Abstract
Discrete-trial-training procedures, particularly matching to sample (MTS), are often used to teach children with autism and/or intellectual disabilities. An example is touching a picture that corresponds to a spoken word. When conducted in a “tabletop” manner, the teacher must arrange several pictures on a table, provide the spoken word, and present response consequences, all while maintaining procedural integrity and collecting data. Using computer programs can greatly reduce the burden on practitioners, but many do not have the access, funding, or time to use complex and expensive software. This report serves as a guide to making MTS tasks that have many of the benefits of computerization using Microsoft® PowerPoint™ 2016, a program that many practitioners have basic knowledge of, and access to. Past papers have described the use of PowerPoint™ for whole classroom instruction. This report expands the use of PowerPoint™ to present individualized instruction that detects child responses and presents consequences based on those responses.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Because PowerPoint™ moves in a forward progression, it is not possible to use a slide for incorrect responses. If there were a slide for incorrect responses, PowerPoint™ would show it following feedback for a correct response.
There is also an option to insert sound in the Timing menu found under the Transitions tab. We do not suggest using this option to play sound on the Start and Choice Slides, because the sound will not repeat. Audio selected for a transition will only play once, when the slide first appears.
References
Blum, C., Parette, H. P., & Watts, E. H. (2009). Engaging young children in an emergent literacy curriculum using of Microsoft© PowerPoint™: Development, considerations, and opportunities. Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education, 1, 41–45.
Coleman-Martin, M. B., Heller, K. W., Cihak, D. F., & Irvine, K. L. (2005). Using computer-assisted instruction and the nonverbal reading approach to teach word identification. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20(2), 80–90.
Green, G. (2001). Behavior analytic instruction for learners with autism: Advances in stimulus control technology. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16(2), 72–85.
Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching receptive language skills. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 6(1), 56–75.
Holland, J. G. (1960). Teaching machines: An application of principles from the laboratory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3(4), 275–287.
Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye, teacher. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 79–89.
Leaf, R., McEachin, J., & Harsh, J. D. (1999). A work in progress, behavior management strategies and a curriculum for intensive behavioral intervention. New York: DRL Books Inc..
Parette, H. P., Blum, C., Boeckmann, N. M., & Watts, E. H. (2009). Teaching word recognition to young children who are at risk using Microsoft® PowerPoint™ coupled with direct instruction. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(5), 393–401.
Petursdottir, A. I., & Aguilar, G. (2016). Order of stimulus presentation influences children's acquisition in receptive identification tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(1), 58–68.
Saunders, K. J., Johnston, M. D., Tompkins, B. F., Dutcher, D. L., & Williams, D. C. (1997). Generalized identity matching of two-dimensional forms by individuals with moderate to profound mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102(3), 285–291.
Saunders, Hine, Hayashi, & Williams. (2016). Adventitious reinforcement of maladaptive stimulus control interferes with learning. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9(3), 223–229.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Author Carol Cummings declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.
Author Kathryn J. Saunders declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cummings, C., Saunders, K.J. Using PowerPoint 2016 to Create Individualized Matching to Sample Sessions. Behav Analysis Practice 12, 483–490 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-0223-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-0223-2