No abstract

Classroom observations are frequently conducted with the purpose of comparing the behavior of a target student to that of other peers within the same classroom. A variety of procedures may be utilized by researchers and practitioners to collect such data; however, little is known of the accuracy of estimates of behavior produced by such procedures relative to continuous behavior recording for the target student, peers sampled as a representation of the class, and the class as a whole. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of estimates of frequently utilized peer comparison observation procedures relative to duration recording. Data were simulated for 4,000 classroom observations, with variations in level of classroom behavior and length of observation being simulated. Results indicated that an Every Fifth interval procedure resulted in the lowest levels of absolute error during single observations for target students, with planned activity checks resulting in the most accurate estimates of class-wide behavior. Despite differences being apparent in level of accuracy of single observations, differences in accuracy across procedures were not apparent when all observations of the same type (i.e., duration, level of classroom behavior, and observation procedure) were compared.

No abstract

Behavior does not occur in a vacuum—there are many environmental factors and events that contribute to the occurrence of behavior. When developing an intervention to address the behavior of students, it is critical to first consider the events in close temporal proximity to the behavior of interest. In this chapter, the authors discuss antecedent-behavior-consequent relations and how to effectively modify behavior in one of three ways: manipulating antecedents to behavior, altering the consequences of a behavior, and teaching replacement or alternative forms of the behavior. Further, the chapter provides a review of principles of operant conditioning: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment. Finally, the chapter provides an overview of key instructional strategies, such as imitation training, chaining, and shaping.

Behavior assessment describes the process of quantifying an operant dimension of student behavior, such that decisions can be made about the need for or effect of interventions. Assessment of behavior is essential to the successful implementation of intervention strategies, with failure of interventions often being attributed to lack of adequate assessment. The chapter describes the four primary purposes of behavioral assessment: universal screening, pre-intervention assessment, progress monitoring, and summative assessment. Next, the chapter describes various methods for assessment of behavior that may be utilized in school settings. Information is provided regarding direct behavior assessment and systematic direct observation, as well as systems for collecting such data on individual students and groups of students. Indirect behavior assessment through interviews, rating scales, office discipline referrals, and direct behavior ratings are also discussed. Finally, issues related to applied use of the described assessment tools are described.

Addressing the challenging behavior of students requires evidence-based interventions that can be implemented in school settings; however, there is a relative lack of literature investigating effective strategies for high school students in secondary settings. Behavior contracts have been used to address challenging behavior in elementary and middle settings but less so in high school settings. Furthermore, the extent to which they have involved student input at the high school level has been unclear despite research indicating that collaborative intervention development processes may be associated with several additional benefits beyond effectiveness. Despite these empirical shortcomings, behavior contracts may be well suited to address individual high school students’ challenging behavior given their flexibility, collaborative nature, and use of goal setting and clearly stated contingencies (i.e., rules) to promote behavior change. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the acceptability and effectiveness of a structured interview informed behavior contract intervention to address the disruptive behavior of high school students. Specifically, we used a multiple baseline design across three students and found that the interview-informed behavior contracts were effective in increasing their academically engaged behavior (Tau = .62) and decreasing disruptive and passive off-task behavior. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract