11 NPDC Coaching Manual.txt — Kentucky Autism Training Center

Plain Text icon 11 NPDC Coaching Manual.txt — Plain Text, 124 KB (127894 bytes)

File contents

Guidance & Coaching
on Evidence-based Practices
for Learners with
Autism
Spectrum
Disorders

Suzanne Kucharczyk

Evelyn Shaw

Brenda Smith Myles

Lisa Sullivan

Kate Szidon &

Linda Tuchman-Ginsberg

Guidance & Coaching on Evidence Based Practices
for Learners with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Guidance & Coaching on Evidence-based Practices for Learners with Autism Spectrum
Disorders.

Suggested citation: Kucharczyk, S., Shaw. E., Smith Myles, B., Sullivan, L., Szidon, K., &
Tuchman-Ginsberg, L. (2010). Guidance & coaching on evidence-based practices for learners
with autism spectrum disorders. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, Frank
Porter Graham Child Development Institute, National Professional Development Center on
Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Design & Layout: Gina Harrison, FPG Publications Office

FPG #2929

The NPDC on ASD was a multi-university center (Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute at The University
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the M.I.N.D. Institute at University of California at Davis Medical School, and the
Waisman Center at the University of Wisconsin) funded by the US Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs (OSEP).

For additional information about the National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders,
visit their website at http://autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu or email Suzanne.kucharczyk@unc.edu

The Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is one of the
nation�s oldest multidisciplinary centers devoted to the study of children and families. Our mission is to cultivate
and share knowledge that enhances child development and family well-being.

Advancing knowledge. Enhancing lives.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction to Coaching. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

2. The Coaching Process: The Model and Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

3. Coaching Practices, Implementation Science and the
National Professional Development Center on
Autism Spectrum Disorders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Appendices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

A: Coaching Logs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

B: Guidelines and Activities for Professional Development. . . . . . . . . .23

C: The Donovan Family Case Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Chapter 1

Introduction
to Coaching

Coaching is a key
ingredient for the
successful implementation
of evidence-
based practices
(EBP). Coaching helps educators
make informed decisions about
instruction and program organization
that will lead to intervention
practices that help children and youth
learn more effectively. Coaching is
relationship-based and is developed
within the cultural context of organizations
(Dunst, Trivette & Hamby, 2010;
Fixsen, 2009; Fixsen, Blas�, Naoom &
Wallace, 2009; Fixsen & Blas�, 2008;
Joyce & Showers, 2005; Knight, 2009;
Metz & Bartley, 2012). The National
Professional Development Center on
Autism Spectrum Disorders (NPDC)
along with a growing number of school
based initiatives (e.g., Response to
Intervention and Positive Behavioral
Intervention Supports) has a strong
focus on coaching as a professional
development strategy (Knight, 2009;
Scott & Martinek, 2006). Beyond the
context of schools and other educational
programs, research has found
coaching to be a critical tool used to
directly support families of young
children as they generalize interventions
into their child�s daily routines. In
schools, centers, and homes coaching
is a critical, relational process used to
support the fidelity of implementation
of EBP (Basu, Salisbury & Thorkidlsen,
2010; Rush & Shelden, 2011).

NPDC committed to the use of
coaching to meet the Center goals to
provide state partners with sustainable,
outcome-based professional
development and technical assistance
that optimized existing resources for
effective delivery of services to learners
with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
Coaching was applied in school and
early intervention settings. For professional
development to be effective and
result in systemic implementation of
evidence-based practices, commitments
such as administrative investment
and support, staff commitment,
staff time and support resources are
required. Fixsen and colleagues (Fixsen
& Blas�, 2008; Knight, 2009; Metz
& Bartley, 2012) suggest that implementation
happens in six nonlinear
stages: exploration, installation, initial
implementation, full implementation,
innovation, and sustainability. These
activities occur in cycles and rely on
data to inform decision-making about
what is and isn�t working toward meeting
implementation goals. Coaching is
integral to such a change process. The
NPDC processes, including coaching,
are implemented as each program,
school, classroom, educator, and family
moves through these stages of implementation.
See Chapter 3 for additional
information on coaching within the
system change framework of implementation
science (Fixsen & Blas�, 2008; Metz
& Bartley, 2012).

The NPDC, in partnership with
participating states, has engaged in
a number of activities designed to
increase the use EBP and improve
programming for learners with ASD.
Coaching relationships were developed
throughout most NPDC activities to
help state partners build the capacity
of their training and technical assistance
systems and to support educators
in model sites to implement EBP
effectively. Teams completed an online
course in autism foundations and participate
in a week-long NPDC Summer
Institute to prepare for their year
of engagement with NPDC. NPDC
staff completed the Autism Program
Environmental Rating Scale (APERS)
or the Autism Program Environmental
Rating Scale-Infants and Toddlers
(APERS-IT) to inform decision

making about targets for program
improvement. Teams then reviewed
the Individualized Family Service
Plans (IFSP) or Individualized
Education Plans (IEPs) for selected
learners and evaluated information
in order to perform Goal Attainment
Scaling (GAS) on identified priority
outcomes and goals for each learner
(Cardillo & Choate, 1994). Following
these activities, each team chose
a few of the EBP that addressed
each learner�s goals and helped build
their team�s capacity. NPDC has
developed criteria and identified 24
evidence-based practices shown to be
effective in demonstrating outcomes
for children and youth with autism
spectrum disorders. For each of these
practices, an educational module
has been developed and posted on
this site: http://www.autisminternetmodules.
org/. These modules are
designed to provide guidance to professionals
and parents in implementing
these practices with fidelity. See
Chapter 3 for more information about
these program components.

After these preparatory activities
were completed, participating NPDC
teams engaged in a year-long coaching
process using EBP module
materials including Implementation
Checklists designed to demonstrate
the use of each practice with fidelity
over time. The following sections
describe the coaching process used by
NPDC, including (a) a description
of coaching, (b) underlying assumptions,
(c) descriptors/non-descriptors,
(d) elements for successful coaching,
(e) communication and (f) potential
barriers to coaching.

Coaching Definition

According to Gentry, Denton, and
Kurz (2008) coaching is a form of
embedded sustained professional
development for practicing educational
professionals. Two individuals participate
in the process: the inviting partner
and the coach. The inviting partner, an
educator, early intervention provider,
family member, or other professional,
is focused on improving her instruction
by enhancing or developing skills.
The coach engages in focused pre-
observation conversations with the
inviting partner, observes her while
working, and then uses questioning and
other communication skills to build
a coaching relationship to empower
her partner to reflect on her practices.
In addition, the coach teams with the
inviting partner to help her incorporate
EBP into her teaching or intervention
so that children and youth will learn
more effectively (Knight, 2009). These
processes contribute to the development
of intellectual capacity in schools
(Neufield & Roper, 2003) and early
intervention settings (Basu et al., 2010;
Peterson et al., 2007; Rush et al., 2010)
as professional knowledge is shared
to refine existing skills and focus on
the acquisition of new techniques.
Through coaching, educators learn to
work and think together about the
impact of their behavior on learner
achievement and outcomes (Showers,
2005). NPDC staff utilized coaching
processes to support training and technical
assistance (TA) providers who
in turn coached educators and early
intervention personnel with the goal
of fostering mentor and peer coaching
relationships that would continue after
the NPDC staff were no longer working
in the state.

Coaching generally consists of
three steps that occur on a scheduled
basis: pre-observation conference, observation,
and post-observation conference.
The pre-observation and post-
observation conferences generally last
15-to-20 minutes. The length of the
observation is based on the amount of
time necessary to take data and model
and/or observe practices that were
identified during the pre-observation
conference. The inviting partner, working
with the coach, selects a coaching
target to improve and/or a behavior to
change. During the pre-observation

Coaching generally consists of three steps that occur on a
scheduled basis: pre-observation conference, observation,
and post-observation conference � Each of these steps
plays an important role in ensuring successful outcomes
from the coaching process; none of these stand alone.

conference, the coach assists the inviting
partner in refining the target and
defining an observation plan, including
the method that will be used to collect
data and observe practices. The coach�s
role is to follow, as closely as possible,
the plan for observation that she
and the inviting partner agreed upon.
During the observation, the coach
must observe, model and/or collect
data in a manner that will allow for
the creation of a clear record that will
be discussed in the post-observation
discussion. Following an observation,
the coach provides feedback during the
post-observation conference according
to prearranged guidelines. Each of
these steps plays an important role in
ensuring successful outcomes from the
coaching process; none of these stand
alone. For example, omitting a pre-
observation conference may result in
the coach taking data or observing irrelevant
information. Failure to engage
in a post-observation conference will
prevent an inviting partner from engaging
in problem solving that may help
change the inviting partner�s behavior.

Three types of coaching relationships�
mentor coaching, peer coaching,
and reflective consultation are
introduced below.

Mentor Coaching

In mentor coaching, the coach shares
knowledge and experience with the
inviting partner to help him develop
or improve skills. The coach offers
guidance and suggestions taking an
active role in defining target behaviors,
as well as observational methods,
with the inviting partner during
the pre-observation conference. The
coach�s role is to follow, as closely as
possible, the plan for observation that
she and the inviting partner agreed to
and to maintain a clear record of the
observation in order to have a valuable
post-observation discussion. During
the post-observation conference, the
coach not only interprets data collected
during the observation, but also
may provide direction on methods to
further improve a coaching target or
suggest a new target. Even though the
mentor provides direction, the mentor/
inviting partner relationship should
not serve as means of evaluating an
inviting partner�s performance. Mentor
coach relationships within NPDC
were developed between TA providers,
state liaisons, or other experts in the
field as identified by the partners.

Peer Coaching

In peer coaching, the process is reciprocal;
each member of the pair coaches
the other, taking turns serving as the
inviting partner and coach. The coach�s
role is non-authoritarian. A good
coach serves as a guide introducing
questions that allow the inviting partner
to select and define a coaching target
and data collection method during
the pre-observation conference. As in
mentor coaching, the coach follows the
observation protocol described in the
pre-observation conference. During
the post-observation conference, the
coach offers nonjudgmental comments
and avoids providing suggestions to
assist the inviting partner in reflecting
on her skills. In the context of NPDC,
peer coaching partnerships formed between
various team members including
a teacher and a therapist, a general
and special education teacher, a teacher
and transition services representative,
and/or family members and a teacher.

In early intervention, the professional
may be joined by a mentor or peer
coach during a home or community-
based visit. There is a parallel process
whereby the early intervention professional
serves as a mentor or peer coach
to an inviting family member to support
them in learning to implement EBP
within daily routines and activities. More
information about this approach to coaching
is included in the companion document
on implementing EBP through coaching
practices in early intervention.

Reflective Consultation

Reflective consultation is a variation
on a coaching relationship that
may be used by an administrator or
supervisor in supporting a mentor or
peer coach. This process utilizes many
of the elements of peer to peer and
mentor coaching, but may not include
an onsite observation. A reflective
consultation session provides a TA
provider or mentor coach the opportunity
to reflect upon her experiences as
a coach and gain insights for improving
or changing aspects of her coaching
practices. This may be particularly
important when there are challenges
in the coaching relationship or when a
coach is newly learning coaching skills.
Questioning, reflective listening, and
an action plan are essential to this type
of coaching support (Rush, Shelden,
& Raab, 2008). These sessions would
typically occur between a coaching
sequence of pre-observation, observation,
and post-observation so that the
coach can reflect upon what occurred
during that sequence and address
challenges that occurred. Within the
NPDC, this type of reflective consul

tation occurred between the NPDC
staff member supporting a technical
assistance coach within a state. Also, it
was an effective method for a supervising
NPDC staff member to support
staff who were engaged in assisting
state teams in learning to implement
peer to peer and mentor coaching
practices within their training and
technical assistance activities.

Elements of Successful Coaching

The following items are essential to
coaching success: (a) trust and mutual
respect, (b) training, (c) willingness to
change, and (d) professional attitude.

Trust and Mutual Respect

A reasonable level of trust is built, in
part, by understanding which topics
people are comfortable discussing and
how to approach topics that may be
somewhat sensitive. By understanding
topic-comfort levels, coaches and
inviting partners can more easily relate
to each other. Trust between coaching
pairs occurs as a result of respecting
each other�s professional skills.
Partners discuss goals and targets in a
confidential and professional manner.

Trust and mutual respect are evident
between the coach and inviting
partner when they

� develop and share a consistent
terminology
� agree on location for pre- and
post-observation conferences
� listen actively, reflectively, and
empathetically
� express feelings honestly
� understand their partner�s level of
concern and comfort
� are open to exploring and
understanding each other�s
belief systems

Training

Organizational commitment to training
is imperative in creating an environment
that supports effective implementation
of coaching and the systemic
changes that sustain these practices
(Joyce & Showers, 2002; Fixen, 2009).
Training considerations include:

� Relevance�This professional
development vehicle should allow
educators to gain or perfect skills
that are shown to positively impact
learning by toddlers, children and
youth. That is, coaching content
should be based on educator
acquisition and use of EBP and
overall program improvement.
� Location�Coaching training
should be conducted at sites that
facilitate professional growth, including
homes, schools or nearby
college settings.
� Time�Coaching partners need
time to practice under optimal
conditions. The more practice
opportunities that are provided,
the more likely that coaching will
become habit. Partners need time
to observe and confer with each
other. It is helpful to build time for
coaching needs into typical work
day routines.
� Content�Coaching instruction
includes content on communication,
identifying target behaviors
and outcomes, implementing
evidence-based practices, data
collection methods and effective
instruction techniques.

Willingness to Change

Coaching is predicated on a willingness
to change and take risks. Inviting
partners must be willing to alter existing
behaviors or add new techniques to their
repertoires. Not only must they attempt
new skills, but ultimately they must
work to ensure that these behaviors are
mastered and maintained. Typically, this
includes a transitional period when the
inviting partner may feel clumsy or awkward
as the partners are working toward
mastery of new learning.

Professional Attitude

Coaching partners use coaching time
to improve their craft. Pre-observation
and post-observation conference
topics are relevant to changing behavior
to influence learner outcomes;
conferences do not focus on personal
information. Coaching pairs react
to each other on a professional level,
actively listening and responding to
coaching topics identified within the
coaching partnership.

Communication

Collaborations between a coach and
inviting partner require effective communication
skills. It is essential that
coaching partners learn to convey clear
expectations and feedback within partnerships
by using (a) open questions,
(b) leveling statements, and (c) communication
conventions. Communication
is impeded when either partner
engages in these types of communication
behaviors: anticipating, avoiding,
cross-examining, denying others�
reality, diagnosing, judging, lecturing,
moralizing, or teasing.

Open Questions

Open questions are invitations to respond
with an elaborated comment of
a listener�s choice. They elicit responses
beyond a yes or no or statement of
fact. When questions take a form that
encourages elaborated responses, it is
more likely that varied methods for
improving teacher performance will
emerge from discussion between partners
(Rush et al., 2008).

Open questions typically begin as
follows:

� Tell me about �
� How do you � ?
� What did you � ?

Questions are open if their wording
does not constrain the form of the
reply. Examples of open questions are
the following:

� What can you tell me about your
experience with your behavior management
system?
� How do you think the data recording
system is working?
� What happened when that behavior
occurred earlier?
� What did you do when your plan
didn�t work?

Questions are closed if their wording
implies that only a short answer
response is necessary. Questions that
begin with are, do, have, should, will,
would, or can invite only a yes or no
in response. Those that begin with
when, where, or who ask for a one or
two-word reply. Examples of closed
questions are the following:

� Would they behave better if you
used another behavior management
system?
� Are you satisfied with the data
recording system? Do you want to
change it?
� When did that behavior occur earlier?
� Are you sure you implemented your
plan right?

Leveling Statements

Leveling statements acknowledge that
two parties may have legitimate and
conflicting claims. Leveling statements
employ the following strategies:

� Acknowledgement of another�s
claims as valid,
� Assumption of other party�s
competence, and
� Desire for compromise or
negotiation.

Leveling is an appropriate communication
technique that can be
used if coaching pairs have different
opinions that are legitimate ideas or
complaints. Leveling statements serve
to clarify claims so parties can negotiate
and compromise without one getting
the better of the other. Leveling is
likely to result in a win-win outcome.

Conventions of Communication

Collaborative communication is
enhanced when communication
conventions for social and non-verbal
communication skills are effectively
applied to a coaching partnership. The
use of these conventions help partners
feel they have been listened to and
are understood. Table 1 lists the elements
of non-verbal skills and social
conventions that promote respectful,
engaging and dynamic communication
partnerships.

Potential Barriers to Coaching

Two potential barriers exist to
coaching: time and lack of administrator
support. Although both can
interact to impede coaching, each is
examined separately.

Time

Coaching consists of three steps: the
15- to 20-minute pre- and post-
observation conferences and observation
that occur on a scheduled basis.
Inviting partners and mentors who
engage in coaching must have scheduled
time to accommodate these steps.
In mentor and peer coaching in schools,
the inviting partner must have available
joint planning or released time allocated
by the administrator, to participate
in the pre- and post-observation
conferences. The second coaching step,
observation, requires that the coach
have time to observe when the inviting
partner is engaging in the targeted
behavior or outcome. It is important
that this scheduled time for coaching
become a part of the coaching pair�s
work routines. If coaching pairs do
not use scheduled time, it is likely that
other school or program activities may
take precedence over this type of staff
development. When coaching occurs in
a home environment, setting aside clear
times and expectations for how that
time will be used is critical to ensure
that coaching fits into the family�s
routines and activities so that the family
dynamic is not unnecessarily disrupted.

Lack of Administrator Support

Coaching is unlikely to succeed unless
district, school building, and early
intervention program administrators
recognize the importance of coaching
as an effective professional development
approach that has an impact on
learner outcomes and provide support
to the staff and families engaged in this
process. Administrators can provide
support in several ways, including (a)
arranging joint planning or release time,
as needed; (b) providing recognition of
coaches in meetings; and (c) respecting
confidentiality maintained by the
inviting partner and coach around the
coaching process and targets. Without
administrator support, educators may
view this type of staff development as
one more task unrelated to teaching
or intervention. Without administrative
support partners may not meet
frequently enough to allow the inviting
partner to practice new behaviors or
partners may not engage in coaching at
all. It is important for administrators to

Table 1.
Conventions of Communication

Nonverbal Skills

Attention
Cues

Focus on the speaker to the exclusion of other legitimate bids for notice. Attention is demonstrated when one partner speaks, the
other turns both body and face toward that partner, looking into the speaker�s eyes at intervals as long as the speaker continues.

Response

Cues

Are active listener behaviors that confirm interest in a speaker�s message. The listening partner alternates nodding agreement,
smiling, or using appropriate facial expressions as the speaking partner makes a succession of points.

Focus on

Content

Ensures understanding by questioning to determining that all information is clear. This helps the partners establish that all
facets of coaching targets, data collections, and procedural issues are clear.

Focus on

Feelings

Helps the coach listen to the inviting partner�s voice tone to determine if it matches with content. In addition, the coach also
looks at movement, posture, and facial expressions.

Social Conventions

Turn Taking

Let one speaker finish before the other starts without interrupting either by word or gesture.

Proximity

Space is at culturally determined intervals in which two or more people feel comfortable standing or sitting across from one
another or side by side.

Nonverbal

Encouragers

Are ways to indicate involvement and listening without speaking. Examples are nodding head, smiling, maintaining eye contact,
touching an arm, or patting a shoulder. Note taking is also a nonverbal encourager. Taking notes indicates to the speaker that
content is important enough to write down.

Verbal

Encouragers

Are brief responses that prompt the speaker to continue talking and convey interest? These include: �yeah,� �go on,� �really,�
�I understand, �right,� �uh-huh,� �yes,� and �I see.�

be aware of the potential barriers to
coaching. Thus, it is necessary that
coaches meet with administrators
to discuss coaching and brainstorm
methods to ensure its success.

To minimize the barriers of
administrative support and time, the
NPDC approach to professional development
included administrators
and other team members who could
support coaching-friendly environments
and the implementation of
EBP to improve learner outcomes.
Furthermore, training on coaching
was embedded throughout the professional
development provided by
NPDC, beginning with the Summer
Institute. See Chapter 3 for description
of NPDC program components.

Summary

Mentor and peer coaching offer
a means of targeted professional
development for practicing educators
and early interventionists. The
implementation of successful coaching
requires an understanding of the
complexities of coaching elements
including the (a) steps of the coaching
process, (b) elements of effective
coaching relationships, (c) effective
communication strategies, and (d)
barriers to coaching.

I can�t say enough as to how this partnership has truly transformed and encouraged
me professionally in my coaching skills! Overall I feel I can more effectively measure
and manage my coaching role with a feeling of more confidence and reassurance to
the staff. I am so appreciative of the modeling and the contributions of this research
and knowledge base.

Absolutely! I could write even more on how this process has shaped and transformed
me professionally, well... and personally as it�s helped manage the stress and anxiety
I sometimes feel by having a formal tool to work from that is evidence based, incremental
and very effective with direct support.

�Johanna Colson; MSEd., BCBA, Behavior Specialist for Culpeper Schools

Chapter 2

The Coaching Process:
The Model and Method

Overview

The coaching process consists of
three cyclical steps: pre-observation
conference, observation, and post-
observation conference. Within
the professional development and
technical assistance practices of the
NPDC, coaching processes facilitated
the inviting partner�s implementation
of the evidence-based practices
that had been selected to meet the
individual goals for a child or youth.
These goals are developed through
GAS, a process that ensures the goals
were measurable across a continuum
of steps leading to a targeted change
(Cardillo & Choate, 1994).

Coaching also supports a team
in addressing the strengths and areas
of growth identified in the APERS/
APERS � IT. Through the use of
individual child goals developed
through GAS, APERS/APERS-IT
reports and the NPDC EBP Modules,
there are ample opportunities
and resources for assisting professionals
in selecting targets for change
within a coaching partnership.

This chapter describes each of
these coaching activities including
(a) the inviting partner�s role, (b) the
coach�s role, and (c) the use of the
coaching log and how it is applied
within NPDC professional development
practices. For NPDC, coaching
activities were primarily carried out
during at least a minimum monthly,
onsite visit by a local, mentor coach
and supported by ongoing phone calls
and emails. In addition, an NPDC
staff member provided monthly,
reflective consultation to the mentor
coach as well as made periodic onsite
visits one to three times a year. The
reflective consultation relationship
was supported with ongoing email
and phone communication. Within
a program or school, peer coaching
occurred both intentionally and
organically as team members worked
together to support one another in
implementing EBP and improving
outcomes for children and youth.

Pre-observation Conference

Once the type of coaching has
been decided (e.g., mentor, peer
coaching), coaching partners can
hold the pre-observation conference
to establish the ground rules for the
inviting partner and coach to follow
during the observation. The pre-
observation may occur as a beginning
step to a monthly visit. In addition to
the monthly visit, additional preparation
for an observation may occur with
phone and/or email communication
in-between monthly visits. During this
coaching stage the target for change
and how the target is to be measured
are identified. Within the NPDC process,
targets were related to the processes
of implementing evidence-based
practices with fidelity and improving
environmental variables to support
a child�s learning and acquisition of
goals. If mentor coaching was the
preferred model, the coach will assume
an active role in either defining the
target for change or guiding the inviting
partner to identify a target. If peer
coaching is used, the inviting partner
defines the target that the coach
will observe in the inviting partner�s
classroom or program and how those
behaviors are to be documented.

Both the coach and inviting partner
may agree to use modeling during
the observation. Modeling allows the
inviting partner to actively observe the
implementation of an EBP and the
coach to provide in the moment feedback.
Modeling may be particularly
valuable during a home visit where
the early intervention coach supports
the family in implementing practices

throughout their daily routines and
activities. Similarly, the coach models
skills for teachers to encourage carry
over into daily lessons and activities.
The final activity of a pre-conference
is for the inviting partner and coach
to identify where the coach will leave
the data and coaching log so that the
inviting partner can review them before
the post-observation conference.

In both mentor and peer coaching
models, the inviting partner also
describes in detail the lesson or activity
to be observed and the etiquette for
the observer to follow (e.g., where to
sit in a classroom or family home).
The coach offers clarifying statements
to ensure that the targeted outcome
of the observation is documented
in a meaningful manner. That is, the
targeted outcome is defined and an
agreement is reached about how that
outcome is to be recorded so that the
information can be used to facilitate
learner engagement, skill acquisition
or refinement. For example, the
coach and inviting partner decide
which steps of a particular EBP will be
observed and recorded on the Implementation
Checklist for that EBP.
Decisions made during the pre-observation
conference are recorded on the
Coaching Log by the coach. (Appendix
A: Coaching Logs.)

Observation

During the observation, each member
of the coaching pair has specific
responsibilities. First, coaching partners
agree druing the pre-observation
meeting on the observation guidelines.
The coach is then responsible for
collecting the agreed-upon data and
completing the Observation portion
of the Coaching Log. (Appendix
A: Coaching Logs.) As previously
discussed, and if appropriate, the coach
may also model the targeted practice
for the inviting partner (e.g., show the
inviting partner how to implement an
aspect of an EBP and provide direct,
in the moment, feedback on the inviting
partner�s success and/or challenges
in implementing the targeted change.

Etiquette

Rules of common courtesy allow the
coach to enter the classroom, home
or other environment within which
the inviting partner is implementing

Table 2.
Responsibilities During
the Pre-observation Conference

Mentor
Coaching

Peer

Coaching

Activity

IP*

State the purpose of the lesson or activity.

Define the coaching target for change.

Identify the data recording system to be used during
the observation.

Operationalize desired instructional behavior.

Determine if modeling will be used during observation.

Establish mastery and maintenance criteria.

Establish etiquette.

Negotiate dates and times of observation and post-
observation conference.

Complete pre-observation conference section of the
Coaching Log.

Verify understanding of the lesson purpose, coaching
objective, and teacher behavior to be observed.

Confirm the recording method, and if it meets
the coaching target; otherwise negotiate another
method.

Negotiate where to deliver data after the
pre-observation conference.

Clarify etiquette.

Summarize the conference,

Confirm dates for observation and post-observation
conference.

*IP=Inviting Partner C=Coach

EBP and record data without disrupting
activities in the inviting partner�s
setting. Both the inviting partner
and coach have specific agendas and
predefined roles. Of particular importance
is preparing students, young
children, family members and other
professionals for the coach�s participation.
Students, children and family
members need to know that the coach
will be observing the inviting partner,
not them. Table 3 includes the
rules of etiquette to help the coach in
observing and collecting data.

Post-observation Conference

The post-observation conference
serves as both ending and beginning
points. It concludes the coaching session
because it completes the cycle of
pre-observation conference, observation,
and post-observation conference.
This phase, however, also begins the
next action part of the coaching process
because it is during this conference
that the inviting partner develops
a plan of action to improve future instruction
or intervention. This plan will
be implemented and its effects measured
during the next observation. The
Coaching Log is completed during the
post-observation conference. The post-
observation conference should occur as
soon after the observation as possible.

The post-observation conference
provides (a) the inviting partner with
someone with whom to discuss new
ideas, (b) interactions to promote
reflection and change improvements,
and (c) professional interchange between
partners. These types of communication
interactions support the
inviting partner to reflect upon their
experiences and plan for future action.
They also provide the coach with information
to most effectively support
an inviting partner.

Coaching partners discuss the data
and observation notes as professionals.
If the mentoring model of coaching is
used, the coach summarizes and interprets
the data while soliciting self-
evaluative statements from the inviting
partner. In addition, the coach offers
feedback and suggestions. Evaluation
of the inviting partner�s use of the
EBP or other targeted change may
shape future coaching targets. In peer
coaching, the coach delivers the data
to the inviting partner and explains
the information using effective communication
methods, such as open
questions and leveling statements
without giving evaluative or interpre

Table 3.

Rules of Etiquette
for Inviting Partner and Coach

Rules of Etiquette
for Inviting Partner

Rules of Etiquette
for Coach

Provide a location where the coach
can observe the targeted practice with
minimum disruption to the setting (e.g.
classroom, home).

Observe from the location identified by the
inviting partner and be respectful of the environment.
Do not interrupt the observation
with calls, texts or emails.

Prepare students, young children, parents
and other professionals for the coach�s
arrival, including a plan to minimize
interaction with the coach.

Follow agreed upon protocol for how to
introduce yourself and respond if a student,
young child or family member attempts to
interact with the coach.

Prepare materials and space for agreed
upon data collection.

Collect only agreed upon data, if engaging in
peer coaching.

Begin the lesson at the agreed upon
time.

Arrive and leave at the agreed upon time.

Limit the inclusion of the coach in the
lesson or activity, except where modeling
is involved.

Do not participate in the lesson or activity if
not agreed upon in advance.

As agreed upon, observe demonstrations
or modeling of implementation of EBP
and participate as planned.

As agreed upon, demonstrate or model an
aspect of an EBP or other targeted change.

Signal the coach to leave if it becomes
apparent that the lesson or activity will
not yield helpful information.

As agreed upon, leave when signaled that
the activity will not yield helpful information.

tive statements. The coach follows the
inviting partner�s lead in discussing the
lesson or activity, elicits self-evaluative
statements with open questions,
and prompts the inviting partner to
develop a plan of action for the next
coaching session. If the inviting partner
wants suggestions about improving
instruction or intervention, the coach
guides the inviting partner toward
answers by asking questions such as
whether (a) the inviting partner has
encountered a similar situation and,
if so, how it was handled; or (b) the
inviting partner may have a resource
material or person available. The coach,
without acting as an expert, leads the
inviting partner to suggest ways to
improve instruction.

In an early intervention setting,
the inviting partner may want to focus
on the partnership with the parent or
other family members in implementing
the targeted change as well as the
content of the EBP. While the aim is
to support the parent or other family
members in implementing the EBP, it
is also important to address how the
inviting partner brings her knowledge
and experience with EBP to the parent
partnership.

When presenting the data and notes
from observation to the inviting partner,
the coach might say the following:

� �You said that you were displeased
about how often you provided
reinforcement. Could you explain
what you meant by that?�
� �Tell me about a similar situation
you�ve encountered? Tell me how
you handled that situation?�
� �I wonder if you recall any articles or
reports by other teachers about ways
to handle that specific situation.�
� �I noticed that you were uncertain
about when to model for the
parent and when to let the parent
explore how to implement the
practice on her own.�

Table 4 provides an overview of
the responsibilities of the inviting
partner and coach during peer coaching
and mentor coaching.

Coaching Log

The Coaching Log (Appendix A)
serves as a record of the coaching
relationship. This one-page document
records all of the aspects of the
pre-observation conference, observation,
and post-observation conference
conducted by a coaching partner. The
log is completed by the coach and is
maintained by the inviting partner as
a confidential record of his progress
toward coaching targets. The Coaching
Log was integrated into the NPDC
technical assistance documentation
and was designed to reflect NPDC
materials and processes, including data
from the Implementation Checklists
and the GAS established for targeted
outcomes for participating learners.
NPDC also created a Reflective
Consultation Log (Appendix A) to
record the reflective coaching conversation
that occurred between an NPDC
staff member and a mentor coach. The
Reflective Consultation Log includes
space to note the topic of interest, alternatives
discussed, actions steps planned
and supports needed for follow up.

Summary

Overall, the coaching process facilitates
professional development for
educational professionals and parents.
The pre-observation, observation, and
post-observation conferences are vehicles
by which coaching participants
actively seek self-improvement.

Table 4.
Responsibilities during the
Post-observation Conference

Mentor
Coaching

Peer

Coaching

Activity

Review data collected by the coach.

Make evaluative statements based on data.

Make statements regarding improvement.

Request advice from coach.

Determine future plans.

Solicit future plans through reflection and questioning.

Chapter 3

Coaching Practices,
Implementation
Science and the
National Professional
Development Center
on Autism Spectrum
Disorders

As mentioned throughout
Chapters 1 and 2,
elements of coaching
have been integrated
throughout many aspects
of the professional development
and technical assistance provided by
NPDC to partnering states. Coaching
relationships and practices were operationalized
as relevant for the stage of
implementation, beginning with the
initial state application process and
planning with an Interagency Autism
Planning Group and continuing
throughout project implementation
and evaluation. This chapter describes
in more detail how NPDC coaching
activities fit into the systems change
framework of implementation science
and six non-linear stages: exploration,
installation, initial implementation,
full implementation, innovation, and
sustainability (Fixsen, 2009; Metz &
Bartley, 2012).

Readiness for Change

Prior to involvement in the NPDC on
ASD, applying states made a determination
regarding their �readiness for
change� as recommended by Fixsen et
al. (2008). The states used the application
process to identify their capacity
(e.g., strengths, weaknesses, and
potential opportunities) and the teams
of educators, families, and administrators
that were ready to invest in
and participate in the activities of the
NPDC.

The lead state applicant, in conjunction
with the NPDC staff, was
accountable for insuring that they
created an environment that would
nurture and sustain meaningful change
for the existing system of educational
services and supports for children and
youth with ASD.

Exploration

The activities of the Interagency Autism
Planning Group (IAPG) illustrate
the NPDC and state partnership
in the stage of exploration. This stage
of implementation change identifies a
need, and explores whether implementation
is feasible and what additional
program development or problem
solving may be needed before committing
to further implementation (Fixsen
et al., 2009; Metz & Bartley, 2012).

IAPG Meeting

During the IAPG meeting, state level
leaders worked with NPDC staff to
develop a two-year strategic plan outlining
specific goals for a comprehensive
professional development process,
including coaching, to support the
implementation of EBP. In addition,
the plan included statewide goals for a
sustainable system that would promote
change and continue beyond the end
of the NPDC formal partnership.
Statewide resources were highlighted,
specific action plans were developed,
and benchmarks were set to monitor
progress. During the IAPG meeting,
the NPDC coaching manual and
philosophy were shared with state level
leaders and training teams. In addition,
expectations for model site participation
included the identification of
local TA providers who would serve as
coaches to the local program team.

Installation

Once needs were identified and
possible interventions explored,
the state, in conjunction with the
NPDC, establishes resources needed
to implement the EBP and prepares
participants. This is considered the
installation phase (Fixsen, 2009; Metz
& Bartley, 2012).

Online Course

Installation began with an 8-session
online course, Foundations for Autism
Spectrum Disorders, which was
developed as an up-to-date source of
information about ASD. The sessions
cover content on characteristics of
ASD, screening and assessment of
ASD, factors affecting learning and
development, and promoting positive
and reducing interfering behaviors
among others. All model site team
members and TA providers/coaches
were required to complete the course
prior to initiating work with the
NPDC in classroom or home settings.
To support the integration and
application of the online content,
NPDC staff created learning opportunities
for NPDC participants
to reflect on online course content;
then NPDC staff gave feedback on
the content and responded to the
reflections. This activity was enhanced
through reflective consultation with
state leads to support them in facilitating
such discussions in the future.

Summer Institute

During the intensive, three to five day,
summer institutes, formal training
included key elements of the coaching
process. The process was taught
using small group activities, role play
and explicit instruction in the NPDC
approach to coaching. In addition,
coaching activities were embedded in
presentations on EBP. For example,
during these presentations two or more
NPDC staff trainers modeled elements
of the coaching process, including the
pre-observation planning conference,
inviting partner input, defining the
coach�s role, the post-observation conference
and developing a coaching log.
In addition, independent activities were
included in the coaching manual as a
resource for teams to begin the coaching
process when they returned to their
school sites in the fall.

Initial Implementation

Installation is followed by initial
implementation of the intervention.
States and their model sites moved
into this phase of change by beginning
to use the knowledge and skills learned
through the NPDC professional development
process (i.e., online course,
Summer Institute) with support from
their designated coaches and the
larger interagency team. The activities
initiated during the initial implementation
were essential to the work that
was conducted throughout the NPDC
processes and the coaching relationships
that were developed to implement
EPB to fidelity. This included a
focus on data collection and data driven
decision making based on information
from Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS),
APERS/APERS-IT, and EBP Implementation
Checklists included in the
online Internet Modules.

Goal Attainment Scaling

GAS is a system used by NPDC to
assess the amount of progress learners
with ASD made on select goals over
an academic year (Cardillo & Choate,
1994). The development of these
goals for each of the targeted learners
was one of the first activities that a
coach and model site team engaged in
together, establishing baseline data and
beginning the relationships that would
inform the remainder of the NPDC
experience. In addition, families were
included in this phase of implementation
by helping to select priority goals
for their child.

Autism Program
Environment Rating Scale

The APERS is an environmental
rating tool that was used to rate both
inclusive and self-contained programs
for learners with ASD at the preschool,
elementary, middle, and high

school levels. The NPDC used the
APERS to measure baseline program
quality at the beginning of the academic
year (early in the fall) or toward the
end of the previous academic year (late
in the spring). The APERS was used
again in the spring as a post-measure
to measure change in program quality.
This tool was developed to assess
program quality for family participation,
interdisciplinary teaming and
other variables in the settings where a
child or youth spends time including
classroom environment, structure and
schedule, classroom climate, curriculum
and instruction, communication, social
relationships, independence, functional
behavior and assessment practices. The
APERS-IT is an adaptation of the
APERS for early intervention settings,
including the home.

During the administration of the
APERS, NPDC staff included elements
of the coaching process when
providing feedback to site teams and
state TA providers. This included techniques
for sharing APERS feedback
to site level teams and working with
trainers to develop improvement plans
based on APERS identified areas
of need to improve program quality.
APERS� data was used continuously
throughout the coaching relationships
as a source of data for pre-observation,
observation and post-observation
conferences. Following the administration
of the APERS, TA teams were
guided on how to utilize the coaching
process to begin implementation of
EBP, completion and monitoring of
GAS and conducting monthly technical
assistance visits (i.e., selecting goals
and targets, measurable descriptions of
behavior, ongoing data collection).

Evidence Based Practice
Internet Learning Modules.

The EBP learning modules are a
dynamic instructional tool for educators
and parents to learn about each of
the 24 practices identified by NPCD.
Each module contains an overview of
the practice, steps for implementing
the practice, implementation checklists,
the evidence base for the practice,
optional data sheets, video and case
study examples, frequently asked questions,
a glossary of terms, discussion
questions, suggested activities, and a
pre- and post- module assessment.
http://www.autisminternetmodules.org/.
Coaching partnerships supported the
inviting partner in developing a deeper
understanding of a particular EBP
and the steps required to implement
that practice to fidelity. The Step-by-
Step Instructions and Implementation
Checklists were used to help the
coaching partners identify the focus
of an observation during a pre-conference
planning session. The debriefing
that occurred during a post-observation
conference helped the inviting
partner refine her implementation of a
particular EBP.

Monthly Technical Assistance
Calls

Coaching practices were embedded in
the monthly contacts between NPDC
team members and state TA providers
and coaches. During these routine
calls, NPDC staff modeled coaching
through use of reflective consultation
focused on supporting the coach�s
role with the model site team. Activities
included establishing discussion
points, reviewing progress on implementation
plans, addressing challenges,
monitoring data, and establishing
topics for future calls. Sometimes,
video examples were reviewed during
monthly technical assistance calls to
demonstrate progress or challenges in
implementation of EBP. These reflective
conversations were recorded on
the Reflective Consultation Logs.

Coaching Resources for
NPDC Teams

Resources to assist in applying the
NPDC coaching approach are available
on the NPDC website http://
autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/ and listed
in Appendix B: Coaching Manual
Guidelines and Professional Development
Materials. This includes the
Coaching Manual as well as supporting
materials and forms. The monthly
calls to site teams were also used to
identify target topics for the Community
of Practice (CoP) forums, and
promote postings related to coaching
on the CoP website. The CoP was
designed to encourage networking,
discussion and reflection across sites
and states.

Full Implementation,
Innovation, and Sustainability

The NPDC�s mission placed an
emphasis on sustainability. The project
facilitated the spread of practices and
ongoing, professional development
across the state. The goal was to have
teams move toward advancing their
knowledge and creating a sustainable
system. This included the state teams
working toward school wide expansion
of the model sites and into other
parts of the state. Prior year model
site teams provided peer support to
expansion sites through professional

development opportunities and peer
coaching. This expansion and the ongoing
partnerships that were promoted
encompass the innovation and sustainability
phases of the Fixsen (2009)
implementation model.

Following the first year with
NPDC these activities cycled through
a second year with the first cohort sites
and the expansion sites. During this
period, year one sites shared their experiences
and knowledge with cohort
two sites during the Summer Institutes
and cross-site visits; plus the CoP
forum was available for cross-site and
cross-state networking. Sustainability
occurred as the states continued with
expansion. At the end of the second
year, each state reviewed their IAPG
Plan to capture and revise their plans
for sustainability of NPDC elements,
including coaching practices, beyond
the end of their formal partnership
with NPDC.

Summary

This process provides a mechanism
for sustained practice. Participants
following this process engage in
ongoing and meaningful implementation
of EBP for students with ASD
in an integrated system that supports
this endeavor.

References

Basu, S., Salisbury, C. L., & Thorkildsen, T. A. (2010). Measuring collaborative consultation
practices in natural environments, Journal of Early Intervention, 32(2), 127- 150.

Cardillo, J. E., & Choate, R. O. (1994). Illustrations of goal setting. In T. Kiresuk, A.
Smith, & J. Cardillo, (Eds.). Goal attainment scaling: Applications, theory, and measurement
(pp. 15-37). Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Hamby, D. W. (2010). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness
of four adult learning methods and strategies. International Journal of Continuing
Education and Lifelong Learning, 3(1), 91-112.

Gentry, L. B., Denton, C. A., & Kurz, T. (2008). Technology-based mentoring provided
to teachers: A synthesis of the literature. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,
16(3), 339-373.

Fixsen, D. L., & Blas�, K. A. (2008). Drivers framework. Chapel Hill: The University of
North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The National
Implementation Research Network.

Fixsen, D. (2009). National Implementation Research Network: Consultation and
Coaching. Retrieved on April 12, 2010 from: http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~NIRN/
implementation/07/07a3_consandcoac.cfm

Fixsen, D. L., Blas�, K. A., Naoom, S. F., & Wallace, F. (2009). Core implementation
components. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 531-540.

Knight, J. (2009). Coaching: The key to translating research into practice lies in continuous,
job-embedded learning with ongoing support. Journal of Staff Development,
30(1), 18-22.

Metz, A., & Bartley. L. (2012). Active implementation frameworks for program success:
How to use implementation science to improve outcomes for children. Zero to Three,
32(4), 11-18.

Neufield, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A strategy for development instructional
capacity. Washington, DC: Education Matters Inc.

Peterson, C. A., Luze, G. J., Eshbaugh, E. M., Jeon, H.-J., & Kantz, K. R. (2007).
Enhancing parent-child interactions through home visiting: Promising practice or
unfulfilled promise? Journal of Early Intervention, 29(2), 119-140.

Rush, D., & Shelden, M. (2011). The early childhood coaching handbook. Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.

Rush, D., Shelden, M., & Raab, L. (2008). A framework for reflective questioning when
using a coaching interaction style. Casetools, 4(1), 1-7. Retrieved on April 12, 2010
from http://www.fippcase.org/casetools/casetool_vol4_no1.pdf

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Scott, T. M., & Martinek, G. (2006). Coaching positive behavior support in school settings:
Tactics and data-based decision making. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
8(3), 165-173.

Zwart, R. C., Wubbels, T., Bergen, T., & Bolhuis, S. (2009). Which characteristics of a
reciprocal peer coaching context affect teacher learning as perceived by teachers and
their students? Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 243-257.

Appendices

Appendix A

Coaching Logs

/Activity

Coaching Log for Reflective Consultation Conference

Inviting Partner: Coach:

Aspect of EBP addressed (e.g., selection, implementation, data collection, evaluation):

Reflective Consultation Conference

Date: Time: Length:

Topic or Concern: ________________________________________________

Supporting Information (including examples of what has occurred):

Check one

q New Topic

q Revisited Topic

If revisited, actions from
previous conference:

Alternatives Discussed:

Notes

Action Steps for Inviting Partner:

Supports Needed from Coach between Conference Sessions:

Next Meeting Date: ____ Time: ____

Appendix B

Guidelines and
Activities for
Professional
Development

The NPDC Coaching
Manual and related
materials were developed
to support technical
assistance (TA)
providers and educational professionals
as they work together to effectively
implement evidence-based practices
in their settings.

Materials available for self-directed
learning or directed professional
development include:

� Coaching manual
� PowerPoint� presentation with
and without narration
� 2 videos of pre-observation,
observation and post-observation
conferences
� 3 videos of reflective consultation
� 2 videos of students in classrooms
for use in professional development
activities

Guidelines

NPDC staff shared the coaching
manual and PowerPoint� presentation
with TA providers before they
begin their work at model and expansion
sites. One option for introducing
TA providers to the manual and
PowerPoint� was during the Summer
Institute. In addition, state partners accessed
to the manual and presentation
on the state page of the NPDC website.
These materials give TA providers
self-directed, learning opportunities
with as much NPDC support as is
necessary for each TA provider. All
coaching materials were then shared
with inviting partners to ensure that
they were comfortable with their roles
and the process of coaching, as well as
preparing them to take on the role of
coaching in their schools and beyond.

The process of coaching, through
the use of the manual, was revisited
as needed during monthly check-ins
with TA providers and during site
visits with TA providers and NPDC
staff. During these times, NPDC staff
sought to understand the coaching
relationship between TA providers and
inviting partners. Further, NPDC staff
explicitly asked TA providers if there
are elements of the coaching process
they need support with and provide
that support to the greatest extent
possible.

Finally, supporting TA providers
is a form of reflective consultation and,
in some instances, mentor coaching.
Thus, NPDC staff familiarized themselves
with their own coaching/consultation
strengths and areas of growth
and sought support as needed.

Suggestions for Professional
Development Activities

The following pages include examples
of activities that can be conducted
one-on-one, in small group, and
with larger groups for the purpose of
supporting TA providers and school
professionals in learning the elements
and skills involved in coaching. These
activities should be modified to meet
the specific needs of the participants.

ACTIVITY I�Free Writing on Being Coached/Coaching

Purpose

To connect participants to the upcoming content on coaching through their
own knowledge and experience of coaching

When to Use

Prior to delivering content on coaching

Participants

Participants work as individuals

Materials

Paper, pen/pencil, handout with questions

Process

1. Ask participants to reflect on their experience of being coached whether that
occurred formally or informally (examples: coaching from mentor, coaching
from supervisor, coaching from a peer).

2. Give participants about 5-10 minutes to reflect on the following issues.

a. Briefly describe the coaching experience: who?, what?, where?, how?

b. What characteristics of the relationship between you and the coach stand
out to you?

c. What aspects of the coaching were particularly helpful?

d. What aspects of the coaching, if any, seemed to hinder your progress?

e. What elements of your experience will you be bringing into your current
role (as coach, inviting partner, etc)?

3. Large group debrief

a. Ask individuals to share thoughts for questions a-e while writing these
down on flip chart.

b. Discuss in groups the commonalities.

c. Discuss how these commonalities relate to the upcoming content on
coaching.

d. Return to these lists as elements come up during the rest of the discussion
and activities on coaching.

ACTIVITY II�Role-play in a Fish Bowl

Purpose

For participants to (a) practice coaching, being coached, and evaluating the
coaching; (b) recognize the different aspects of the coaching process; and/or
(c) increase their comfort with using the coaching log

When to Use

After a discussion of each of the content areas: pre-observation conference,
observation, and post-observation conference. These can be repeated so that
participants have an opportunity to role-play from each perspective if time
allows

Participants

Each participant takes one role: coach, inviting partner, or observer. Participants
role play from each perspective during three rounds.

Materials

Videos of up to three examples of coaching, copy of coaching log for each participant,
list of responsibilities for each participant

Process

1. Bring together triads of participants and ask them to choose roles for the first
round (1 coach, 1 inviting partner, 1 observer).

2. Whole group watches video of student in preparation for role-play.

3. Provide a few minutes for participants to write down notes after video.

4. Pre-observation Instructions: instruct teams to role-play a pre-observation
conference with the idea that the student video they saw would be the
observation.

a. Coaches take the role of coach, including completing the coaching log
with the inviting partner.

b. Inviting partner take the role of teacher, including completing out the
coaching log with the coach.

c. Observer will use the table, Responsibilities During the Pre-observation
Conference, on which to take notes:

i. Responsibilities covered

ii. Responsibilities missed

iii. Elements that are positive or interesting in the conversation to share
with the coach and inviting partner.

d. Provide groups approximately 10 minutes to role play.

e. Debrief:

i. Give triads a few minutes to share their experiences and observations

ii. Large group triads:

(1) Ask coaches: What did you find most challenging? How did
you/might you deal with those challenges?

(2) Ask inviting partners: What did you find most helpful?

(3) Ask observers: From what you saw, what was most critical for a
successful session?

5. Post-observation conference Instructions: re-watch the student video after
providing content on observations and post-observation conference.

a. Ask participants to change roles.

i. Coach to become observer.

ii. Inviting partner to become coach.

iii. Observer to become inviting partner.

b. Coaches to take the role of coach including filling out the coaching log
with the inviting partner.

c. Inviting partner to take the role of educator including filling out the
coaching log with the coach.

d. Observer to use the Responsibilities During the Post-observation Conference
to take notes on:

i. Responsibilities covered.

ii. Responsibilities missed.

iii. Elements that are positive or interesting in the conversation to share
with the coach and inviting partner.

e. Give groups about 10 min to role play.

f. Debrief:

i. Give triads a few minutes to share their experiences and observations.

ii. Large group triads:

(1) Ask coaches: What did you find most challenging?
How did you/might you deal with those challenges?

(2) Ask inviting partners: What did you find most helpful?

(3) Ask observers: From what you saw, what was most critical for a
successful session?

ACTIVITY III�Using the Coaching Log

Purpose

For participants to gain awareness of the coaching log elements and how to fill
them in

When to Use

After discussion on coaching log

Participants

All participants practice as individuals in a large group. Alternately, small groups,
dyads, triads, etc. can work on one coaching log together.

Materials

Coaching log handouts pre-filled in for video; video of coach and inviting partner
during pre-observation

Process

1. Hand out coaching logs that are pre-filled to some extent with important
discussed information left blank.

2. Watch video.

3. After watching video instruct participants time to fill in the missing information
on the coaching log.

4. Option: After giving participants a few minutes have participants work in
small groups/dyads, triads filling in any gaps.

5. Debrief: Discuss in large group any questions participants have.

ACTIVITY IV�Open/Closed Questions

Purpose

For participants to recognize the impact of open ended questions

When to Use

During discussion of communication competencies of coaches

Participants

All participants in large group

Materials

Flip chart paper and pen

Process

1. Begin by telling participants that you will start a true story about yourself and
they will have an opportunity to ask questions in order to learn more.

2. Begin a story about yourself that would be of interest for others to learn more
and would provide for opportunities to ask questions. Examples of one person�s
beginning: �Once, I was walking with my family by the river and I fell
through the bridge.�

3. Ask participants what else they would like to know about the story.

4. Write their questions on a piece of paper.

5. When time/questions have been exhausted:

a. Mark all of the yes/no questions and respond to them.

b. Mark the open ended questions and respond to them

c. Ask participants the difference in information they received from the two
levels of questions.

ACTIVITY V�Open/Closed Questions in Coaching Context

Purpose

For participants to recognize the impact of open ended questions

When to Use

During discussion of communication competencies of coaches

Participants

All participants in large group

Materials

Video of coaching pre-observation conference or post-observation conference

Process

1. Watch video of coaching pre-observation or post-observation.

2. Watch clips of video rich with questions.

a. Review with participants which questions elicited what level of
information from inviting partner.

b. For examples of closed questions, ask participants to suggest alternate
questions.

ACTIVITY VI�Critiquing the Coaching Process

Purpose

For participants to practice observing and identifying the various elements of
the coaching process

When to Use

After providing much of the content on coaching process

Participants

Participants work in small groups

Materials

Video of coaching process and handouts with list of the elements of the
coaching process

Process

1. Provide handouts to participants.

2. Watch video.

3. Ask participants to jot down which elements were or were not present. Also,
ask participants if present elements could be improved upon and how.

4. Review in large group.

ACTIVITY VII�Coach/Inviting Partner Responsibilities

Purpose

For participants to: recognize the different responsibilities of a coach and inviting
partner during pre-observation, observation and post-observation; and
recognize the timeline during pre- and post-observation conferences.

When to Use

After discussing the roles and responsibilities of coaching and inviting partners
during mentor coaching and peer coaching

Participants

Participants work in small groups

Materials

Strips of paper and tape�each strip of paper has �responsibility� printed for
either mentor or peer coaching and either inviting partner or coach.

Process

1. Provide groups with strips of paper so that roles for coach and roles for inviting
partner are mixed up.

2. Instruct groups to post the strips of paper on wall according to coach or
inviting partner. Ask groups to list responsibilities as much as possible on a
timeline (what comes first, second and so on) with an understanding that
some responsibilities are necessary throughout the entire conference.

3. Alternately, give some groups responsibilities during mentor coaching and
others responsibilities during peer coaching. In debrief, review the
differences.

4. Alternately (especially if time is limited), give some groups responsibilities for
pre-observation conference, others for observation and others for
post-observation conference. Review differences as a large group.

ACTIVITY VIII�TA Providers Self-Coaching

Purpose

For TA providers to reflect on what they have learned in the content on
coaching and formulate a plan to address these competencies in their work

When to use

At the end of presentation on coaching for TA providers

Participants

Participants work individually and in dyads

Materials

Handouts with reflection questions�

Sentence stems:

1. In my role as a coach, it will be important for me to bring the following
to the coach/inviting partner relationship �

2. I am confident that as a coach I �

3. I am concerned about �

4. I will address these concerns by �

5. When I come across challenges as a coach, I will seek support in �

Process

1. Provide TA providers with handouts.

2. Give TA providers 10�15 minutes to reflect on the questions and write their
responses.

3. Ask TA providers to meet in pairs to discuss their plans and to coach each
other by asking opened questions that guide the other person towards an
understanding of their strengths, needs, and support structure.

Appendix C

The Donovan Family
Case Study:

Guidance and Coaching on
Evidence-based Practices for
Infants and Toddlers with ASD

The Donovan family
case study was
developed through
a collaboration between
the National
Professional Development Center on
Autism Spectrum Disorders (NPDC)
and The Family, Infant and Preschool
Program (FIPP) Center for the Advanced
Study of Excellence (CASE) in
Early Childhood and Family Support
Practices, M�Lisa Shelden, P.T., Ph.D,
Director and Dathan Rush, Ed.D.,
C.C.C.-S.L.P. Associate Director
(http://www.fipp.org/programs/earlyIntervention.
html). The purpose of this
case study is to describe the coaching
process in the context of early intervention
and to outline two parallel
coaching processes.

This case study provides a description
of how an early intervention
provider, Jillian, supports the Donovan
family through coaching on the
use of evidence-based practices with
their two-year-old son, Joey, who
has autism. As the early intervention
provider works with the parents, she
receives coaching support from both
her supervisor, in the form of program-
wide and individualized supervision,
and from an experienced peer
coach. Both the coaching of the family
and the provider coaching processes
occur in a three stage cycle outlined in
the NPDC coaching manual, Guidance
and Coaching for the Implementation
of Evidence-based practices for Children
and Youth with Autism Spectrum
Disorders (Kucharczyk, S., Shaw, E.,
Smith Myles, B., Sullivan, L., Szidon,
K., and Tuchman-Ginsberg, L.,
2012). (http://autismpdc.fpg.unc.
edu/coaching-resources) These stages
are: pre-observation, observation, and
post-observation. For the purposes of
this case study, pre-observation includes
stating the purpose, defining the target
for change, and identifying how the target
will be observed and data captured;
observation includes modeling and action
by the coach and inviting partners
(i.e., parents); and post-observation
includes reflection, feedback, and evaluation.
This framework helps to integrate
the NPDC coaching process with the
coaching approach to teaming in early
intervention supported by FIPP.

The case study is structured
chronologically. It describes the work
the Donovan family and the early
interventionists do together. First, is a
description of the program to provide
context. Then the steps of the early
intervention process are outlined:
Step 1.) information gathering, Step
2.) outcome planning, Step 3.) intervention
planning, Step 4.) implementation
and ongoing assessment, and
Step 5) evaluation and modification of
the outcomes and intervention.

The Clarksville
Early Intervention Program

The Clarksville Early Intervention
Program (EI Program) is situated in
an urban area, which also provides
services to nearby rural communities.
The program serves families through
home visits and in consultation with
child care settings when relevant. A
primary early intervention provider
delivers services in collaboration with
team members from other disciplines
and the family. The team, including
the primary provider and the other
members of the team meet once a

week for 1� hours to discuss issues related
to their work which includes but
isn�t limited to: brainstorming about
resources for families, families whose
dynamics puzzle or challenge them,
and questions related to implementation
and effectiveness of interventions
for children.

The primary provider for Joey�s
family, Jillian, has been working for
the EI Program for the last two years.
Previously, she worked for another
agency in a different city for two years.
Jillian completed her bachelor�s degree
in early childhood education. While
in college she took a number of special
education classes. She holds an Infant,
Toddler, and Family Specialist Certification
through her state�s early intervention
agency due to her education,
experience, and continuing professional
development credits. Jillian shares
that she further developed her skills
in using interventions for children
with special needs on the job. The EI
Program provides professional development
throughout the year on topics
that emerge as important through
team discussions. Additionally, the EI
Program director supervises all staff
and facilitates the weekly team meetings
discussed previously. During these
times, Jillian brainstorms intervention
ideas with her supervisor, as well as
discusses areas of concern.

Program Quality

Last year, the Clarksville EI Program
partnered with technical assistance
providers from a regional University�s
early intervention support program. In
order to inform the beginning of their
coaching work with the EI team, the
University support program suggested
that the EI Program take part in
Autism Program Environment Rating
Scale � Infants & Toddlers (APERS-
IT) in order to systematically assess
the program�s core strengths and
areas requiring priority attention. The
APERS-IT is composed of components
which, as a whole, illustrate
quality early intervention practices
for infants and toddlers with autism.
These components are in the following
domains: physical environment,
activity and daily routines, positive
relationships, communication, intervention
(e.g., imitation, joint attention,
play), behavior, coaching teaming, and
assessment and IFSP development.
APERS-IT data are collected through
observations, interviews, and record
reviews. APERS-IT data are used
to inform the collaborating partners
about areas of strength and areas that
they might want to target for growth.

To complete the APERS-IT,
observations were conducted of two
interventionists during one home
visit each. One interventionist was
also a service coordinator; the other
was a speech-language pathologist.
Interviews were conducted with the
director of the program, parents and
interventionists from both home visits.
The Individualized Family Service
Plans (IFSP) for both families observed,
were reviewed along with other
relevant records.

The APERS-IT revealed that
two of the program�s strengths were
teaming and a strong foundation in
evidence-based practices for children
with autism with a specialization in
practices focusing on communication
development. Teaming was evident in
the weekly meetings during which individual
practitioners have the opportunity
to gain insight into each other�s
work and brainstorm possible responses
to specific challenges. In addition,
through their weekly meetings the
team has the opportunity to recognize
specific needs that require attention
from the program as a system (e.g.,
difficultly communicating with other
agencies, parents needing information
on transition).

Following the review of the
APERS-IT findings and summary,
technical assistance providers and
the program coordinator developed a
list of the EI Program�s priority areas
which required improvement and
attention. These included: systematizing
data collected by providers and
supporting families in collecting and
using data, ensuring that providers
implement evidence-based practices to
fidelity, and further developing coaching
processes.

Up to this point, providers across
the program understood their role as
being experts in child development
for infants and toddlers with disabilities/
developmental delays, including
autism. Most of their work in the
home was spent with the child while
the parent often sat close by watching.
The technical assistance providers
and program director wanted to help
the early intervention team members
shift their roles so that the program
practices more fully engaged families.
The program director and technical
assistance providers developed a professional
development plan for coaching
providers so that they learned to
partner with families to coach them in
learning to implement evidence-based
practices.

This professional development
plan included ensuring that providers
were confident in their own use of specific
EBP. The team of providers and
families chose specific EBP relevant
for each child. Providers gathered
resources such as the Learning Modules
on the Autism Spectrum Disorders
(ASD) Toddler Initiative website
(http://asdtoddler.fpg.unc.edu/) and
Autism Internet Modules on the
OCALI website (http://www.autisminternetmodules.
org/) and briefs
and implementation checklists on the
NPDC website (http://autismpdc.
fpg.unc.edu/content/briefs). In addition
to self-study, technical
assistance providers
observed home visits (in
person or through video)
and coached providers on
their work with families
at least once a month.
Providers with extensive
family coaching experience
were paired with less
experienced providers so
that they could use a peer
coaching model.

The Donovan Family

The Clarksville EI
Program continued to
develop its strengths and
attend to areas needing
growth as it began to
work with the Donovan
family. Mike, Pat and
their two-year old son
Joey recently moved to
a farm within the EI
program�s service area.
The Donovans had
started the EI evaluation
process prior to moving after developmental
screening conducted by Joey�s
pediatrician raised flags. After more
extensive assessments were done, Joey
was diagnosed with autism. Prior to
moving, the Donovans contacted the
EI Program and were seen by Jillian
upon arriving. Together they began a
five step process.

Step 1: Information Gathering

During this step, the primary provider
gathered pertinent information about
the family, including their preferences,
their routines, Joey�s preferences, and
family activities.

Information Gathering Resources

The team reviewed information from
multiple sources, including standardized
and authentic assessments, in
order to better understand Joey�s
development in the areas of cognition,
speech and language, motor,
social emotional development and
adaptive skills. In addition other tools
were used to better understand Joey�s
strengths and needs within the context
of his family as well as family priorities.
Using the Interest-Based Everyday
Activity Checklist (Swanson, Raab,
Roper, & Dunst, 2006), the early intervention
team learned that Joey loves
to play in and with water, so
much so that the family has
been required to lock toilet
lids and decrease the temperature
of the hot water
tank in their home because
of Joey�s interest in turning
faucets on and off.
http://www.fipp.org/Collateral/
casetools/casetools_
vol2_no5.pdf

A copy of the Interest-
Based Activity Checklist
completed for Joey and his
family follows.

Figure 1.

Interest-Based Activity Checklist

The family also shared that Joey
likes to be outside. Using the Asset-
Based Context Matrix (Wilson &
Mott, 2006) http://www.fipp.org/Collateral/
casetools/casetools_vol2_no4.
pdf, the team learned more information
about the natural learning opportunities
(i.e., activities and routines
embedded in the family�s day) important
to Joey and his family. They
learned that Joey�s mom and dad are
farmers and the family enjoys growing
all of their own food. The Donovans
have a large extended family. Joey has
10 cousins close to his age who live
within 30 minutes from his new home.
The Donovans attend church every
Sunday with their extended family
members and then share Sunday dinners
together. Mike and Pat also stated
that Joey is not fond of napping and
does not sleep through the night.

Figure 2.

Asset-Based Context Matrix Assessments

Family Routines and Priorities

During this process, the Donovans
and EI team developed calendars of
the family�s current day in order to pin
point areas for support and intervention.
Pat and Mike included activities
and routines that occur on a typical
day for them and Joey. With the
EI team they identified challenging
routines and prioritized which needed
more immediate attention. These
activities are recorded on the My Calendar
� form, developed and available
through FIPP, and included at the end
of this document. Mike and Pat also
shared their priorities of learning more
about Joey�s diagnosis of autism and
how to help their family understand
Joey better. Mike and Pat are anxious
that Joey will not sit down at the dinner
table for family meals, which they
find particularly troublesome when the
entire extended family shares meals
together on the weekend. Joey�s parents
also worry that his lack of sleep
contributes to some of his agitation.

Observation of
Families and Children

Once the above information was gathered,
a member of the early intervention
team observed a family mealtime
with Mike, Pat and Joey. During the
mealtime, Joey was agitated and would
not join his parents at the table. Mike
and Pat demonstrated strategies they
had tried in the past and the practitioner
had a few ideas that they implemented
during the observation. Joey�s
parents showed their frustration with
the situation as well as their willing

ness to consider new approaches. The
EI provider wondered if Joey might
be making more attempts to communicate
than the information she had
gathered prior to the observation suggested.
Overall, everyone felt they had
better ideas about how to get started
on improving the family�s mealtimes.

Step 2: Outcome Planning

At the IFSP meeting, the EI team, including
the primary EI provider, speech
language pathologist, the service coordinator,
and family used the information
gathered to support the outcome planning
process. During the IFSP meeting,
the service coordinator reviewed
and summarized the information that
the Donovan family had shared as well
as discussed the observations made by
the EI provider during the home visit.
Together, the family and team decided
upon the following outcomes:

1. Joey will join the family for
meals at the dinner table on
the weekends.
2. Mike and Pat will know how
to put Joey to bed for naps and
at bedtime.
3. Joey will help his parents water
the garden and houseplants.
4. Mike and Pat will feel comfortable
discussing Joey�s diagnosis
of autism with family
and friends.

Goal Attainment Scaling

As part of the meeting, the team
worked with Pat and Mike to select
the priorities above for the IFSP
outcomes. Next, the team and family
followed the Goal Attainment Scaling
(GAS) process (Cardillo & Choate,
1994). The Goal Attainment Scaling
process has been used by NPDC in
schools and early intervention programs
in addition to Individual Education
Plans (IEP) or IFSP. The GAS is a
tool used to help document progress
on IFSP outcomes. Teachers and
early intervention providers who have
worked with NPDC using the GAS
report that the process helps them to
link data with goals, to think ahead, and
to consider generalization opportunities
from the beginning. By linking data
collection and generalization of the skill
directly to goals/outcomes, teams are
more effective in their implementation
of EBP. Joey�s parents appreciated that
the process helped them to have a sense
of where their child might be heading
after a goal/outcome is met. The GAS
process helped the team create goals
based on the priority IFSP outcomes
that were meaningful to the family and
were measurable and observable. In
addition, the family and team were able
to project out expectations for Joey and
the family over six months and beyond.

The team and family followed the
steps in the GAS process described
below. They included the highest
priority outcomes for the family at the
moment. In addition, Mike and Pat
chose with the team the next priorities
they might focus on in their work
together. These included Joey�s participating
in Sunday services at the Donovan�s
church, helping Joey get more
sleep during the day, and continuing to
work on communication approaches
that help Joey express himself and better
understand his mom and dad. They
decided to develop goals from the
priority outcomes listed above. These
include the 4 goals related directly to
Joey and one for the family to keep
track of Pat�s successes.

1. Develop Goals: They developed
these observable and
measurable goals from the
priority outcomes.

a. During family dinners,
Joey will sit at the dining
room table either eating
or quietly playing with a
toy for at least 10 minutes
for 2 out of 3 dinners.

b. When mom or dad is
working in the garden,
Joey will participate by
watering a plant through
the use of a 2-step visual
sequence (1. Walk to
garden plot while holding
child size watering
can filled with water,
2. Water plant) with
prompts as needed for 3
out of 4 naturally occurring
opportunities.

c. During playtime with mom
or dad (e.g., bath time,
outdoor water play), Joey
will make a choice among
preferred play objects (e.g.,
water wheel, bucket, squirt
duck, boat) by pointing,
touching, or approximating
name of object for or 8 out
of 10 naturally occurring
opportunities for 3 consecutive
days.

d. Joey will be in bed (no
wandering or opening/
closing drawers) by 9:30
for bedtime routine of
reading with mom or dad
on 5 out of 5 week nights.
Lights out and Joey quiet
by 10:00. Joey will wake
up once in the night and

be taken directly back to
bed for quiet time.

e. (This goal is a companion to
Joey�s goal that the family
and EI team wrote as
an aligned goal for mom.)
Joey�s Mom starts reading
to him at 9:00 and spends
30 minutes reading to
Joey before �lights out� (or
lights go out) at 9:30. She
spends up to 15 minutes
with Joey (lights out, quiet
time) to help him get to
sleep. Joey�s Mom sleeps
in her own bed. She wakes
up no more than once in
the middle of the night
with Joey. She spends no
more than 10 minutes
helping him get back to
sleep. (5 out of 7 nights)

Note: The family and team identified
an additional family support
outcome (i.e., Mom and Dad feel
comfortable discussing Joey�s diagnosis
of autism with family and friends).
Rather than scaling this goal, Mike,
Pat, and the early intervention provider
strategized various approaches
and resources in order to build their
confidence and comfort in discussing
autism with others.

2. Current Performance: Next,
the team identifies Joey�s and
the parent�s current performance
on these goals by
reviewing existing data and
collecting additional data until
they are sure of their starting
point.

3. Scaling the Goals: After
determining baseline, the team
and family determine how to
change conditions and criteria
to decide what it would look
like if Joey (or family) were
short of meeting the goal or
exceeded expectations. Scaling
the goals helped the team
and family have a clear picture
of what success would look
like and when interventions
weren�t working and needed to
be adjusted. Additionally, scaling
helped them consider how
a goal would be part of a larger
plan for Joey and his family.
The team completed the rest
of the priority outcomes in the
following way.

Table 1.

Developing Mealtime Goals

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

During all mealtimes Joey gets up from the table and comes back to it to take
one bite at a time. Joey does not sit down at the dining room table.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

During family dinners, Joey will sit at the table either eating or quietly playing
with a toy for at least 10 minutes for 3 out of 4 dinners a week.

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

Table 2.

Joey�Mealtime

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

During all mealtimes Joey gets up from the table and comes back to it to take
one bite at a time. Joey does not sit down at the dining room table.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

During family dinners, Joey will sit at the dining room table either eating or
quietly playing with a toy for at least 5 minutes for 3 out of 4 dinners a week.

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

During family dinners, Joey will sit at the table either eating or quietly playing
with a toy for at least 10 minutes for 3 out of 4 dinners a week.

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

During weekend dinners with extended family, Joey will sit at the table either
eating or quietly playing with a toy for at least 5 minutes for 34 dinners a
month.

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

During weekend dinners with extended family, Joey will sit at table outside
either eating or quietly playing with a toy for at least 10 minutes for 3 out of 4
dinners a month.

Table 3.

Joey�Bedtime

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

Joey wanders the room (rocking/opening closing drawers) while Mom or Dad
read books, play music and sing to Joey. He falls asleep by midnight and wakes
up 2 to 3 times a night.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

Joey spends no more than 5 minutes wandering the room before laying down
for bedtime routine of reading with Mom or Dad at 10:00. Lights go out and
Joey is quiet before 10:45 on 3 out of 5 week nights.

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

Joey will be in bed (no wandering or opening/closing drawers) by 9:30 for
bedtime routine of reading with Mom or Dad on 5 out of 5 week nights. Lights
go out and Joey is quiet by 10:00.

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

Joey will be in bed (no wandering or opening/closing drawers) by 9:30 for
bedtime routine of reading with Mom or Dad on 6 of 7 nights. Lights go out and
Joey is quiet by 9:45.

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

Joey will be in bed (no wandering or opening/closing drawers) by 9:30 for
bedtime routine of reading with Mom or Dad on 7 of 7 nights. Lights go out and
Joey is quiet by 9:45.

Table 4.

Parents�Bedtime

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

Joey�s Mom, Pat, spends up to an hour and a half singing, humming, playing
songs and reading stories to Joey at bedtime. She falls asleep in Joey�s room
and wakes with him 2 or 3 times a night. When he wakes up in the middle of
the night, she sings to him to help him get back to sleep.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

Joey�s Mom, Pat, starts reading to him at 9:00 and spends 30 minutes reading to
Joey before lights go out at 9:30. She spends up to 30 minutes with Joey (lights
out, quiet time) to help him get to sleep. Pat sleeps in her own bed. When Joey
wakes up in the middle of the night, she walks him to bed and spends no more
than 20 minutes helping him get back to sleep.

(4 out of 7 nights)

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

Joey�s Mom, Pat, starts reading to him at 9:00 and spends 30 minutes reading to
Joey before lights out at 9:30. She spends up to 15 minutes with Joey (lights out,
quiet time) to help him get to sleep. Pat sleeps in her own bed. When Joey wakes
up in the middle of the night, she walks him to bed and spends no more than 10
minutes helping him get back to sleep.

(5 out of 7 nights)

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

Joey�s Mom, Pat, starts reading to him at 9:00 and spends 20 minutes reading
to Joey before lights out at 9:20. She spends up to 10 minutes with Joey (lights
out, quiet time) to help him get to sleep. Pat sleeps in her own bed. When Joey
wakes up in the middle of the night, she walks him to bed, and spends no more
than 5 minutes helping him get back to sleep.

(6 out of 7 nights)

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

Joey�s Mom, Pat, starts reading to him at 9:00 and spends 20 minutes reading
to Joey before lights out at 9:20. She spends up to 10 minutes with Joey (lights
out/quiet time) to help him get to sleep. Pat sleeps in her own bed. When Joey
wakes up in the middle of the night, she walks him to bed and spends no more
than 1 minute helping him get back to sleep.

(7 out of 7 nights).

Table 5.

Joey�Watering the Garden

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

Joey enjoys water and water play indoors and out. He engages in water play by
himself. He does not participate with the family as they take care of the garden.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

When mom or dad are working in the garden, Joey will participate by watering
a plant through a 1 step visual sequence (1. when handed a child size
watering can, water the plant) with prompts as needed for 3 out of 4 naturally
occurring
opportunities.

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

When mom or dad are working in the garden, Joey will participate by watering a
plant through use of a 2 step visual sequence (1. Walk to garden plot while holding
child size watering can filled with water, 2. Water a plant) with prompts as needed
for 3 out of 4 naturally occurring opportunities.

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

When mom or dad are working in the garden, Joey will participate by watering
a plant through a 3 step visual sequence with prompts as needed for 3 out of 4
naturally occurring.

Three step visual sequence includes:

1. Hold child size watering can while parent fills with water,

2. Walk to garden plot while holding can,

3. Water a plant

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

When mom or dad are attending to plants indoors, Joey will participate by
watering an indoor plant with mom or dad through a 3 step visual sequence with
prompts as needed for 3 out of 4 naturally occurring opportunities.

Three step visual sequence includes:

1. Hold child size watering can while parent fills with water,

2. Walk to plant while holding can,

3. Water a plant.

Step 3: Intervention Planning
and EBP Selection

Once the priority outcomes are
determined and scaled, the team and
the family discuss what EBP to begin
implementing together. The team
reviewed the list of EBP from the
NPDCwebsite http://autismpdc.fpg.
unc.edu/content/briefs. They learned
that 10 of the 24 EBP were found to
have efficacy with infants and toddlers
with ASD so they focus on these as
most relevant for Joey�s goals. These 10
are: reinforcement, prompting, visual
supports, functional communication
training, pivotal response training,
naturalistic interventions, parent
implemented intervention, discrete
trail training, activity work systems,
and Picture Exchange Communication
System.

Choosing EBP for Donovan Family

Their decision about which EBP to
select was further informed by information
gathered including: child
development assessments, the priority
outcomes, Joey�s history (what has
worked in the past), family resources
and needs, and the EI Program and
provider resources. To prepare for
implementation, the team identified
the professional development needs related
to (1) learning, in depth, foundational
EBP and (2) learning to better
partner and support families through
coaching in the use of EBP. Given the
program�s need to further develop the
fidelity of implementation of EBP, the
team is interested in learning, in depth,
some foundation EBP. In addition,
they recognize their need to learn to
better communicate through coaching
the use of EBP with families. Further,

Table 6.

Joey�Communication

Much less than expected

(Present Level of Performance)

Joey will take his parents� by the arm to what he wants and/or
squeals to let them know that he wants an object.

Somewhat less than expected

(Benchmark)

During playtime with mom or dad (e.g. bath time, outdoor water
play), Joey will make a choice among preferred play objects
(e.g. water wheel, bucket, squirt duck, boat) by pointing, touching,
or approximating name of object for 4 out of 10 naturally
occurring opportunities for 3 consecutive days.

Expected level of outcome

(Outcome)

During playtime with mom or dad (e.g., bath time, outdoor water
play), Joey will make a choice among preferred play objects (e.g.,
water wheel, bucket, squirt duck, boat) by pointing, touching, or
approximating name of object for 8 out of 10 naturally occurring
opportunities for 3 consecutive days.

Somewhat more than expected
(Exceeds Outcome)

During playtime with mom or dad (e.g. bath time, outdoor water
play), Joey will make a choice among preferred play objects (e.g.
water wheel, bucket, squirt duck, boat) by pointing, touching, or
approximating name of object for 8 out of 10 naturally occurring
opportunities for 5 consecutive days.

Much more than expected
(Far Exceeds Outcome)

During playtime with a relative other than mom or dad (e.g. bath
time, outdoor water play), Joey will make a choice among preferred
play objects (e.g., water wheel, bucket, squirt duck, boat) by
pointing, touching, or approximating name of object for 8 out of 10
naturally occurring opportunities for 3 consecutive days.

Joey and the family�s priority outcomes
and described goals suggest that some
of the foundational EBP would be a
great fit. Thus, the team and family decide
to begin by focusing on prompting,
reinforcement, and visual supports.
In addition, Jillian will review parent-
implemented intervention and self-
management interventions to support
Joey�s mom, Pat, given the toll that
bedtime is taking on the family.

Identifying Roles
and Coaching Needs

A team is assigned to support Joey
and his family. Jillian is the primary
provider who will be the main contact
for the family. Other team members,
including a speech-language pathologist
and occupational therapist, are
available to join Jillian during routine
team meetings and on joint visits as
needed. Jillian will visit the Donovans
in their home or in the community
once a week on average with additional
visits as needed. Community
settings will be those frequently visited
by the Donovans, especially those that
they have identified as priorities. These
settings include the Donovan�s church
and the local grocery store.

Identify Training/Coaching Needs

While Jillian and the team support the
Donovans, the team will receive support
from the EI Program. Jillian will
continue to receive supervision and
support from the EI program director
once a week. She will also meet once a
week with the team to discuss particular
successes or concerns. Since Jillian
is interested in building her skills as
a coach to families, she has asked another
primary provider, Meg, to have
lunch with her once a week to discuss
her work with families, including the
Donovans. Meg and Jillian have also
received support from their supervisor
for Meg to observe Jillian during
home visits once a month. Thus, Meg
will serve as a peer coach to Jillian as
she coaches the family. Meanwhile,
the staff of the Clarksville EI Program
will continue to receive coaching and
consultation from the regional University�s
early intervention support
program. Through these relationships,
coaching becomes a vehicle through
which ongoing learning takes place
on a variety of levels, the overall EI
Program, the providers, the Donovans,
and ultimately Joey.

Step 4: Implementation and
Ongoing Assessment

Coaching with the family occurs
through a cyclical process that aligns
the NPDC coaching process with
the five coaching styles of interaction
developed by Rush & Shelden (2011).
The process includes: pre-observation/
initiation, observation and action,
and post-observation/reflection and
evaluation (Kucharczyk, S., Shaw, E.,
Smith Myles, B., Sullivan, L., Szidon,
K., and Tuchman-Ginsberg, L., 2012).
A parallel process takes place as an
experienced EI provider, Meg, coaches
Jillian. Jillian has informed Pat and
Mike about the structure of the team
meetings and Meg�s role as a peer
coach. The following is an example of
this component of the coaching process.
This is a snapshot of an ongoing
process and interaction style between
the Donovans and Jillian and Jillian
and Meg. More description of these
stages is available in the Chapters
1-3 of the Guidance and Coaching for
the Implementation of Evidence-based
practices for Children and Youth with
Autism Spectrum Disorders. Additional
resources are available on the Family,

Figure 3.

Coaching Process

Infant and Preschool Program (FIPP)
Center for the Advanced Study of Excellence
(CASE) in Early Childhood
and Family Support Practices website
http://www.fipp.org/products.html.
The following snapshot highlights how
Jillian and the Donovans work together
within the three phase coaching
process used by the NPDC and the
five coaching styles of interaction used
by FIPP CASE.

Table 7.

Coaching Snapshot

Coaching the Donovans

Coaching Jillian

Pre-observation/Initiation

Jillian asks the parents to remind her of what their mealtimes are like
currently. Pat and Mike describe Joey as a good eater. He loves fruits
and vegetables. He does not join the family at the dinner table. He grazes
throughout the day. He walks around while eating, especially when eating
outdoors (searching for mud puddles). They�ve tried offering Joey preferred
foods, keeping Joey in a booster seat which caused massive tantrums like
last Sunday, and closing off doors in the kitchen to contain Joey.

Jillian suggests that they reschedule their visit time so that she
can come during lunch. They talk about how Jillian is helping Pat and Mike
prompt Joey during playtime with graduated guidance and reinforcing Joey
right away for responses they want to see. The parents and Jillian decide
to try to work on these interventions during meal time with the goal of having
Joey sit at the table with a toy or eating for a few minutes.

When Jillian returns to her office, she reviews the Prompting
Implementation Checklist for graduated guidance to begin to plan for her
next visit with the Donovan family (http://autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/sites/
autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/files/Prompting_Checklist-Graduated.pdf)

Jillian meets with Meg to discuss her work with the
Donovans. Jillian shares that she�s feeling good about her
work with them. They are an engaged family although
she�s worried that,, Pat is very overwhelmed and hitting
her limit. Jillian shares that she�s worried that she may
be pushing mom. She�s not sure how to gauge the pace
by which they should be moving with working on implementing
the practices they agreed to. Meg asks Jillian
reflective questions to better understand her concern. She
asks Jillian to share the moments when Pat has seemed
overwhelmed, how Jillian might address this concern with
mom and dad, how she might include them in the decision
about pacing that would work well for them. They discuss
the next session. Jillian asks Meg if she would be available
to come observe the home visit. The family is aware
that Meg will be coming every few weeks to observe and
support Jillian. Meg asks Jillian what she would like her
to focus on during the visit. Jillian and Meg agree that she
should observe how Jillian does with pacing and responding
to the Donovans� ability to take on new information.
After their meeting Jillian calls Pat to make sure that the
extra visitor won�t be an issue.

Coaching the Donovans

Coaching Jillian

Observation & Action/Engagement

Jillian returns to the Donovan home a few days later as scheduled with
Meg, her coach. She brings a family friendly version of the graduated guidance
checklist (INSERT LINK) in case the family wants to discuss implementing
the steps. Before starting, Jillian, Mike, and Pat review the plan for
the visit. They will begin the lunch routine and Jillian will begin to observe.
If she sees opportunities to model, she will. Joey�s parents can ask for her
feedback and immediate help at any time during her observation.

Jillian observes that Pat doesn�t seem as relaxed as she usually does
during play sessions. She also notices that while Mike is preparing the
food options for Joey, Joey is already being prepared for the meal. Jillian is
concerned that the amount of wait time might be undermining the family�s
meal time success. She makes a mental note of these observations.

Lunch is ready. Pat remarks that they are offering only his most
preferred foods (carrots, apples, and strawberries) to help ensure success
as she learned to do when she and Jillian were talking about favorite toys
to use to work on new skills. Jillian reinforces Pat�s generalization from
their previous conversations. Mike asks Jillian what she thinks about how
to transition Joey to the table. Jillian suggests they try to minimize their
talking to him and use what they know works in play�gently physically
leading him towards the table. Joey has a tough time transitioning. He is
busy inspecting the water in the dog�s water bowl. Jillian suggests they
find a visual to show him (they have used Boardmaker symbols in playtime).
Everyone quickly scans for a visual to use. Pat suggests they show
him the strawberry he is to eat. �Genius!� Jillian exclaims and Mike smiles.
Pat shows Joey the strawberry while gently helping him up and physically
guiding him to the table. She helps him into his chair. Joey eats the strawberry
and as soon as it�s done is fussing to be let down. Jillian immediately
steps in and guides Joey�s hand to the next piece of fruit on his plate. As
he eats it, she cuts up the rest into smaller pieces and says to his parents
�I�m cutting them so we have more opportunities to keep him busy here�.
For the next few pieces she again guides Joey to feed himself at the table.
She then asks Pat to give it a try. Before Pat begins, Jillian reminds her to
guide Joey to the fruit before he�s likely to become frustrated with sitting at
the table. A few minutes later Joey has had enough. Pat, Mike and Jillian
all agree that it�s time to let him down. He�s done well.

They move to the living room where the parents and Jillian hone
their use of prompting and reinforcement as they interact with Joey and his
toys. The session is coming to a close. Mike engages Joey in a preferred
activity, playing at the water table outside, so that the three can reflect on
their work together.

Meg finds an unobtrusive place to sit and observe Jillian
with the Donovans. She checks with Pat and Mike to
ensure they are comfortable with her presence. Meg sees
Joey giving her a sideways glance. She smiles in return
and says �Hi Joey�. He shifts his attention to lunch and
doesn�t return to her.

Meg makes a note about Jillian�s effective
reinforcement of mom and dad throughout the visit. It�s
immediate and specific, something she and Jillian have
discussed doing more often in the past.

Meg notices the anxiety in mom�s behavior that
Jillian mentions. She wonders why Jillian hasn�t checked
in with mom during the visit.

Coaching the Donovans

Coaching Jillian

Post-observation/Reflection, Feedback & Evalution

Jillian begins by asking the parents, �So how do you feel that went?� Pat
and Mike agree that it was much better than expected. Pat shares that
she was very nervous because most meals feel like a battle to her. Jillian
attempts to support Pat by saying how hard it must be to prepare for
unavoidable activities that are so difficult and that she has high hopes that
based on today they will be able to make it easier for the family. Jillian
asks Pat and Mike to reflect on what they all did during mealitme that
worked and what didn�t work. Pat and Mike are quick to recognize the
need for visuals to help Joey transition. Jillian again praises Pat�s in the
moment creativity. Mike mentions that he hadn�t thought of cutting the
food smaller to give Joey more opportunities to engage in eating and is excited
to do more that. Jillian reminds both parents that they were smart to
have very reinforcing food for Joey. As a team they decide to continue to
have these food choices for a while until Joey becomes more comfortable
staying longer in the chair. They will begin to add in a few less preferred
options as he and the family gain success. Makes makes a mental note to
have Joey�s favorites ready at the following Sunday�s dinner

Since the parents didn�t bring up the issue themselves, Jillian
decides to give them some feedback on Joey�s activities prior to meal
time. She suggests that as they build in opportunities for Joey�s success
through the favorite foods and visuals they could also think about what
he�s doing just before lunch. She reminds Joey�s parents that if Joey is
very much engaged (such as in water play) before mealtime or if he�s very
disengaged and frustrated the transition to mealtime is likely to be more
difficult. The parents agree and consider how to manage the time prior to
mealtime. Pat suggests this might be a good time for her to play with Joey
in the living room with the door closed to the kitchen where Mike can be
preparing lunch. Mike also suggests that on days that he is traveling for
work that he can have prepared lunches ready for Joey in the refrigerator.
Jillian takes notes of these decisions to share with the parents before she
leaves.

Pat, Mike, and Jillian plan for their next session. Jillian asks if
they would like to continue their focus on mealtime. They agree that this
continues to be a priority. Jillian suggests that since they were able to use
some of the steps of graduated guidance during mealtime that they could
fine tune this practice. She shows Pat and Mike the graduated guidance
resource she brought. She reviews the different steps as they worked on
play routines. They decide to go over the steps at the beginning of their
next session together and just before they transition Joey to mealtime.

Meg asks how Jillian thought the session went. Jillian
is happy with her work with Joey�s parents. Given Pat�s
frustration with mealtime before her observation, she was
worried it would be more difficult. She was pleased to see
Pat and Mike engaged, problem solving, and noticing successes.
She�s also really excited that Joey sat at the table!

Meg agrees those were great positives and asks
Jillian to reflect on her work and coaching of the parents.
Jillian wonders if she modeled too much for Mike and Pat.
Perhaps she could have given them more opportunity to be
at the table with Joey. Meg reminds Jillian that this was a
particularly challenging family routine and that her instinct
to help ensure success was probably a good one. Meg
talks to Jillian about how to provide support to Pat without
interrupting Meg�s interaction with Joey. They discuss
ways to give mom and dad opportunities to practice working
with Joey at the table. Meg also points out to Jillian her
effective use of reinforcement with mom and dad throughout
the session. They make a plan for how to coach mom
and dad at the table during the next session.

Next, Meg asks how she gauged the parents,
especially Pat�s, level of frustration during the session. Jillian
says she felt her frustration at the beginning. She also
says that she felt Pat get frustrated during their reflection
time and that it seemed to get better when they made a
plan to continue to work on mealtime and made a plan to
continue to use graduated guidance. Meg asks Jillian why
she didn�t ask Pat and Mike directly about these observations
so she can better gauge their work together? Jillian
is not sure. Perhaps she�s worried she won�t know what to
do if they say they are overwhelmed.

Meg and Jillian brainstorm ways to have this
conversation with the parents and different approaches
she could take based on their answer. One would be to
use the implementation checklists for the practices she�s
teaching them to breakdown their work into more manageable
pieces. They take out a checklist to plan this out.

Meg and Jillian discuss when she might watch
Jillian implementing the practices to check her own fidelity
and any trouble spots

Step 5: Evaluation and
Modification of Planning
Process and Intervention
Outcomes

Throughout their work, Jillian and the
Donovans monitor their and Joey�s
progress by evaluating and sometimes
modifying their process. To monitor
hers and the family�s implementation
of evidence-based practices, she uses
EBP Implementation Checklists. She
reviews the step-by-step directions
prior to working with the family. She
also uses this detailed version with her
peer coach who observes her implementation
of the practices during
home visits. Through this data, she
is better able to hone her use of the
practice and thus better able to teach
the practice to care givers. EBP Implementation
Checklists are found on
the NPDC on ASD website (http://
autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/content/briefs).
Early Intervention-specific EBP learning
modules and resources can also be
found on the ASD Toddler Initiative
website (http://asdtoddler.fpg.unc.
edu/ ).

In addition to the EBP Implementation
Checklists, the parents and
Jillian take data related to the family�s
GAS goals and they review these
goals frequently. Data collection tools
are developed as a team, so that they
are easy for the family to integrate
into their lives and gather all of the
information needed to determine if
progress is being made. Based on the
information from the data sheets,
Jillian supports the family to make
decisions about how to modify their
implementation approaches. Examples
of these data sheets follow. In addition
to informing week to week decisions,
the information gathered from these
data sheets is reviewed and evaluated
during IFSP meetings in order to
inform changes in the plan.

Jillian periodically requests feedback
about the coaching process from
Joey�s parents and her coach. She asks
the parents about what is working
for them (e.g., would they like more
modeling, less modeling, more paper
resources, more observations). She also
asks her peer coach, Meg, to observe
the specific skills she would like to
make sure she�s using effectively (e.g.,
listening actively, asking open ended
questions, providing feedback effectively).
During one session, she asked
the parents if she could videotape their
time together so that she could review
the content with her peer coach and
supervisor and get their feedback. The
parents shared with Jillian that they
appreciate her commitment to improving
her skills and this gives them
confidence in her abilities.

Summary

This case study illustrates the parallel
processes of coaching of an early
intervention provider and the coaching
of a family as they partner to implement
evidence-based practices for a
child with autism spectrum disorders.
Coaching is supported by the use of
resources used by the NPDC such as
a program quality tool (APERS � IT),
the goal attainment scaling process,
EBP learning modules, and implementation
checklists. The EI Program
and interventionist use these resources
along with those developed by FIPP to
effectively support the Donovan family
through five steps: (1) information
gathering, (2) outcome planning, (3)
intervention planning, (4) implementation
and ongoing assessment, and (5)
evaluation. These coaching and intervention
practices smoothly fit into the
steps of the Part C Early Intervention
processes. They add specificity to focus
on improving outcomes for infants and
toddlers with ASD and their families.

References

Cardillo, J. E., & Choate, R. O. (1994).
Illustrations of goal setting. In T.
Kiresuk, A. Smith, & J. Cardillo,
(Eds.). Goal attainment scaling: Applications,
Theory, and Measurement
(pp. 15-37). Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.

Rush, D. D, & Shelden, M. L. (2011).
The early childhood coaching handbook.
Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Brookes Publishing Company.

Table 7.

Time at Dinner Table

Goal: During family dinners, Joey will sit at the dining room table either eating or quietly playing with a toy for at least 10 min for 2/3 dinners.

Date

Mom & Dad/

Extended
(circle)

Time at Table
(min)

Notes (e.g., ate,
played, what helped,
what was hard?)

5/27

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

2min

Ate for a min with airplane
in his hand/used airplane
to move Joey to table/ate for
another min with mom giving
Joey airplane after every bite

5/28

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

1min

What do we do when dinner is
not ready but he�s ready to eat?
Had to put food on table but
mom wasn�t ready to sit and
help.

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Mom &/or Dad

Extended

Table 8.

Watering the Garden

Goal: When mom or dad are working in the garden, Joey will participate by watering a plant through the use of a 2 step visual sequence (1.
walk to garden plot while holding a child size watering can filled with water, 2.water plant) with prompts as needed for � opportunities.

Date

5/27

5/28

6/1

6/2

6/3

6/4

Step 3.
Water plant

NO (spilled
all of water
before getting
to plant)

With lots of
help got most
of water on
plant

C:\Documents and Settings\kucharcz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\M40JQVBP\MP900407293[1].jpg

C:\Documents and Settings\kucharcz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\CBS367XJ\MP900407271[1].jpg

C:\Documents and Settings\kucharcz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\M40JQVBP\MP900407293[1].jpg

C:\Documents and Settings\kucharcz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\L1MSAQ49\MP900407291[1].jpg

Step 2. Walk
to garden plot
while holding a
child size watering
can filled
with water

(YAY!!!)

(needed lots of
help today)

Step 1. Hold
child size
watering can
can while mom/
dad fills it with
water

(YAY!)

Who helped?

Dad

Mom

Dad

Mom

Table 9.

Communication

During playtime with mom or dad (e.g., bath time, outdoor water play) Joey will make a choice among preferred play objects (e.g., water wheel,
bucket, squirt duck, boat) by pointing, touching, or approximating name of object for 8/10 opportunities for 3 consecutive days.

Date

Play Objects
Available

Object
Chosen

How
Chosen

Amount
of Help
Given

Who
Helped

Notes

5-28

Water wheel, bucket,
hose, squirt duck

hose

point

I G

T P

V No

Dad

J started
screaming for
hose so I used the
steps to help him
point it out.

5-28

(bath)
whale, boat, sponge,
cup

whale

point

I G

T P

V No

Dad

J kept looking
at the whale so
I helped him by
moving his hand
to it

5-28

Same as above

Cup

�Cuh�

I G

T P

V No

Dad

J yelled for the cup
so I said �cup� a
few times and he
did it too!!! J

5-28

Same as above

Whale

Grab

I G

T P

V No

Dad

I showed J the cup
and whale and
he grabbed the
whale without
screaming!

5-29

Outside playing in
creek(sticks, a cup,
bucket, rocks)

Stick

Tried to
grab

I G

T P

V No

Mom

J reached for stick.
I said �Stick, you
want stick?� And
pointed at it

5-29

Creek (sticks, a cup,
bucket, rocks)

Cup

�Cuh�

I G

T P

V No

Mom

I was holding the
cup. J wanted the
cup. I said �Cup?�
and he said it!!!

I � independently/ no help was needed G � gesture point to the object

T- gently touch Joey�s elbow and guide him to the object V � model by verbally naming the object

P � place Joey�s hand on the object No � Refused / Didn�t do it

Table 10.
Frequency Recording Sheet

Figure 4.
My Calendar� Assessment Tool