How do you spell lawsuit? For example, for some reason
(!) the national Council for Exceptional Children offers Liability
insurance.
Quote:
"Fortunately, as a CEC member, you have access to a
professional liability plan specifically designed to
protect you as a full- or part-time educator. As a
full-time employee, you may choose coverage limits from
$500,000 to $2,000,000 at competitive rates."
Functional Behavioral Assessment: How?
IDEA/1997 calls for a FAB approach and behavioral plans
for students. The Amendments do not call for
specific approaches, techniques, or strategies when
conducting FAB, however. The assumption seems to be that
competent teachers don't need that level of hand-holding.
Good point!
So,
logic would suggest that well-schooled teachers follow an
approach that is time-proven, classroom-tested, and
researched-based. The approach is called the
"diagnostic-prescriptive" approach (Bateman,
1963) and the steps in such an approach are as follows...
Step
1. Define the target behavior.
Be specific! "Johnny is bad," is not
specific. "Johnny hits the computer keyboard with his
fist" is specific. "Sharon is crude" won't
do it. "Sharon picks her nose" does fit the
specificity bill!
The
key? The so-called target behavior must be (a)
observable (can you see it occurring?) and (b) measurable
(can you count it?).
Step
2. Define the context.
Context consists of (a) where (where the
behavior occurs); (b) when (what time of day the
behavior occurs); (c) how often (how often the
behavior occurs; or, how long the behavior occurs); and
(d) why (why the behavior occurs).
Notes:
Students often act out when ill, off their meds,
around new teachers, hungry, triggered by disruptions in
their immediate vicinity. Students often act out where
the location is new/different/strange/unfamiliar (on a
walk, in a playground, on a bus, in a new building, in a
store). Students often act out because of
unfamiliar sounds, unfamiliar volume of sound, number of
distractors in a new environment/ location (fast food
eatery, transportation, trip), different set of task
requests (from a substitute teacher or aide).
Students
act up often, depending on location, how they are
feeling, and time of day or week (notice the number of
times a teacher or aide must instruct the student to sit
down, stop yelling, "behave" [whew!], be
quiet....). If the context is new, different, loud,
distracting, or muchly wanted (a lunchtime meal), be alert
to the behavioral "trigger" that context
alone may pose.
Inappropriate student-directed teacher verbal behavior is
a common and overlooked form of child abuse. Competent
teachers seldom need yell at or dictate to students. My
advice (seldom heeded!): "If you wouldn't say it to
Evander Holyfield, don't say it to a student."
To wit: All
behavior occurs in context. Observe the target behavior in
a variety of settings and at different times to ensure
that you can define the context.
Step
3. Describe Antecedents
What
has happened just before the target behavior
occurs?
The
success of your forthcoming intervention will be
influenced by your level of specificity here, at this
point. Some important antecedents that can
influence the target behavior: Heat and humidity in the
room? Noisy trucks collecting garbage outside the window?
Fire engine screaming by? Other students acting act?
Several adults in the area yelling at other students?
Public address system blaring? Classroom door repeatedly
opening/closing loudly? Student recently given (or not
given) prescribed meds? Firedrill?
Step
4. Describe Consequences
The
success of your forthcoming intervention will be
influenced by your level of specificity here, at this
point. Some important consequences that can
influence the target behavior: Was the behavior ignored?
By everyone? Was the behavior followed by dictates of
"Stop!" "No!" "Bad boy!"
"OK, no lunch for you!" "Hey, GREAT
WORK!" Did one person address the situation or did
several adults "put in their two cents?" Was the
scenario repeated to provide the student with an
opportunity to freely engage in more appropriate behavior?
The
form presented below provides a well-known, often-used
method for collecting Behavioral Plan information
(Skinner, 1953). This A-B-C Form is divided into
three columns. The 'A'-column consists of events that
occurred just prior to the target behavior. Column 'B'
simply lists the target behavior. Column 'C' provides a
space to jot down events in the setting that happened just
after the behavior occurred. You will of course expect to
find a relationship emerge between "A" and
"B" which in turn will influence both
"A" and "B" and "C" at some
point.
This A-B-C
model is really brilliant in its simplicity. Given a
measurable, observable student Behavior, events or
conditions that precede the behavior (setting events,
input factors, instructional context) are termed
Antecedents. Whatever follows the target behavior are the
Consequences. If the target behavior is maintained or
increased, the consequences proved to be reinforcing. If
the (student) behavior decreases, by definition the
consequences proved punishing.
Summary CHECKLIST
 |
Behavior: Observable.
Measurable. |
|
Context: WHERE |
|
Context: WHEN |
|
Context: HOW OFTEN |
|
Context: WHY |
|
ANTECEDENTS noted |
|
CONSEQUENTS noted |
|
OTHERS who have taken
notes
of their observations of the target behavior. |
Step
5. Record target behavior
Great
work! You have defined the target behavior. You have
observed the context in which the behavior repeatedly
occurs. You have noted several antecedent events or
factors that you conclude may play a role in the
occurrence of the behavior. You have also noted the
consequences that occur after the behavior occurs.
Finally, you have taken the time to consult with and
compare your notes with others who have been observing the
behavior as well. Job well done!
Time
now to record the behavior. You have two practical
choices: (1) Do a frequency count: How many
times does the behavior occur during a specified period of
time? (2) Do a duration check: How long does
the behavior continue once it is initiated?
All you
need is a small notepad with a drawn grid and room for the
specifics: Student name. Location. Time. Day. Date. ...
Also a space for your notes regarding antecedent and
consequence information.
Sample ABC Direct Observation FORM
| Student: |
Day/Date: |
| Observer: |
Time: |
| Lesson: |
Location: |
| Behavior: |
|
ANTECEDENTS |
BEHAVIOR |
CONSEQUENCES |
|
|
|
|
ABC CONTEXT Form
(This form would be reproduced on the back of the
above form)
| Student:
______________________Observer: __________________
Date:_______ Time: _____Lesson:
__________________________ |
|
Behavior Context:
Antecedents:
Target Behavior:
Consequences:
Comments/Other Observers:
|
Step
6. Prepare Behavioral Plan
Time to write up the
Behavioral Plan!
What triggers and maintains the target behavior
and what can be done about it? That is the question.
You
the teacher are most likely the one who conducted the
direct observation, collected the data, and logged the
information. Remember, though: What is done with the data
will and should be a Team
Decision.
Such is law! Who is on your diagnostic/prescriptive
team will in large part be defined by the administration
(for good or less good!) at your site.
Unless
there are monumental egos involved, you as the homeroom
teacher will carry the most weight. Public schools are
busy places with never enough time to get most jobs done
thoroughly. Paper compliance is the honest name of the
game. Make it look good and all will be fine. A major task
confronting you, therefore, will be to ensure that the
write-up is comprehensive and reflects the information you
have collected. If you have been around awhile as a
teacher, you already know that it won't be easy -- unless
you are fortunate enough to have truly competent superiors
committed to getting the job done right. "Let the
data do the talking" insofar as politically possible.
(Seasoned teachers know what I mean!)
When
preparing the Plan,
look for behavior patterns; that is, under same or similar
context conditions, does the student display the target
behavior that has caused team concern? With sufficient
data, patterns will emerge.
Develop a Behavioral Objective (BO). Given the information
the team has agreed on, the BO will state the functional
behavior, the conditions, and the criterion. (For six
examples, please visit the Lesson Plan area of this
website -- Lesson
Plans.)
BO Components
(1) Functional Behavior
-- attention (e.g., one-to-one verbal praise from
teacher); or, task avoidance (e.g., get out of having to
do a vocational education matching & sorting task);
or, self-stimulation (playing with one's private parts).
(2) Conditions -- the
context behaviors that most of the time are related to the
occurrence of the target behavior. For example, when the
student is left to work or play alone in the classroom, he
begins to yell and shout. Time and again that same
"if...then" contingency happens. Leave the
student alone and he begins to shout and yell. Solution to
try: Peer teaching. If this change in the context results
in the student spending more time on task and less (or no)
episodes of yelling/shouting, then the behavior plan is
working.
(3) Criteria -- the level of
student performance you expect. Example, "Liz will
stop hitting herself for 30 seconds."
Step
7. Implement Behavioral Plan
Does it get the job done?
Try it
out! Since we are "taking it to the bank today,"
as we try to save you wasteful, silly staff development
training time and money, take this to the bank: The
ultimate key to the success of the Plan is ... Generalization.
Visit this webpage and note well. Generalization indeed is
the sine qua non of instruction. (If anyone tries
to tell you anything different, write them up a
Behavioral Plan. They need to change their behavior!)
References
Bateman, B. (1967). Three approaches to diagnosis and
educational planning for children with learning
disabilities. Academic Therapy, 92, 215-222.
Becker, W.C. (Ed.). (1988). Special issue: Direct
instruction. Education and Treatment of Children, 11,
297-402.
Becker, W.C., & Carnine, D. (1981). Direct
instruction: A behavior theory model for comprehensive
educational intervention with the disadvantaged. In S.W.
Bijou & R. Ruiz (Eds.), Behavior modification:
Contributions to education (pp. 145- 210). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Becker, W.C., Engelmann, S., & Thomas, D.R. (1975).
Basic requirements for teaching concepts. In W.C. Becker,
S. Engelmann, & D.R. Thomas, Teaching 2: Cognitive
learning and instruction (pp. 57-75). Chicago: Science
Research Associates.
Bijou, S.W. (1963). Theory and research in mental
(developmental) retardation. The Psychological Record, 13,
95-110.
Bijou, S.W. (1975). Development in the preschool years:
A functional analysis. American Psychologist, 30, 829-837.
Brown, L. (1973). Instructional programs for trainable
level retarded students. In L. Mann & D.A. Sabatino
(Eds.), The first review of special education (Vol. 2, pp.
103-136). Philadelphia: Buttonwood Farms.
Dunlap, G., Kern, L., dePerczel, M., Clarke, S.,
Wilson, D., Childs, K.E., White, R., & Falk, G.D.
(1993). Functional analysis of classroom variables for
students with emotional and behavioral disorders.
Behavioral Disorders, 18, 275-291.
Engelmann, S.E., Becker, W.C., Carnine, D., &
Gersten, R. (1988). The Direct Instruction Follow Through
Model: Design and outcomes. Education and Treatment of
Children, 11, 303-317.
Gable, R.A. (1996). A critical analysis of functional
assessment: Issues for researchers and practitioners.
Behavioral Disorders, 22, 36-40.
Gresham, F.M. (1991). Whatever happened to functional
analysis in behavioral consultation? Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 2, 387-392.
Haynes, S.N., & Brien, W.H. (1990). Functional
analysis in behavior therapy. Clinical Psychology Review,
10, 649-668.
Hedbring, C., & Holmes, C. (1977). Getting it
together with PL 94-142: The IEP in the classroom.
Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 12,
212-224.
Iwata, B.A., Vollmer, T.R., & Zarcone, J.R. (1990).
The experimental (functional) analysis of behavior
disorders: Methodology, applications, and limitations. In
A.C. Repp & N. Singh (Eds.), Aversive and nonaversive
treatment: The great debate in developmental disabilities
(pp. 301-330). DeKalb, IL: Sycamore Press.
Kantor, J.R. (1970). The analysis of the experimental
analysis of behavior (TEAB). Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior, 13, 101-108.
Overton, T. (1992)> Assessment in special education:
An applied approach (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Pierce, W.D., & Epling, W.F. (1980). What happened
to the analysis in applied behavior analysis? The Behavior
Analyst, 3, 1-10.
Raschke, D., & Young, A. (1976). A comparative
analysis of the diagnostic-prescriptive and
behavioral-analysis models in preparation for the
development of a dialectic pedagogical system. Education
and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 11, 135-145.
Rosenshine, B. (1983). Teaching functions in
instructional programs. The Elementary School Journal, 83,
335-351.
Sasso, G.M., Reimers, T.M., Cooper, L.J., Wacker, D.,
& Berg, W. (1992). Use of descriptive and experimental
analyses to identify the functional properties of aberrant
behavior in school settings. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 25, 809-821.
Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New
York: The Free Press.
Smith, N.W. (1973). Interbehavioral psychology: Roots
and branches. The Psychological Record, 23, 153-167.
Williams, W., Brown, L., & Certo, N. (1975). Basic
components of instructional programs. Theory Into
Practice, 14, 123-136.
Ysseldyke, J.E., & Salvia, J. (1974).
Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching: Two models. Exceptional
Children, 41, 181-185.
Reminder: Please consider downloading
Biblio-Refs
--
THE practical Assistant. |
steppec@aol.com