of behavior with the use of identified supports that enable the student to complete the target behavior. When making the final video model for the student, the supports are edited out to provide the student with a precise self-model of the desired behavior (Mason et al., 2016; Schaeffer et al., 2016).	A video is created that depicts a peer or other person engaging in the desired behavior or skill. Others can also be used to create videos from the point-of-view of the student (Park et al., 2019).	A single video clip is recorded to represent each step of a task. Each step is recorded from either the student’s point-of-view or shows a model performing the task. The addition of a verbal prompt is included with the visual prompt. Text can also be added (Aljehany & Bennett, 2020; Carrero & Fuller, 2021; Cullen et al., 2017).
Examples of skills or behaviors used to teach
Independent living skills, improving transitional behaviors, math word problem solving, and writing one’s name (Cannella-Malone et al., 2011; Cihak et al., 2010; Karal et al., 2022; Moore et al., 2013)	Functional math skills, narrative reading comprehension, independent living skills, and reducing aggressive behaviors (Burton et al., 2013; Drill & Bellini, 2022; Mason et al., 2016; Sadler, 2019)	Abduction prevention skills, reading fluency and comprehension, preparing for employment interviews, library skills, and purchasing activities (Bell, 2022; Egarr & Storey, 2022; Hayes et al., 2015; Markey & Miller, 2015; Yakubova & Taber-Doughty, 2013)	Office tasks, text messaging, completing vocational tasks in integrated community-based employment setting, and robotics and coding (Aljehany & Bennett, 2020; Carrero & Fuller, 2021; Cullen et al., 2017; Wright et al., 2021)

Point-of-view video modeling provides the learner with a visual that details the steps of a task with voice-over narration from the learner’s perspective (Hughes & Yakubova, 2016; Mason et al., 2013). Point-of-view video models can be created by teachers without editing software or the additional assistance that may be required with other types of video models. Creating point-of-view video models will allow Mr. Davidson to individualize instruction and reduce distractions so that the students’ attention is on the steps of the task that need to be learned to complete the desired behavior or skill (Mason et al., 2013).

Mr. Davidson Plans Instruction for Accessing Point-of-View Video Models

Mr. Davidson has read about the various skills that video modeling has been used to successfully develop with students with ASD and ID (See Table 1), and he wants to use a set of guidelines that he found for developing video models (Hughes & Yakubova, 2016) to create point-of-view video models for his students based on their IEP goals and objectives. (See Figure 1 for guidelines.) He plans to teach the students to access the video models in their individual online learning platforms. Mr. Davidson decides to develop a visual task analysis that he can use to teach the students steps for using their school-purchased laptops to access a video model in their class’s online learning platform.

Figure 1.

Hughes & Yakubova (2016)’s steps for developing VBI interventions.

Visual Task Analysis

The NCAEP defines a task analysis as a tool that is used with a learner to break down a complex or chained behavioral skill into smaller components to enable him or her to become more independent in completing the complex skill or behavior (Steinbrenner et al., 2020). Teachers can individualize their students’ task analyses based on the device the student is using, independence levels based on assessments conducted prior to the intervention, preferred reinforcers, and visuals to aid in understanding the steps of the intended task. Variations in the task analysis can also be made based on the virtual platform that the student is accessing (e.g., Canvas, Seesaw, Google Classroom).

In creating a visual task analysis, teachers can use presentation software (e.g., Google Slides, Visme, Canva) or a word processing program (e.g., Word, Pages). With presentation software, a visual representation for each discrete behavior or step is placed on each slide with corresponding text. After the slides are created for each task analysis step, they can be printed as a handout with multiple slides per page or one slide per page if the student has a visual impairment (VI) or responds better with reduced visual stimuli. The one-page images can be laminated and put on a binder ring for the student to turn as he or she completes each task or put in a binder or folder as full-page images. Once students learn to access online materials, the task analysis can also be saved electronically if further editing is needed when teaching the task in the future, to share with families, or to allow for features like text-to-speech for struggling readers, embedded audio, or embedded video support (Cheung et al., 2016).

In developing and implementing the task analysis, teachers can use the steps recommended in the Autism Focused Intervention Resources and Modules (AFIRM) Step-by-Step Guide for developing and implementing a task analysis (Sam & AFIRM Team, 2015b). It is important that teachers carefully plan for which evidence-based practices (e.g., prompting, reinforcement) they will implement to teach the task analysis steps to their students (Wong et al., 2015; Parker & Kamps, 2011). For the students to develop independence with the task, it will be necessary to design and implement systematic support that can be faded as the students gain independence with the task (Cohen & Demchak, 2018).

Mr. Davidson Develops the Visual Task Analysis

Assess the Student’s Prerequisite Skill Performance for the Intended Task

Prior to developing the steps for the task analysis, Mr. Davidson observes each student to determine their independence levels with elemental laptop features (e.g., pressing keys on the keyboard, manipulating the mouse). He knows that basic AT supports (e.g., text-to-speech features, noise-canceling headphones) can be easily accessed and implemented to enable students to use various computer features independently. Based on his observations, he decides on basic Assistive Technology (AT) supports that can be used to enable each student to use their laptops to access point-of-view video models for instruction.

When observing Felicia, Mr. Davidson notices that when she hovers her mouse over the icons on her laptop, she has difficulty manipulating the mouse to do the double-clicks that are needed to open the online learning platform that the students are using. She also seems to struggle with seeing the mouse cursor. He models for Felicia how to use the mouse to do double-clicks and points out the mouse cursor verbally and by gesturing to the screen, but Felicia still struggles with performing the double-click action due to fine motor weaknesses and presses “frustrated” on her communication device. As Felicia’s frustration level increases, her attention is diverted from the task by the sound that Chris makes when he drops several colored, plastic snap cubes on the floor that he is using to solve a math problem.

He decides that providing Felicia with a one-button mouse and wireless noise-canceling headphones will ease her frustration with the mouse and reduce distractions when she is working on her laptop. He also plans to adjust the settings in the accessibility features to manipulate the mouse’s behavior. For example, he can change the settings so Felicia can open the icon by hovering over it for a specified time period and adding a colored circle around the cursor to make it more visible to Felicia.

After Mr. Davidson has observed each student and determined individual basic AT supports, as he did for Felicia, he begins to work with each student to teach them how to use their AT (e.g., one-button mouse, headphones). Most online providers (e.g., Google, Apple) have built-in accessibility features that can be adjusted by teachers based on the device (e.g., Chromebooks, iPads) their students are using to enable individual students to interact with online learning platform tools. Educators can work with their districts to access available equipment and adjust their accessibility settings to accommodate students' basic AT needs.

Break the task down into observable and measurable steps and determine which method and evidence-based practices (e.g., reinforcement, prompting) will be used to teach the task analysis steps.

Mr. Davidson develops a list of steps as shown in Figure 4 for the students to follow to use their laptops to access their individual classes in their online learning platform where they can access video models, and he reviews the AFIRM Task-Analysis Step-by-Step Guide and decides to use the total task presentation method, in which the learner is taught the entire task and goes through all steps during each trial until the entire chain is mastered (Sam & AFIRM Team, 2015b). Other options include forward chaining, in which the learner is shown the next step of the task each time he or she masters the previous one, and backward chaining, in which the learner is taught the final step of the task first and then learns each previous step as single steps are mastered (Spooner & Spooner, 1984). Mr. Davidson chooses the total task presentation method because he wants the students to have repeated practice with the entire task during each trial, and it allows him to provide affirmative and corrective feedback, make instructional adjustments as needed, and monitor to ensure skill maintenance while allowing the students to feel successful and competent in completing a complex task as they engage in steps already mastered with their devices (Spooner, 1984).

He also read that the total task presentation method paired with a task analysis and least to most prompting was used to teach two 8 and 10-year-old students with ASD to access a self-managed digital activity schedule on an iPad to order items from a community bakery (Cheung et al., 2016). Additionally, the methods were utilized for teaching individual tasks like typing sentences with a spelling word and completing a lunchroom routine in the general classroom for an elementary-aged student with ID and Down Syndrome and an English Learner (EL) with ID (Cohen and Demchak, 2018). In assisting his students in acquiring the skills that they need to complete complex tasks independently and in combining academic and functional skills in task instruction, he is preparing his students for future positive postsecondary education, employment, and independent living outcomes (Aljehany & Bennett, 2020; Cannella-Malone et al., 2021).

Develop the Task Analysis Model Appropriate for the Student (e.g., Visual, Video)

Mr. Davidson takes the steps that he developed in step 2 and uses them for developing a visual task analysis, for each student, which is differentiated based upon their preferred reinforcer. For each student, he takes a screenshot or picture of the reinforcer (e.g., favorite app, game) and places it at the end of the task analysis so the students have a visual reminder that they will have access to their reinforcer once they complete the task (i.e., after watching the video model). He also finds pictures to represent each step in the task analysis by using open access photos and creating specific icon screenshots that the students will click on to access their online learning platform. Finally, he creates a table in a word processing program (e.g., Microsoft Word, Pages) and inserts each picture into the table to represent each task analysis step as represented in Figure 2. Other options for teachers would be to take pictures of the students engaging in the tasks or to create individual videos for the students modeling each step, which would become a digital task analysis in which each video would serve as a video prompt. (Aljehany & Bennett, 2020; Cannella-Malone et al., 2011).

Figure 2.

Example visual task analysis for accessing video model.

Mr. Davidson numbers the pictures sequentially and puts a text box in the corner of each picture so the students can use a dry erase marker to check off each step as they complete it. He laminates each student’s task analysis for durability. For Chris, he decides to make each picture removable with velcro so he can remove each picture and hand it to him or place it on a velcro strip on his desk as he completes the step. Mr. Davidson makes this decision because Chris is working on Picture Exchange Communication skills and has not fully developed the fine motor skills necessary for writing.

Since Mr. Davidson’s first goal is to teach the students to independently access and watch a video model, his first video will simply congratulate the students on completing their task and indicate that they have earned their individual reinforcer. He develops a slide with the words “Great Job” on it and an image depicting the student’s reinforcer, and he uses his school’s online audio and web conferencing platform (e.g., Zoom, Webex) to share his screen and record himself saying “Great Job, now you can get [individualized reinforcer].” He minimizes himself in the video when recording so the students will only view the slide and hear his voice. Although students are not being asked to demonstrate a behavior modeled in the video yet, Mr. Davidson hopes that these initial experiences will promote student motivation and interest as they are asked to model increasingly challenging skills in the future.

Since Mr. Davidson plans to teach his students to use a point of view-video model to solve addition and subtraction word problems using virtual manipulatives that they will access in slides, embedding the “Great Job” video in slides will prepare the students for the intervention’s second phase (using virtual manipulatives to solve word problems). Mr. Davidson decides to embed the “Great Job” video as the first slide in the slide presentation because he will embed practice tasks on subsequent slides (e.g., slides 2 through 6) that require the student to use the skills modeled in future videos from slide 1. By determining the prerequisite skills for his students’ long-term goals, he is systematically preparing his students for success.

Response Prompting Procedures

Response prompting procedures have been shown to be effective for individualized and in small-group direct instruction for students with ASD and/or ID (Collins et al., 2018; Ledford et al., 2012; Pennington et al., 2018; Shepley et al., 2019; Spooner & Browder, 2015). With response prompting procedures, a facilitator systematically provides a prompt (e.g., verbal, gestural, model) that enables a student to perform a behavior correctly and fades the prompt as the student gains independence with the target behavior or skill. A prompting hierarchy can be used to facilitate the target behavior or skill (Shepley et al., 2019).

In a prompting hierarchy, the prompts are sequenced based on each prompt’s intrusiveness in providing support to the learner in completing the task. (In Figure 4, see Mr. Davidson’s key on the task analysis checklist for prompting examples that are sequenced based on the intrusiveness to the learner). Some of the most common evidence-based response prompting procedures include constant time-delay, progressive time-delay, most-to-least prompting, and least-to-most prompting (Shepley et al., 2019).

Mr. Davidson plans to use the least-to-most prompting procedure with his students because it will enable them to complete the chained task steps, accessing a video model, that they know independently while allowing each student to receive the support that he or she needs to complete unknown steps of the task (Collins et al., 2018; Markey & Miller, 2015). Least to-most prompting also provides nuanced data for monitoring improvement across time (McConomy et al., 2021). For example, Mr. Davidson will be able to see student progress from physical prompting support to model prompting support and know that they are making progress towards independence.

When teaching a new skill with the least-to-most prompting procedure, the facilitator plans a prompting hierarchy that includes at least three prompting levels. The first level is independence in which the learner is given the opportunity to complete the task on his her own. The remaining prompting hierarchy levels proceed from least supportive to most supportive (e.g., physical prompt) to assist the learner in responding correctly to complete the task, and it includes a final level which is the controlling prompt (e.g., physical prompt) that is used to make sure that the student completes the task correctly (Barton & Wolery, 2010; Sam & AFRIM Team, 2015a).

Teachers can use a prompting planning sheet like the Sam & AFIRM Team (2015a) one for the Least-to-Most Prompting Procedure from AFIRM to assist them in constructing an appropriate prompting hierarchy for enabling their students to develop independence with a designated task. The sheet guides the user in steps like the ones listed in Figure 3. AFIRM also provides instructor responses for the prompting hierarchy based on the student’s responses.

Figure 3.

Steps for constructing an appropriate prompting hierarchy.

Mr. Davidson Implements Instruction Using Least-to-Most Prompting

Mr. Davidson uses a rotation schedule in his classroom during academic instructional time to meet the students' individual needs and chooses the time designated for mathematics to begin the intervention since he plans to initially use point-of-view video modeling for mathematics goals. While he is working one-to-one with students at his table, the other students rotate through individually assigned activities in which the two paraeducators assist students to ensure that they are on task with their activities or to provide support as needed. The students have access to a preferred reinforcer for a designated time period when they successfully complete each rotation. Before instruction, Mr. Davidson assesses each student using the steps in the task analysis to determine his or her current performance level (i.e., baseline), recording the prompting level needed for the student to complete each step on the task analysis checklist. (See Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Example of collected data using task analysis checklist for Felicia.

When the first student, Felicia, comes to Mr. Davidson’s table, Mr. Davidson sits to Felicia’s right to provide her with prompting assistance once she begins the task. Mr. Davidson has Felicia’s laminated visual task analysis sitting on the right side of her laptop on the table, and he holds the dry erase marker in his hand to give to Felicia to mark off each task analysis step as she completes it. Before beginning the task, Mr. Davidson verbally points out the visual task analysis to Felicia and gestures to the reinforcer picture to show her the item or activity she will gain access to once she completes the required steps.

Mr. Davidson verbally prompts Felicia to complete the first task analysis step. When Felicia doesn’t respond within her designated response time of five seconds, Mr. Davidson repeats the task direction verbally and points to the laptop screen to indicate to Felicia that she needs to open the online learning platform app (e.g., Google Classroom, Canvas). When Felicia opens the app, Mr. Davidson verbally praises her with descriptive feedback (e.g., “Good job opening Canvas, Felicia.”) and records the prompting level used on his task analysis checklist, as pictured in Figure 4. Mr. Davidson continues to guide Felicia through the steps on the visual task analysis while implementing the prompting hierarchy. He continues to record the prompting level used for each step on the task analysis checklist and gives Felicia access to her tablet once she completes the required steps and views the “Great Job” video.

Mr. Davidson will continue the intervention with each student and fade prompts once they reach independence in accessing the video model. By fading prompts, Mr. Davidson is gradually reducing the amount of assistance he provides the students for each step until they can do all steps independently. When the students are able to access the video model on their own, Mr. Davidson plans to work with their caregivers to schedule a date in which they can access online learning at home to see if they are able to transfer or generalize the skill to the home setting.

Involving Family and the Home Environment

Mr. Davidson Meets with Families

When Mr. Davidson schedules a meeting with guardians and caregivers, he will explain the intervention to the parents and make sure that they can also access the online video models. He plans to host family meetings with the option of participating in-person or online using an application that allows for live video as well as screen-sharing (e.g., Zoom, Webex), and he will show them how to use the visual task analysis and prompting hierarchy that was used in the intervention. Mr. Davidson will also explain to the families how he uses the task analysis checklist to collect data and work with each family to schedule a time for them to use the same checklist to collect data at home, send him a video of the student performing the task, or arrange a time for him to observe the student performing the required task at home live via video call. A laminated visual task analysis will be sent home with the student prior to practice in the home setting. Mr. Davidson will also email or text links of point-of-view video models that he created for his students’ families that model how to access online learning and prompt and support their students in accessing online learning.

Preparing Families for the Transition to the Home Setting

It’s important that teachers not only conduct assessments to determine if students maintain skills across time but that they also plan for generalization to other environments, like the home. Teachers can collaborate with caregivers using virtual platforms like Zoom or Webex to set up sessions in which they can remotely observe and interact with the students as well as provide guidance to caregivers on how to support the student in generalizing the task analysis steps to their home environment. Using video models that show families how to use a task analysis and least-to-most prompting to enable their children to access a video model in their school’s online learning platform as well as to show families how to access online resources themselves can be very helpful, especially if the students have circumstances in which caregivers may have limited experience with technology. Furthermore, strategic technology use and online support for families can promote engagement, communication, and collaboration.

Planning for Using Point-Of-View Models for Math Instruction

Each of Mr. Davidson’s students has an IEP goal to solve a one-step addition or subtraction word problem that involves real-life situations. Mr. Davidson knows that this will be a challenging goal for his students because they each have difficulties sustaining attention to tasks that impedes their ability to plan and organize information. However, he wants them to develop their mathematical skills to increase opportunities for independence and employment (Root et al., 2021, 2022). Mr. Davidson plans to use point-of-view video modeling, hosted in the school’s online learning platform, to teach the skill to his students. He knows that some students will require additional support with learning to utilize video models, even after they have learned how to access them.

After students have demonstrated the skills to independently access and view the “Great Job” video, he will modify the video to be a point-of-view video model that models a behavior Mr. Davidson knows each student has already mastered. His goal is for the students to learn that the video models demonstrate a behavior that they are then expected to replicate. For example, Felicia’s first video model would show her handing the completed task analysis to Mr. Davidson and using her Voice-Output communication device to say, “finished.” Once these behaviors are completed, Felicia would access her reinforcer.

After each student demonstrates the ability to independently access his or her video model and complete the mastered behavior demonstrated within the video model, Mr. Davidson will know that they are ready to begin utilizing video models targeting their IEP math goals. He knows that by teaching his students the steps that they will need to have mastered to access and use a point-of-view video model, he will reduce their frustration levels when more complex tasks targeting their math goals are introduced.

Conclusion

Teachers who use evidence-based practices to teach students with extensive support needs to independently use a virtual learning platform to access a video model can enable their students to gain an additional level of independence. Thus, developing the skills necessary to access virtual learning will provide the students with a learning tool that can not only be used to teach an array of current IEP goals and objectives but also prepare them for accomplishing future post-secondary or vocational goals. By ensuring that all of their students are able to access and utilize virtual learning for instructional purposes, teachers can not only prepare to effectively engage their students remotely, but also alleviate the barrier of limited remote learning tools knowledge that some caregivers or family members may experience. In providing students and families with the knowledge base that they need to access and utilize remote learning tools, teachers can prepare their students with ASD and ID to access high-quality instruction virtually.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jennifer Annette Cottrell

Author Biographies

Jennifer Annette Cottrell is a PhD student at the University of Southern Mississippi.

R. Alex Smith is an Assistant Professor of Special Education in the Department of Early Childhood, Multilingual, and Special Education at UNLV.

Audra I Classen is the Associate Director of the School of Education and an Associate Professor of Special Education at the University of Southern Mississippi. She is also a Research Specialist at the Mississippi Early Childhood Inclusion Center.

References

Aljehany

M. S.

Bennett

K. D.

(2020). A comparison of video prompting to least-to- most prompting among children with autism and intellectual disability. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(5), 1714–1724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03929-x

American Psychiatric Association . (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596

Bandura

(1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.

Barton

Wolery

(2010). Training teachers to promote pretend play in young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291007700104

Bell

(2022). Using video modeling to teach abduction-prevention skills to children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52(9), 3909–3918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05241-z

Bellini

Akullian

(2007). A meta-analysis of video modeling and video-self modeling interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 264–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290707300301

Burton

C. E.

Anderson

D. H.

Prater

M. A.

Dyches

T. T.

(2013). Video self- modeling on an iPad to teach functional math skills to adolescents with autism and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 28(2), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357613478829

Cannella-Malone

H. I.

Barczak

M. A.

Dueker

S. A.

Brock

M. E.

(2021). Teaching academic skills to students with significant intellectual disabilities: A systematic review of the single-case design literature. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 25(3), 387–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744629519895387

Cannella-Malone

H. I.

Fleming

Chung

Y. C.

Wheeler

G. M.

Basbagill

A. R.

Singh

A. H.

(2011). Teaching daily living skills to seven individuals with severe intellectual disabilities: A comparison of video prompting to video modeling. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(3), 144–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300710366593

10.

Carrero

K. M.

Fuller

M. C.

(2021). Teaching adolescents with autism to text message Requests using video prompting. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419890247

11.

Cheung

Schulze

K. A.

Leaf

J. B.

Rudrud

(2016). Teaching community skills to two young children with autism using a digital self-managed activity schedule. Exceptionality, 24(4), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2016.1215654

12.

Cihak

Fahrenkrog

Ayres

K. M.

Smith

(2010). The use of video modeling via a video iPad and a system of least prompts to improve transitional behaviors for students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12(2), 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300709332346

13.

Cohen

Demchak

(2018). Use of visual supports to increase task independence in students with severe disabilities in inclusive educational settings. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 53(1), 84–99. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/26420429

14.

Collins

B. C.

Park

Haughney

(2018). Response prompting as an ABA- based instructional approach for teaching students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50(6), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918774920

15.

Cullen

J. M.

Alber-Morgan

Simmons-Reed

E. A.

Izzo

M. V.

(2017). Effects of self- directed video prompting using iPad on the vocational task completion of young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 46(3), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-170873

16.

Delano

M. E.

(2007). Video modeling interventions for individuals with autism. Remedial and Special Education, 28(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325070280010401

17.

Drill

R. B.

Bellini

(2022). Combining reader’s theater, story mapping, and video self- modeling interventions to improve narrative reading comprehension in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04908-x

18.

Egarr

Storey

(2022). Model teachers or model students? A comparison of video modeling interventions for improving reading fluency and comprehension in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52(8), 3366–3382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05217-z

19.

Francom

G. M.

Lee

S. J.

Pinkney

(2021). Technologies, challenges, and needs of k-12 teachers in the transition to distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Tech Trends, 65(4), 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00625-5

20.

Hayes

G. R.

Custodio

E. V.

Haimson

O. L.

Nguyen

Ringland

K. E.

Ulgado

R. R.

Waterhouse

Weiner

(2015). Mobile video modeling for employment interviews for individuals with autism. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 43(3), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-150775

21.

Hughes

E. M.

Yakubova

(2016). Developing handheld video intervention for students with autism spectrum disorder. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(2), 115–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216636059

22.

Hurwitz

McClaine

B. G.

Carlock

(2021). Special education for students with autism during the COVID-19 pandemic: “Each day brings new challenges”. Autism, 26(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211035935

23.

Karal

M. A.

Riccomini

P. J.

Hughes

E. M.

(2022). Effects of video modeling on addition word problem performance of students with autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 68(5), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2022.2039452

24.

Ledford

Lane

J. D.

Elam

K. L.

Wolery

(2012). Using response-prompting procedures during small group direct instruction: Outcomes and procedural variables. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: 117(5), 413–434. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-117.5.413

25.

Long

H. M.

Bouck

E. C.

Jakubow

L. N.

(2021). Explicit instruction in mathematics: Considerations for virtual learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(2), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643421994099

26.

Markey

P. T.

Miller

M. L.

(2015). Introducing an information-seeking skill in a school library to students with autism spectrum disorder: Using video modeling and least-to- most prompts. School Library Research: Research Journal of the American Association of School Librarians, 18, 1–31. http://www.ala.org/aasl/slr/volume18/markey-miller.

27.

Mason

R. A.

Davis

H. S.

Boles

M. B.

Goodwyn

(2013). Efficacy of point-of-view video modeling: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 34(6), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513486298

28.

Mason

R. A.

Davis

H. S.

Ayres

K. M.

Davis

J. L.

Mason

B. A.

(2016). Video self- modeling for individuals with disabilities: A best-evidence, single case meta- analysis. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 28(4). 623–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-016-9484-2

29.

McConomy

M. A.

Root

Wade

(2021). Using task analysis to support inclusion and assessment in the classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 54(6), 414–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599211025565

30.

Moore

D. W.

Anderson

Treccase

Deppeler

Furlonger

Didden

(2013). A video-based package to teach a child with autism spectrum disorder to write her name. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 25(5), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-012-9325-x

31.

Morlock

Reynolds

J. L.

Fisher

Comer

R. J.

(2015). Video modeling and word identification in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 31(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659013517573

32.

Park

Bouck

Duenas

(2019). The effect of video modeling and video prompting interventions on individuals with intellectual disability: A systematic literature review. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418780464

33.

Parker

Kamps

(2011). Effects of task analysis and self-monitoring for children with autism in multiple social settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 26(3), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357610376945

34.

Pennington

Flick

Smith-Wehr

(2018). The use of response prompting and frames for teaching sentence writing to students with moderate intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33(3), 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357616673568

35.

Reyes

E. N.

Wood

C. L.

Walker

V. L.

Voggt

A. P.

Vestal

A. R.

(2022). Effects of video self-modeling and system of least prompts on completion of transitional routines for a student with extensive support needs in inclusive settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 24(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300721990291

36.

Root

J. R.

Ingelin

Cox

S. K.

(2021). Teaching mathematical word problem solving to students with autism spectrum disorder: A best-evidence synthesis. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 56(4), 420–436. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1315651

37.

Root

Jimenez

Twine

(2022). Small group mathematical problem-solving instruction for elementary students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 57(1), 3–15. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=university+students+with+disabilities+and+family&ff1=dtysince_2004&pg=16&id=EJ1332123

38.

Sadler

K. M.

(2019). Video self-modeling and functional behavior assessment to modify aggressive behaviors in students with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 54(4), 406–419. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/26822517

39.

Sam

AFIRM Team . (2015a). Prompting. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorder, FPG Child Development Center, University of North Carolina. https://afirm.fpg.unc.edu/prompting

40.

Sam

AFIRM Team . (2015b). Task analysis. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorder, FPG Child Development Center, University of North Carolina. https://afirm.fpg.unc.edu/task-analysis

41.

Schaeffer

K. M.

Hamilton

K. A.

Bauman Johnson

W. L.

(2016). Video self-modeling interventions for students with autism spectrum disorder. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216630281

42.

Shepley

Lane

J. D.

Jones Ault

(2019). A review and critical examination of the system of least prompts. Remedial and Special Education, 40(5), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517751213

43.

Spooner

(1984). Comparisons of backward chaining and total task presentation in training severely handicapped persons. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19(1), 15–22. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/23877208

44.

Spooner

Browder

D. M.

(2015). Raising the bar: Significant advances and future needs for promoting learning for students with severe disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514555022

45.

Spooner

(1984). A review of chaining techniques: Implications for future research and practice. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19(2), 114–124. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/23877224

46.

Steinbrenner

J. R.

Hume

Odom

S. L.

Morin

K. L.

Nowell

S. W.

Tomaszewski

Szendrey

McIntyre

N. S.

Yucesoy-Ozkan

Savage

M. N.

(2020). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism. In National Clearinghouse on Autism evidence and practice review Team. https://ncaep.fpg.unc.edu/

47.

Stenhoff

D. M.

Pennington

R. C.

Tapp

M. C.

(2020). Distance education supports for students with autism spectrum disorder and complex needs during COVID-19 and school closures. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 39(4), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870520959658

48.

Wong

Odom

S. L.

Hume

K. A.

Cox

A. W.

Fettig

Kucharczyk

Brock

M. E.

Plavnick

J. B.

Fleury

V. P.

Schultz

T. R.

(2015). Evidenced-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism spectrum disorder: A comprehensive review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 1951–1966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z.

49.

Wright

J. C.

Knight

V. F.

Barton

E. E.

Edwards-Bowyer

(2021). Video prompting to teach robotics and coding to middle school students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36 (4), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419890249

50.

Yakubova

Taber-Doughty

(2013). Effects of video modeling and verbal prompting on social skills embedded within a purchasing activity for students with autism. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341302800104