between the child and the item, after the child made an initiation (McGee et al., 1986). Generalization probes occurred throughout the baseline and after every fifth session, along with changes in the types of stimuli (McGee et al., 1986). For example, changes in the font style and font size were made on the card (McGee et al., 1986). The results exhibited that incidental teaching yields generalization to functional reading and comprehension skills; therefore, indicating that incidental teaching is a valid procedure to use for other skills other than vocal communication (McGee et al., 1986). McGee et al. (1983) discussed that incidental teaching is a procedure that can teach language skills and other adaptive skills concurrently. These skills could include meal preparation, leisure activities, or self-care skills (McGee et al., 1983).

Incidental teaching is a very popular procedure among communication and has been proven very effective. It expands on the child initiation, so it is a good method for the child to understand the context of the word and/or phrase. However, not all children with autism make initiations that show clearly what they prefer or want, so it is difficult to use incidental teaching. Therefore, McGee et al. (1983) developed a modified incidental teaching procedure that is based on the principles of the standard incidental procedure, but it is aimed to increase the receptive language skills of autistic children who have severe language delays. The children who have severe language delays do not initiate interaction by language or gestures (McGee et al., 1983).

Two children were both in a Teaching Family Model group home and both have been institutionalized there for a little over seven years (McGee et al., 1983). One of the participants was fifteen years old, and the ot