A comparative analysis of the CABAS® model of education at the Fred S. Keller School: A twenty-year review.

Abstract

The Comprehensive Application of Behavior Analysis to Schooling or CABAS ® model is characterized by an organizational system of teacher training and mentoring by those with more expertise in the science of behavior analytic teaching. At the center of the system are the students, whose data drive the system. Decades of research support the CABAS ® model as a whole as well as its components, which include a fundamental unit of measure and analysis, a criterion-referenced assessment that is also a curriculum, and the incorporation of teacher training modules created to develop teachers who are strategic scientists of pedagogy. When the CABAS ® system was first analyzed in 1989, data across one school year reflected the increased effectiveness of instruction as measured by student outcomes. Twenty years later, we provide a comparative analysis of data from a similar school where the CABAS ® model has been faithfully implemented for over two decades. Our data reflect an evolution of the CABAS ® model, as a function of increased teacher expertise, more accurate and valid measurement and analyses of relevant data, and more effective assessment and teaching strategies, all of which have lead to improved student outcomes.

An analysis of a system under pandemic conditions

“…The number of learn-units to criterion (Greer, 2002;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010) or the number of learn units required to master instructional objectives, was used to monitor client progress. This data indicated potentially problematic targets or teaching procedures, or demonstrated that a client was mastering objectives with the current teaching procedures in place.…”

“…The TPRAs are objective measures of a teacher or practitioner's accuracy of delivering learn unit instruction (Ingham & Greer, 1992). When teachers present accurate learn units, children learn four to seven times faster than when learn units are presented inaccurately (Albers & Greer, 1991;Greer & McDonough, 1999;Ross et al, 2005;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010). The term procedural integrity is often used to refer to scoring the accuracy of implementation.…”

“…Though CABAS ® was first designed as a model for schools, it can be adapted to any type of educational or therapeutic organization. The model must encompass certain definable, critical, interlocking components which are each validated for a specific measure of fidelity and produce performance data that drives change within the system (Greer, 1997;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010). The components include: a) maintaining a positive classroom environment, b) unique instruction for each student based on individual student responding and the research literature base, c) collecting data and making data-based decisions using graphs, d) making student progress data available for view, e) using logically and empirically tested curricula and curricular sequences to teach socially significant repertoires and f) providing performance modules for staff (Greer et al, 2002;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010).…”

“…The model must encompass certain definable, critical, interlocking components which are each validated for a specific measure of fidelity and produce performance data that drives change within the system (Greer, 1997;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010). The components include: a) maintaining a positive classroom environment, b) unique instruction for each student based on individual student responding and the research literature base, c) collecting data and making data-based decisions using graphs, d) making student progress data available for view, e) using logically and empirically tested curricula and curricular sequences to teach socially significant repertoires and f) providing performance modules for staff (Greer et al, 2002;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010). Research on the CABAS ® model has established it as an effective instructional approach correlated with improved student outcomes and teacher effectiveness (Greer, 1997;Greer et al, 1989Greer et al, , 2002Selinske et al, 1991;Singer-Dudek et al, 2010).…”

Addressing the feasibility of the teacher performance rate and accuracy scale as a treatment integrity tool

“…Compared to previous studies on the effects of training on treatment integrity (Cook et al., 2015), which typically include a dependent variable like the percentage of steps implemented correctly, the current study's inclusion of a tool that also analyzes rate of instructional trials presents an added benefit. Singer‐Dudek et al (2010) explain that the TPRA scale is generally conducted by behavior analyst supervisors who train junior teachers and/or teaching assistants to ensure that correct learn units are presented at appropriate rates to support active student responding (Ingham & Greer, 1992; Ross et al., 2005, as found in Singer‐Dudek et al., 2010). The TPRA scale presents as not only a direct measure of the treatment integrity of the teacher but also a direct measure of learner responses.…”