Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 2011, 46(4), 499 –513
© Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
Video Modeling and Prompting: A Comparison of Two
Strategies for Teaching Cooking Skills to Students with Mild
Intellectual Disabilities
Teresa Taber-Doughty, Emily C. Bouck, Kinsey Tom, Andrea D. Jasper,
Sara M. Flanagan, and Laura Bassette
Purdue University
Abstract: Self-operated video prompting and video modeling was compared when used by three secondary
students with mild intellectual disabilities as they completed novel recipes during cooking activities. Alternating
between video systems, students completed twelve recipes within their classroom kitchen. An alternating
treatment design with a follow-up and withdrawal probe was used to illustrate the effectiveness of both systems
on each student’s independent task performance. Results indicated increased independence following video
system use by all three students with video modeling more effective for two students and video prompting more
effective for the third. Future directions for research are presented.
Students with mild intellectual disabilities are
those who typically face a range of challenges
related to learning, including difficulty generalizing and/or transferring information, inputting and retrieving information from
memory, and short attention spans (Belmont,
1966; Dunn, 1973; Kirk, 1972; Spitz, 1973;
Stephens, 1972; Thomas, 1996; Zeaman &
House, 1963, 1979). Specifically, students with
mild intellectual disabilities are characterized
by “significantly subaverage intellectual functioning, existing concurrently with related
limitations in two or more of the following
applicable adaptive skill areas: communication, self-care, home living, social skills, community use, self direction, health and safety,
functional academics, leisure, and work” (Polloway, Patton, Smith, & Buck, 1997, p. 298).
However, despite the term “mild,” these students do not necessarily possess mild learning
challenges (Luckasson et al., 2002; Polloway,
2004; 2005). They experience numerous
The final four authors listed provided equal effort
into to this study and thus, their order should not be
interpreted as a greater contribution over a preceding author. Correspondence concerning this article
should be addressed to Dr. Teresa Taber-Doughty,
5162 BRNG Hall, Purdue University, 100 North University Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2098, 765494-7345, [email protected]
learning challenges considerably impacting
their functioning in current and potential future environments.
Students with mild intellectual disabilities
once received a substantial focus in research
and practice; however, in recent decades, attention to the educational issues of these students declined (Bouck, 2007; Edgar, 1987;
Polloway, 2006). This lack of consideration
extends to issues of curriculum and instruction where historically these students theoretically received a functional curriculum–a curriculum focused on life skills that enable
adults to be successful in life, work, and participation in all facets of an inclusive community (Brown et al., 1979; Cronin, 1996; Patton,
Polloway, & Smith, 2000). However, over the
past few decades, researchers suggested a decrease on a functional or life skills approach
in practice and research (Alwell & Cobb,
2009; Billingsley, 1997; Billingsley & Albertson, 1999; Nietupski, Hamre-Nietupski,
Curtin, & Shrikanth,1997), although without
data as to the effectiveness of other curricula.
For example, Bouck (2004a) reported a
range of curricular approaches being used by
teachers for secondary students with mild intellectual disabilities including a functional
curriculum (19.0%), a special education curriculum (23.8%), a general education curriculum (15.3%), a lower grade level curriculum
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
499
(14.3%), a unique curriculum (13.8%), no
curriculum (4.8%), and a vocational curriculum (1.1%). Her results suggested limited attention to a functional curriculum for this
population, akin to the critique by Patton et
al. (2000) regarding the practice of educating
students with mild intellectual disabilities (i.e.,
a watered-down general education curriculum
lacking specialized instruction and concrete
educational benefits).
Currently, the curricular focus for students
with mild intellectual disabilities is believed to
be mixed and variable, although educational
policy within the last decade placed greater
emphasis on students with mild intellectual
disabilities receiving and succeeding in a general education curriculum (Bouck, 2007;
Bouck, Bassette, Taber-Doughty, Flanagan, &
Szwed, 2009; Patton et al., 2000). No Child Left
Behind (NCLB, 2002) and the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) privilege students taking general large scale assessments, suggesting the curricular focus is a general education curriculum to the detriment of
other approaches (i.e., functional) (Bouck,
2007). Patton et al. questioned the availability
of specialized curriculum currently in schools
for these students.
The lack of specialized curriculum for students with mild intellectual disabilities may be
problematic given research suggesting the
poor postschool outcomes typically experienced by this population. For example, students typically face lower rates of employment, independent living, and postsecondary
school attendance (Blackorby & Wagner,
1996; Kaye, 1997; Newman, 2005; Newman,
Wagner, Cameto, & Knokey, 2009). While typically not measured in the instruments assessing other outcomes, students with mild intellectual disabilities also face challenges related
to daily living skills (Lynch & Beare, 1990).
Thus, a need exists for elements of a functional curriculum for these students. Alwell
and Cobb (2009) identified the lack of research attention on functional life skills was
particularly apparent for students with high
incidence disabilities (e.g., mild intellectual
disabilities; Reschly, 2002) as well as research
of high quality on the impact of life skills
instruction.
Bouck and Flanagan (2010) note the limited current research on teaching functional
500
/
life skills to students with mild intellectual
disabilities. In a systematic review, the authors
found seven articles published between 1994
and 2009 on teaching at least one student with
a mild intellectual disability a functional curriculum or elements of a functional curriculum (i.e., functional academics, vocational education, community access, daily living,
financial, independent living, transportation,
social/relationships, and self-determination)
(Patton, Cronin, & Jairrels, 1997). Of the
seven, four focused, in part, on daily living
skills with three of those related to food, nutrition, and/or cooking (Collins, Branson, &
Hall, 1995; Kennedy, Itkonen, & Lindquist,
1994; Arnold-Reid, Schloss, & Alper, 1997)
and one directed at safety (Collins & Stinson,
1995). Students improved in the targeted
skills in each intended area; thus, the review
by Bouck and Flanagan highlighted the minimal attention on aspects of functional living
skills while simultaneously showing the effectiveness for skill acquisition using this approach.
Strategies to Teach Functional Skills
Strategies used to teach functional skills to
students with mild intellectual disabilities
since 1994 included time delay (Collins et al.,
1995; Collins & Stinson, 1995; Kennedy et al.,
1994), one-more-than concept for purchasing
(Denny & Test, 1995), goal setting (Agran,
Blanchard, Wehmeyer, & Hughes, 2002), and
the system of least prompts (Arnold-Reid et
al., 1997). Each resulted in overall increases in
functional skill acquisition and generalization
for students with mild intellectual disabilities.
Although no study could be found focusing
on functional skills training in which technology as an instructional tool was used, technology was used for teaching other skills to this
population. Computerized instruction (e.g.,
computer assisted instruction, pentop computers) was successfully used to teach mathematics (Bouck et al., 2009; Fazio & Polsgrove,
1989), social skills (Margalit, 1995), fact retrieval skills (Edyburn, 1991), and word recognition skills (Lin, Podell, & Rein, 1991). Thus,
the potential exists for students with mild intellectual disabilities to successfully use various forms of technology in acquiring and generalizing functional skills. Researchers have
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
however taught functional skills, using technology, to students with moderate and severe
intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum
disorders.
Various technologies are frequently used
when teaching functional skills to students
with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorders. Recent investigations reported the effectiveness of computers (Lancioni, Dijkstra,
O’Reilly, Groeneweg, & Van den Hof, 2000;
Lancioni, Van den Hof, Boelens, Rocha, &
Seedhouse, 1998; Lancioni, Van den Hof,
Furniss, O’Reilly, & Cunha, 1999; Mechling,
2003; 2005; Mechling, Gast, & Langone,
2002), personal digital assistants (PDA)
(Cihak, Kessler, & Alberto, 2007), MP3 players (Taber-Doughty, 2005), and iPods for
delivering numerous forms of instruction
incorporating technology in school and
community settings (Taber-Doughty, Patton, & Brennan, 2008; Van Laarhoven, Johnson, Van Laarhoven-Meyers, Grider, &
Grider, 2009; Van Laarhoven & Van Laarhoven-Meyers, 2006). All resulted in increases in skill acquisition, maintenance
and/or generalization; thus, demonstrating
the potential for the ongoing use of technology in instruction for these populations.
Two increasingly used strategies for teaching skills to students with autism spectrum
disorder and moderate to severe intellectual
disabilities incorporate video technology for
instruction in the form of video prompting
and video modeling. Video prompting combines visual and auditory prompts requiring
students to view a single step of a video task
sequence and complete that step before
watching the next video clip of the subsequent step and performing that step (Cihak,
Alberto, Taber-Doughty, & Gama, 2006;
Krantz, MacDuff, Wadstrom, & McClannahan, 1991; Taber-Doughty et al., 2008).
Video prompting was successfully used to
teach individuals with disabilities vocational
skills in an employment setting (Van Laarhoven et al. 2009), to use an ATM and debit
machine (Cihak et al; Mechling, Gast, &
Barthold, 2003), daily living skills (CannellaMalone, Sigafoos, O’Reilly, de la Cruz,
Edrisinha, & Lancioni, 2006; Van Laarhoven
& Van Laarhoven-Meyers, 2006), grocery
shopping skills (Hutcherson, Langone, Ay-
res, & Clees, 2004; Mechling et al., 2002),
and cooking skills (Graves, Collins, Schuster, & Kleinert, 2005). Similar success was
also found with video modeling in which
students perform a task in the same or alternative setting without additional prompting
only after viewing the entire task sequence
(Cannella-Malone et al.; Taber-Doughty et
al.). What may vary with video modeling,
other than the task, is the delay between
viewing the video model and the actual performance of the task. Reported delays between viewing videos and performing tasks
range from immediately after viewing (Charlop-Christy & Daneshvar, 2003; Geiger, LeBlanc, Dillon, & Bates, 2010; Nikopoulos &
Keenan, 2004) to at least an hour after viewing (Alberto, Cihak, & Gama, 2005;
D’Ateno, Mangiapanello, & Taylor, 2003;
Taber-Doughty et al.; Wert & Neisworth,
2003) when teaching students with autism
spectrum disorder a variety of social, play
and drawing skills, and numerous functional
community skills (e.g., library skills, using
an ATM) with students experiencing moderate and severe intellectual disabilities.
While ongoing evidence is reported about
the effectiveness of both video prompting
and modeling for teaching students with autism spectrum disorder and moderate to severe intellectual disabilities, no studies
could be found in which these strategies
were used for teaching skills to students with
mild intellectual disabilities. At a time when
video technology is increasingly accessible
and uncomplicated while concurrently socially desirable by peers (Taber-Doughty et
al. 2008), research should seek to examine
whether this technology is appropriate for
use with students who experience mild intellectual disabilities. In addition, the need
exists to refocus research efforts in the area
of functional skills training for students with
mild intellectual disabilities (Bouck & Flanagan, in press). As such, the purpose of the
present investigation was to compare the
effectiveness of video prompts and video
modeling when used to teach three middle
school students with mild intellectual disabilities to acquire cooking skills when preparing a variety of simple recipes.
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
501
TABLE 1
Student Characteristics
Student
Chronological
Age
Ethnicity
IQ
Adaptive
Behavior
Reading
Math
Brittany
Rose
Wes
12
13
12
Caucasian
Caucasian
African American
72a
61a
63a
44b
77c
88b
4.5th graded
83e
87e
4.5th graded
45e
70e
a
WISC-IV.
GAC
c
ABAS-II
d
Test Scores unavailable; score given is a teacher estimate
e
Woodcock-Johnson
b
Method
Participants
Three sixth grade students with mild intellectual disabilities served as participants for this
study. Brittany, Rose, and Wes were nominated by their teacher for participation in the
study based on the following: (a) willingness
to participate, (b) level of cognitive functioning within the mild range of intellectual disabilities, (c) no sensory deficits, (d) limited, or
no experience cooking, and (e) successful
completion of a pre-training program. Two of
the participants were Caucasian and one was
African American and all participants spent
approximately 80% of their time in a special
education setting for students with mild intellectual disabilities and 20% of their time in
general education, largely for elective courses
(i.e., physical education). All participants
spoke English as their first language. Intelligence, adaptive behavior ratings, and reading
and math levels were obtained from the
teacher. Table 1 provides a summary for each
participant.
Brittany. Brittany was a 12 year-old sixthgrade female with a mild intellectual disability. Brittany had limited previous cooking experience at home and no previous cooking
experience at school. Additionally, Brittany
reported she did not have previous experience using an iPod. Despite her limited cooking experience, Brittany expressed interest in
using an iPod to learn how to make new recipes.
502
/
Rose. Rose was a 13 year-old sixth-grade
female with a mild intellectual disability. Rose
reported she had limited previous cooking
experience at home, and Rose’s special education teacher indicated she did not have previous cooking experience at school. Additionally, Rose reported she did not have previous
experience using an iPod, but she did have
experience using another brand of MP3
player and thought it was easy to use. Rose was
also interested in learning how to cook and
making new recipes using videos although she
lacked prior experience with these types of
activities.
Wes.
Wes was a 12 year-old sixth-grade
male with a mild intellectual disability. Wes
reported his parents did not typically allow
him to cook at home. Wes’ teacher indicated
he did not have previous cooking experience
at school. Wes also indicated he had no previous experience using an iPod, though he did
state that he was good at “figuring out computers and a lot of stuff.” Similar to Brittany
and Rose, Wes expressed an interest in using
an iPod to learn how to cook.
Setting
All cooking activities took place in the participants’ special education classroom. Upon entering the classroom there was a small area
(approximately one-fourth of the classroom)
with three sinks, a counter, cooking appliances (i.e., toaster oven, toaster, blender, and
microwave), and a refrigerator. Additionally, a
round table with six chairs was present for
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
students and teachers to eat. Next to the refrigerator, near the rear of the classroom, was
a table with three computers for student use.
On the other side of the table, also near the
rear of the classroom, was a desk for the paraeducators. In the middle of the classroom was
a large instructional area where sixteen student desks faced the front of the classroom. In
the front of the classroom next to the teacher’s desk was an interactive electronic whiteboard students used to complete several academic activities (e.g., math worksheets, daily
oral language, etc.).
Cooking activities took place in the morning between 8:30AM and 11:30AM. Depending on the class period, there were 12 to 15
additional students in the classroom. While
participating students completed cooking
tasks, other students in the class were engaged
in mathematics or Language Arts. These activities were typically completed in a group setting with the teacher or paraeducator lecturing to students and allowing students to raise
their hands and ask questions. Conversation
amongst students and teachers occurred often
while target students engaged in cooking activities.
Materials
Recipes. All recipes students followed were
from the Cooking to Learn books functional
curriculum from PCI Educational Publishing
(Anderson, Coxson, Lamontagne, Buteyn, &
Chapman, 2008; Anderson, Coxson, Britt,
Haugen-McLane, & Mullins, 1999; Coxson &
Anderson, 2001). Recipes were written at an
independent level of reading, allowing students to read them without assistance. Recipes
from the books were re-typed in Microsoft
Word to allow for changes in the recipes (i.e.,
if a recipe called for an oven, but was changed
to a toaster oven due to the supplies available)
and for consistency in how recipes were
worded (i.e., to read, “Put 1/2 cup of ____,”
instead of variations on that step/wording
such as “Add one half cup of _____”). Recipes
were also retyped to eliminate the preprinted
checklist of ingredients and supplies at the top
of each page. Recipes were varied, but all
required completing seven or more task steps
using multiple foods and cooking supplies.
Cooking supplies.
Cooking supplies were
those typically available in a kitchen (e.g., a
toaster oven, toaster, hot plate, and a microwave). Other cooking supplies used included
pans, a cookie sheet, measuring cups and
spoons, cooking and eating utensils, and
plates or bowls. Students were able to use
these independently without instruction.
Ingredients. Recipe ingredients were purchased prior to baseline and intervention sessions. For each recipe, all ingredients were
placed on the worktable for students to select
from when completing steps of each recipe.
Common ingredients used included a variety
of fruits, milk, crackers, and biscuit dough.
Videos.
Short videos ranging from one
minute and fifty-seven seconds to six minutes
and thirty-eight seconds were created using
iMovie (Apple Inc., 2010) and demonstrated
how to complete each recipe from start to
finish. Each video also contained simple audio
instructions in which task analysis steps were
read prior to being demonstrated on the
video. The third author physically and verbally
modeled each step. All videos had similar pacing (i.e., how far apart each step was modeled)
and view. For example, the video always
showed the entire measuring cup being filled
with an ingredient rather than just the specific
line that to which the cup was being measured; or, the video zoomed in when going to
a temperature or time setting. All videos were
filmed in the classroom where participants
performed tasks and used the same equipment and ingredients to be used by students
for completing recipes.
iPods. Three Apple 8-G iPod Nanos with
color video capabilities were used in this
study. The screen display was approximately
one and one-fourth inches wide and two
inches in height. Below the screen was the
control wheel approximately one inch in diameter containing the word “menu” at the
top, play/pause at the bottom, and rewind
and fast forward on the left and right sides
respectively. At the center of the wheel was a
black select button pressed when making a
selection from the screen. Students turned on
the iPod by pressing and holding down any
one of the buttons. In order to access videos,
once the screen was lit, students pressed the
menu button. Students moved their thumb
around the control wheel until the word “vid-
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
503
eos” was highlighted. Students then pressed
the center select button. From the next list of
items appearing on the screen, students used
their thumb to scroll to the word “movies” and
pressed the center button to confirm that selection. On the final screen, students scrolled
down to the name of the correct recipe video
and pressed the center select button. Once
selected, they were able to press the play (or
pause) button as needed. Students did not
report any difficulty with being able to view
the screen. During this study, all students navigated the iPods independently. Students
watched videos and listened to the audio using earphones; two students preferred behind-the-ear headphones while one preferred
ear buds.
Dependent and Independent Variables
Video modeling and video prompting in conjunction with a six level system of least
prompts were two independent variables used
to teach students to cook basic recipes. Pairs
of recipes were matched based on number of
steps, difficulty of completion, and similarity
of tasks involved. Students completed 12 total
recipes using video modeling or video
prompting during the intervention condition.
When using video modeling students watched
the full video of the task to be completed five
minutes prior to being asked to cook the recipe. When video prompting was used, students
watched individual task steps while cooking
and paused the video after each step.
When the system of least prompts was
needed during video modeling and video
prompting sessions, the following prompts
were available: independent student performance (no prompt), verbal prompt, gesture,
modeling, partial physical prompt, and full
physical prompt. The dependent variable was
the percent of task analysis steps for each recipe each student completed independently
without prompting. The level of prompting
needed for students to complete each step was
also recorded.
Design and Data Collection
An alternating treatment design (ATD) with a
baseline and maintenance condition was used
to illustrate the effectiveness of the video mod-
504
/
eling and video prompting systems for each
student. This design was selected as it allowed
investigators to rapidly compare the effects of
both interventions to establish if one was more
effective than another when determining independent task performance while concurrently demonstrating experimental control
(Kennedy, 2005). A flip of a coin was used to
determine the order in which prompting systems were used with no more than two consecutive administrations of a prompting system during intervention. The maintenance
condition allowed investigators to confirm student performance levels achieved during intervention using the system that resulted in
greater independence.
Each recipe was divided into discrete steps
of a task analysis. Event recording was used to
record the number of steps from each task
analysis students were able to complete independently. Using each recipe step, a data
sheet was created to allow researchers to record whether students completed each step
independently or required a prompt and the
level of prompt needed.
Experimental Procedures
Twenty-three different recipes were used in
this study across conditions. Recipes were selected from the Cooking to Learn curriculum
books (Coxson & Anderson, 2001) and were
divided and grouped together into three categories based on their number of task analysis
steps. Specifically, the three groups included
recipes containing 6 – 8 steps, 9 –11 steps, and
12 or more steps. Three recipes were included
in the study from the first group, 15 recipes
from the second group, and five recipes from
the third.
Recipes were randomly selected during all
phases of the study. Specifically, a total of 37
recipes were selected and divided into the
three groups based on their number of steps
(i.e., 6 – 8, 9 –11, and 12 or more). Six (16%)
recipes contained 6 – 8 steps, 20 (54%) contained 9 –11 steps, and 11 (30%) contained 12
or more steps. During intervention sessions,
recipes were randomly selected and paired
based on task difficulty, similarities, and number of steps. Overall, 6 recipe pairs or 12 total
recipes were used during intervention. Each
recipe pair had a similar number of steps, type
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
of food, cooking supplies needed, and preparation steps.
Pretraining. Prior to data collection, students were introduced to the iPod Nanos and
taught how to use the device to watch videos.
A sample video illustrating a simple task was
created. To ensure each student was able to
successfully use the iPod prior to beginning
the study, each watched the video and completed the tasks (i.e., raised their right hand as
the model on the video did, drew a blue star,
drew a pink circle, etc.). Each student was
required to complete the tasks with 80% accuracy before beginning baseline.
Baseline. During this condition, students
were given a paper copy of a recipe and instructed to make the assigned recipe. The students were observed while cooking and a
member of the research team used the system
of least prompts to correct the students, as
needed. The percent of steps each student
completed independently were recorded per
session. Students continued in the baseline
condition based on the order they were selected to begin the intervention. Brittany began intervention first while Rose and Wes continued baseline phase using traditional
instruction. Rose began intervention second;
Wes continued in the baseline phase using the
traditional instruction and was the last student
to begin the intervention. Students only began the intervention phase once baseline stability was established.
Intervention. This condition consisted of
two treatments: video modeling and video
prompting. Six pairs (12 recipes total) of
matched recipes were used and each student
completed one of the matched recipes using
video modeling and the other recipe using
video prompting. During video modeling sessions, students were individually presented
with the iPod set to start on the selected video.
Each was then instructed to watch the entire
video at his/her desk. Once each student finished watching the video, he or she remained
seated for 5 minutes (5-minute time delay)
prior to beginning the cooking activity. At that
time, students were asked to move to the cooking area. Once there, students were presented
with a paper copy of the recipe and directed
to begin cooking. Throughout each session,
the system of least prompts was used when the
student required assistance with a task step.
During video prompting sessions, each student immediately moved to the table in the
kitchen area where he or she was given the
iPod set to start at the selected video. Each was
then instructed to pause the video after each
step and complete that step before pressing,
“Play,” to move on to the next step. Students
were also instructed to rewind the video if a
step needed to be viewed again before moving
on to the next step. Finally, each student was
provided a paper copy of the recipe. As during
video modeling sessions, the system of least
prompts was used to assist the students as they
completed each cooking step.
Follow-up. Two separate probes over a twoweek period were collected during this condition in which students completed two additional matched recipes. The first probe
recorded the student’s level of independence
as he or she continued to use his/her more
effective intervention used during the previous condition. The second follow-up probe
was conducted one week later where neither
video system was used. The purpose of this
final probe was to determine if student performance would return to baseline levels. As
in baseline and intervention, the percent of
steps completed independently by students
were recorded and the system of least prompts
was implemented as needed.
Interobserver Agreement and Treatment Integrity
Interobserver agreement data were collected
by a trained second observer for each student
across all three conditions. The second observer recorded whether the student completed steps independently or with prompts.
Interobserver data were collected by the second observer at the same time as the first
observer. The percent agreement for steps
completed independently by students was calculated by dividing the number of agreements
by the total of agreements plus disagreements
and multiplying those by 100. For Rose, data
were recorded during 33% of the baseline
sessions, 58% of the intervention sessions, and
100% of the maintenance sessions. Agreement was 100% for baseline and maintenance
and 97% for intervention. For Brittany, data
were recorded during 60% of the baseline
sessions, 50% of the intervention sessions, and
100% of the maintenance sessions. Agree-
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
505
Figure 1. Percentage of independent correct steps per session (Brittany).
ment was 100% for baseline and maintenance
and was 96% for intervention. For Wes, data
were recorded during 63% of baseline, 67% of
intervention, and 100% of maintenance sessions. Agreement was 100% during baseline
and maintenance and 95% during intervention.
A checklist was developed to assess treatment integrity during the intervention condition to ensure that the student began each
session by meeting with the researcher(s),
watching the appropriate video depending on
the intervention they were receiving for a
given session (this included having the students receive the time delay and prompts as
needed), and completing the recipe. Treatment integrity was collected for 33% of the
sessions for all three students and was 100%
for all of the sessions for all three of the
students
Results
Figures 1, 2 and 3 demonstrate the number of
steps each student was able to complete independently using video modeling or video
prompting while engaged in cooking tasks.
Visual analysis revealed all students increased
506
/
the number of steps they completed independently when using video prompting and modeling over baseline levels. Visual analysis indicated Brittany’s level of independence was
higher when using video prompting, while
Rose and Wes cooked more independently
when using video modeling.
Brittany. Figure 1 illustrates the percentage of steps Brittany completed independently while engaged in cooking tasks. She
completed 58.5% of the steps independently
during baseline 77.8% of during intervention
using video prompting and 74.3% independently using video modeling. The difference
between the percentages of steps completed
using the two independent variables was 3.5%
with video prompting resulting in slightly
greater independent performance. A nonparametric analysis (standardized mean difference effect size) was used to verify these intervention findings and confirmed the positive
effect of video prompting over video modeling for Brittany (d ⫽ 0.285, r ⫽ 0.14). During
the follow-up probe using video prompting,
Brittany completed 100% of steps independently. When video prompting was then withdrawn, her level of cooking independence
dropped to 90%.
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
Figure 2. Percentage of independent correct steps per session (Rose).
Rose. Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of
steps she completed independently while engaged in cooking tasks. Visual analysis indicates Rose completed tasks more independently when using video modeling. During
baseline, she completed 52.0% of task analysis
steps independently. However, this increased
during intervention where she completed
78.5% of steps independently using video
prompting and 87.0% using video modeling.
To confirm visual analysis findings of intervention data, the standard mean difference effect
size was calculated verifying video modeling
was slightly more effective than video prompting for Rose (d ⫽ 0.587, r ⫽ 0.28). During the
follow-up probe, Rose continued to increase
her percentage of independent task performance by completing 91.0% of steps independently using video modeling. When this video
system was withdrawn during the second
probe her level of cooking independence increased to 100%.
Wes. Figure 3 illustrates the percentage
of steps Wes completed independently while
engaged in cooking tasks. Visual analysis indicates he completed more steps independently when using video modeling than
when video prompting was used. During
baseline, he completed 42.83% of task analysis steps independently. This increased to
65.3% when using video prompting and
77.5% when using video modeling was used
during intervention sessions. The difference
between the percentages of steps completed
using the strategies (e.g., video modeling
and video prompting) was 12.2%. To confirm these findings, a nonparametric analysis (standardized mean difference effect
size) was conducted verifying that Wes completed tasks more independently when using video modeling (d ⫽ 0.706, r ⫽ 0.33).
During the first follow-up probe using video
modeling, Wes continued to increase his
level of independent task performance by
completing 91.0% of task analysis steps independently. However, when this was withdrawn, his level of cooking independence
dropped to 73%.
Social Validity
Each student was informally interviewed prior
to and following the study in order to determine whether they felt learning to cook was
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
507
Figure 3. Percentage of independent correct steps per session (Wes).
important and if video modeling and prompting were effective strategies to use. In addition, their teacher was also interviewed to confirm the social validity of cooking skills and
instructional procedures used by students.
Students unanimously agreed that learning to
cook was an important skill to learn and video
prompting and modeling were strategies that
made tasks “easier to do after seeing it.” Students also reported the availability of the written recipe in addition to the video prompts
and models were important for successfully
completing the cooking activities.
The teacher reported her students loved
using the video iPod technology but was concerned about using it herself due to her own
lack of knowledge on how to operate the
equipment. However, she indicated her intent
to incorporate the video strategies into her
“cooking curriculum for next year.” Additionally, she noted the potential benefits of using
video prompting and modeling for students
who were visual learners and indicated these
strategies might be beneficial for teaching her
students in other functional skill areas.
508
/
Discussion
Ensuring all students with disabilities receive
access to the general education curriculum is
not only a legal but ethical obligation for all
educators (Bechard, 2000; Hitchcock, Meyer,
Rose, & Jackson, 2002). Special educators
must also assure students will have access to a
curriculum that facilitates future autonomous
functioning in school, domestic, work, and
other community settings (Clark, Field, Patton, Brolin, & Sitlington, 1994). As such, a
clear need exists for education programs serving students with disabilities, including those
with mild intellectual disabilities, to provide
concurrent access to the general education
curriculum and a functional curriculum in
order to meet students’ academic and functional skill needs. The present investigation
compared the effectiveness of video prompting and video modeling delivered via iPod
Nanos when teaching functional cooking
skills to students with mild intellectual disabilities. The results indicated each student was
successful in using video prompting and video
modeling for independently completing novel
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
recipes and improving their accuracy over
baseline levels.
Increased independence was evident for
each student between baseline and intervention conditions. For students, baseline levels
ranged from 42.8% to 58.5%. During intervention when video prompting was used, independent performance increased from
65.3% to 78.5%. However, a somewhat higher
percentage was found for students when video
modeling was used with percentages of independence ranging from 74.3% to 87%. While
video modeling resulted in slightly greater
task performance, upon closer examination of
data, slight differences in student performance were measured between the two video
instructional methods. For example, both Wes
and Rose were able to complete cooking tasks
more independently when using video modeling whereas Brittany’s performance was
greater when using video prompting. Interestingly, while each student indicated their preferred video instructional system, only Rose
performed better with her nonpreferred system, video modeling. Previous studies examining student’s preferred instructional methods indicate some correlation between
preference
and
performance
(TaberDoughty, 2005; Taber-Doughty et al., 2008).
However, this remains an area in need of further validation.
Two separate follow-up probes were conducted to determine students’ ongoing level
of cooking independence. The first probe was
conducted to confirm the effectiveness of the
more effective intervention used during the
previous condition. The second probe examined whether each student’s level of independence when cooking would return to baseline
levels following withdrawal of the video system. All three students demonstrated a continued level of independence as observed during intervention when using their more
effective video system. When those systems
were removed during the follow-up probe, the
level of independent functioning decreased
slightly for both Brittany and Wes while Rose
increased in her performance level. Thus, students either improved in their cooking skills
or some carry-over effect existed as a result of
the similarity to the previous recipe completed when using the video system. Future
research may seek to expand this condition
over more sessions to confirm the effects of
the video systems on student performance. In
addition, a more accurate measure of student
learning might compare student performance
on similar recipes (e.g., similar number of
steps, type of food, equipment needed, and
preparation steps) previously completed using
a video system as well as novel recipes requiring only a few similarities.
While students in the present investigation
demonstrated increased independence in
cooking and following recipes when using
video modeling or video prompting, only
three students served as participants. Replication is needed to confirm these results when
used by students who experience mild intellectual disabilities. In addition, further studies
are needed to validate the use of video
prompting and video modeling by students
who experience high and low incidence disabilities. While there is a growing body of
literature demonstrating the effectiveness of
these video strategies with students who experience low incidence disabilities (e.g., Cihak et
al., 2006; Van Laarhoven et al., 2009) and
autism spectrum disorders (e.g., CharlopChristy & Daneshvar, 2003; Charlop-Christy,
Le, & Freeman, 2000), this research is still in
its infancy. When used by students who experience mild intellectual disabilities, the present investigation may represent the first to
involve this student population.
Although students in the current study were
generally successful in using video prompting
and modeling, one possible limitation to their
immediate success and independence may be
attributed to the equipment used to deliver
the videos. While lightweight and portable,
the iPod Nanos contained an extremely small
viewing screen. Students may have experienced limitations while completing cooking
activities due to an inability to see video details. As such, future studies may need to introduce similar forms of portable equipment
yet with larger screens for delivering video
models and prompts. Another potential limitation involves the teacher’s knowledge and
comfort level with the technology being used
to deliver the intervention. During the present study, the teacher expressed enthusiasm
about using video prompts and modeling with
her students yet was hesitant about using the
iPods dues to her own lack of knowledge in
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
509
how to program and operate the equipment.
As such, future studies should examine how
interventions are selected and used based on
the teacher’s knowledge and comfort level. In
addition, a second area of study might examine the amount of training a teacher receives
in the use of technology and its subsequent
use in the classroom.
More empirical studies are needed examining strategies for teaching functional skills
to students who experience mild intellectual
disabilities. While acquisition of functional
skills leads to a greater likelihood for future
independence and success in school, home
and community settings (Browder et al.,
2004; Brown et al., 1979), the declining curricular focus for students with mild intellectual disabilities may result in individuals
who struggle to complete basic life skills
(Bouck, 2004b). This study represents one
recent attempt to address functional programming with students who experience
mild intellectual disabilities while concurrently incorporating socially desirable technology during intervention. Future studies
should examine how to integrate new technologies in addressing skills for students
who continue to demonstrate a need for
functional programming. Additionally,
noted throughout this investigation were
numerous positive comments from peers
who indicated their desire to use the iPod
Nanos to assist them in completing their
work beyond the tasks targeted for intervention. Future studies may also examine the
social validity associated with the various
technologies used to deliver video prompts
and models to students in an effort to find
the most effective and those considered
most socially valid.
Finally, investigators should examine
whether or not the video systems are associated with the types of tasks targeted for intervention. For example, does video prompting
or video modeling work better with discrete
trial tasks or those less precise? Can they be
used for tasks with less clear outcomes such as
social interactions where appropriate responses may vary? Prospective studies might
investigate whether a linkage exists between
the video system used and type of task to be
completed.
510
/
References
Agran, M., Blanchard, C., Wehmeyer, M., &
Hughes, C. (2002). Increasing the problem-solving skills of students with developmental disabilities participating in general education. Remedial
and Special Education, 23, 279 –288.
Alberto, P. A., Cihak, D. F., & Gama, R. I. (2005).
Use of static picture prompts versus video modeling during simulation instruction. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 327–339.
Alwell, M., & Cobb, B. (2009). Functional life skills
curricular interventions for youth with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals,
32, 82–93.
Anderson, C., Coxson, L., Britt, M., HaugenMcLane, J., & Mullins, B. (1999). Cooking to learn:
Integrating reading and writing activities. San Antonio, TX: PCI Educational Publishing.
Anderson, C., Coxson, L., Lamontagne, C., Buteyn,
L., & Chapman, D. (2008). Cooking to learn 3:
Recipes from around the world. San Antonio, TX: PCI
Educational Publishing.
Apple Inc. (2010). iMovie (version 8.0.6). Cupertino, CA: Apple Inc.
Arnold-Reid, G. S., Schloss, P. J., & Alper, S. (1997).
Teaching meal planning to youth with mental
retardation in natural settings. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 166 –173.
Bechard, S. (2000, Oct.). Students with disabilities
and standards-based reform. Policy Brief: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning, Office of
Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, pp. 1– 8.
Belmont, J. M. (1966). Long-term memory in mental retardation. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), International
review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 7). New
York: Academic.
Billingsley, F. (1997, December). The problem and
place of functional skills in inclusive settings. In
G. Singer (Chair), The role of functional skills and
behavior instructional methods in inclusive education.
The Annual Meeting for Persons with Severe
Handicaps. Boston, MA.
Billingsley, F. F., & Albertson, L. R. (1999). Finding
a future for functional skills. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 298 –302.
Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal
post school outcomes of youth with disabilities:
Findings from the national longitudinal transition study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399 – 413.
Bouck, E. C. (2004a). Exploring secondary special
education for mild mental impairment: A program in search of its place. Remedial and Special
Education, 25, 367–382.
Bouck, E. C. (2004b). The state of curriculum for
secondary students with mild mental retardation.
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities,
39, 169 –176.
Bouck, E. C. (2007). Lost in translation: Educating
secondary students with mild mental impairment.
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 18, 79 – 87.
Bouck, E. C., Bassette, L., Taber-Doughty, T., Flanagan, S., & Szwed, K. (2009). Pentop computers as
tools for teaching multiplication to students with
mild intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 367–380.
Bouck, E. C., & Flanagan, S. M. (2010). Functional
curriculum – Evidence-based education?: Considering secondary students with mild intellectual
disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and
Developmental Disabilities, 45, 487– 499.
Browder, D., Flowers, C., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Karvonen, M., Spooner, F., & Algozzine, R. (2004).
The alignment of alternate assessment content
with academic and functional curricula. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 211–223.
Brown, L., Bronston, M. B., Hamre-Nietupski, S.,
Pumpian, I., Certo, N. & Gruenewald, L. (1979).
A strategy for developing chronological age-appropriate and functional curricular content for
severely handicapped adolescents and young
adults. Journal of Special Education, 13, 81–90.
Cannella-Malone, H., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., de la
Cruz, B., Edrisinha, C., & Lancioni, G. E. (2006).
Comparing video prompting to video modeling
for teaching daily living skills to six adults with
developmental disabilities. Education and Training
in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 344 –356.
Charlop-Christy, M. H., & Daneshvar, S. (2003).
Using video modeling to teach perspective taking
to children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 5, 12–21.
Charlop-Christy, M. H., Le, L., & Freeman, K. A.
(2000). A comparison of video modeling with in
vivo modeling for teaching children with autism.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30,
537–552.
Cihak, D., Alberto, P. A., Taber-Doughty, T., &
Gama, R. I. (2006). A comparison of static picture
prompting and video prompting simulation strategies using group instructional procedures. Focus
on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 21,
89 –99.
Cihak, D. F., Kessler, K. B., & Alberto, P. A. (2007).
Generalized use of a handheld prompting system.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28, 397– 408.
Clark, G. M., Field, S., Patton, J. R., Brolin, D. E., &
Sitlington, P. L. (1994). Life skills instruction: A
necessary component for all students with disabilities. A position statement of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 17, 125–124.
Collins, B. C., Branson, T. A., & Hall, M. (1995).
Teaching generalized reading of cooking product
labels to adolescents with mental disabilities
through the use of key words taught by peer
tutors. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 65–76.
Collins, C. B., & Stinson, D. M. (1995). Teaching
generalized reading of product warning labels to
adolescents with mental disabilities through the
use of key words. Exceptionality, 5, 163–181.
Coxson, L. & Anderson, C. (2001). Cooking to learn 2:
Integrating reading and writing activities. San Antonio, TX: PCI Educational Publishing.
Cronin, M. E. (1996). Life skills curricula for students with learning disabilities: A review of the
literature. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 53–
68.
D’Ateno, P., Mangiapanello, K., & Taylor, B. A.
(2003). Using video modeling to teach complex
play sequences to a preschooler with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5, 5–11.
Denny, P. J., & Test, D. W. (1995). The One-MoreThan technique to teach money counting to individuals with moderate mental retardation: A
systematic replication. Education and Treatment of
Children, 18, 422– 432.
Dunn, L. M. (1973). An overview. In Lloyd M.
Dunn, (Ed.), Exceptional children in the schools: Special education in transition (2nd ed.). New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Edgar, E. (1987). Secondary programs in special
education: Are many of them justifiable? Exceptional Children, 53, 555–561.
Edyburn, D. L. (1991). Fact retrieval by students
with and without learning handicaps using print
and electronic encyclopedias. Journal of Special
Education Technology, 11, 75–90.
Fazio, B. B., & Polsgrove, L. (1989). An evaluation of
the effects of training special educators to integrate microcomputer technology into match curricula. Journal of Special Education Technology,
10(2), 5–13.
Geiger, K. B., LeBlanc, L. A., Dillon, C. M., & Bates,
S. L. (2010). An evaluation of preference for
video and in vivo modeling. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 43, 279 –283.
Graves, T. B., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Kleinert, H. (2005). Using video prompting to teach
cooking skills to secondary students with moderate disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 40, 34 – 46.
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R.
(2002). Providing new access to the general curriculum: Universal design for learning. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 35(2), 8 –17.
Hutcherson, K., Langone, J., Ayers, K. M., & Clees,
T. (2004). Computer assisted instruction to teach
item selection in grocery stores: Assessment of
acquisition and generalization. Journal of Special
Education Technology, 19, 33– 42.
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
511
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2003, 31 U.S.C. (2004).
Kaye, H. S. (1997, July). Disability statistics abstract:
Education of children with disabilities, Number 19. San
Francisco, CA: Disability Statistics Rehabilitation
Research and Training Center, University of California, San Francisco.
Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Kennedy, C. H., Itkonen, T. L., & Lindquist, K.
(1994). Modality effects during equivalence class
formations: An extension of sight word reading
and concept development. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 673– 684.
Kirk, S. A. (1972). Educating exceptional children. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Krantz, P. J., MacDuff, G. S., Wadstrom, O., & McClannahan, L. E. (1991). Using video with developmentally disabled learners. In P. W. Dowrick
(Ed.), A practical guide to using video in the behavioral sciences. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Lancioni, G. E., Dijkstra, A. W., O’Reilly, M. F.,
Groeneweg, J., & Van den Hof, E. (2000). Frequent versus nonfrequent verbal prompts delivered unobtrusively: Their impact on the task performance of adults with intellectual disability.
Education and Training in Mental Retardation and
Developmental Disabilities, 35, 428 – 433.
Lancioni, G. E., Van den Hof, E., Boelens, H.,
Rocha, N., & Seedhouse, P. (1998). A computerbased system providing pictorial instructions and
prompts to promote task performance in persons
with severe developmental disabilities. Behavioral
Interventions, 13, 111–122.
Lancioni, G. E., Van den Hof, E., Furniss, F.,
O’Reilly, M. F., & Cunha, B. (1999). Evaluation of
a computer-aided system providing pictorial task
instructions and prompts to people with severe
intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability, 43, 61– 66.
Lin, A., Podell, D. M., & Rein, N. (1991). The effects
of CAI on word recognition in mildly mentally
handicapped and nonhandicapped learners. Journal of Special Education Technology, 11(1), 16 –25.
Luckasson, R., Borthwick-Duffy, S., Buntinx, W.,
Buntinx, H. E., Coulter, D. L., Craig, E. M., et al.
(2002). Definitions, classifications, and support systems (10th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
Lynch, E. C., & Beare, P. L. (1990). The quality of
IEP objectives and their relevance to instruction
for students with mental retardation and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 11,
48 –55.
Margalit, M. (1995). Effects of social skills training
for students with an intellectual disability. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 42, 75– 85.
512
/
Mechling, L. (2003). Effects of multimedia, computer-based instruction on grocery shopping fluency.
Journal of Special Education Technology, 19, 23–34.
Mechling, L. (2005). The effect of instructor-created video programs to teach students with disabilities: A literature review. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20, 25–36.
Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L., & Barthold, S. (2003).
Multimedia computer-based instruction to teach
students with moderate intellectual disabilities to
use a debit card to make purchases. Exceptionality,
11, 239 –254.
Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L., & Langone, J. (2002).
Computer-based video instruction to teach persons with moderate intellectual disabilities to
read grocery aisle signs and locate items. Journal of
Special Education, 35, 224 –240.
Newman, L. (2005). Family involvement in the educational development of youth with disabilities. Menlo
Park, CA. SRI International.
Newman, L., Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Knokey,
A. M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth
with disabilities up to 4 years after high school. A report
of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition
Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2009 –3017). Menlo Park,
CA: SRI International.
Nietupski, J., Hamre-Nietupski, S., Curtin, S., &
Shrikanth, K. (1997). A review of curricular research in severe disabilities from 1976 to 1995 in
six selected journals. Journal of Special Education,
31, 36 –55.
Nikopoulos, C. K., & Keenan, M. (2004). Effects of
video modeling on social initiations by children
with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37,
93–96.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No.
107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
Patton, J. R., Polloway, E. A., & Smith, T. E. C.
(2000). Educating students with mild mental retardation. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 15, 80 – 89.
Patton, J. R., Cronin, M. E., & Jairrels, V. (1997).
Curricular implications of transition: Lifeskills as
an integral part of transition education. Remedial
and Special Education, 18, 294 –306.
Polloway, E. A. (2004). A eulogy for MMI. DDD
Express, 14, pp. 1, 8.
Polloway, E. A. (2005). Mild retardation: The status
of a category of exceptionality. In J. J. Hoover, &
R. Hills (Eds.), 21st century issues in special education: Meeting diverse needs (pp. 35– 46). Boulder:
University of Colorado, BUENO Center.
Polloway, E. A. (2006). Mild mental retardation: A
concept in search of clarity, a population in
search of appropriate education and supports, a
profession in search of advocacy. Exceptionality,
14, 183–190.
Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R., Smith, T. E. C., & Buck,
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
G. H. (1997). Mental retardation and learning
disabilities: Conceptual and applied issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 297–308, 345.
Reschly, D. J. (2002). Change dynamics in special
education assessment: Historical and contemporary patterns. Peabody Journal of Education, 77, 117–
136.
Spitz, H. H. (1973). Consolidating facts into the
schematized learning and memory of educable
retardates. In N. R. Ellis (Eds.), International Review of Research in Mental Retardation, Vol. 6 (pp.
149 –168). New York: Academic Press.
Stephens, W. E. (1972). Equivalence formation by
retarded and nonretarded children at different
mental ages. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
77, 311–313.
Taber-Doughty, T. (2005). Considering student
choice when selecting instructional strategies: A
comparison of three prompting systems. Research
in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 411– 432.
Taber-Doughty, T., Patton, S. E., & Brennan, S.
(2008). Simultaneous and delayed video modeling: An examination of system effectiveness and
student preferences. Journal of Special Education
Technology, 23(1), 2–18.
Thomas, G. E. (1996). Teaching students with mental
retardation: A life goal curriculum planning guide.
Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Van Laarhoven, T., Johnson, J. W., Van LaarhovenMyers, T., Grider, K. L., & Grider, K. M. (2009).
The effectiveness of using a video iPod as a
prompting device in employment settings. Journal
of Behavioral Education, 18, 119 –141.
Van Laarhoven, T., & Van Laarhoven-Myers, T.
(2006). Comparison of three video-based instructional procedures for teaching daily living skills to
persons with developmental disabilities. Education
and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 365–
381.
Wert, B. Y., & Neisworth, J. T. (2003). Effects of
video self-modeling on spontaneous requesting in
children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 5, 30 –34.
Zeaman, D., & House, B. J. (1963). The role of
attention in retardate discrimination learning. In
N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency:
Psychological theory and research (pp. 159 –223).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zeaman, D., & House, B. J. (1979). A review of
attention theory. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of
mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research
(pp. 63–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Received: 29 September 2010
Initial Acceptance: 2 December 2010
Final Acceptance: 22 January 2011
Video Modeling and Prompting
/
513