The Effects of Severe Behavior Problems in Children on the Teaching Behavior of Adults

Abstract

Applied behavior analysts have focused on how adults can influence the problem behavior of children using a variety of behavior modification strategies. A related question, virtually unexplored, is how the behavior problems of children influence adults. This child-effects concept was explored empirically in a study involving 12 adults who were asked to teach four pairs of children in which one member of the pair exhibited problem behavior and the other typically did not. Results demonstrated that problem children displayed tantrums, aggression, and self-injury contingent on adult instructional attempts but not at other times, whereas nonproblem children showed little or no problem behavior at any time. Importantly, from a child-effects perspective, adults engaged in teaching activities with nonproblem children more often than with problem children. Also, when an adult worked with a problem child, the breadth of instruction was more limited and typically involved those tasks associated with lower rates of behavior problems. The implications of these results are discussed with respect to theories of escape behavior, current assessment practices, and intervention issues related to maintenance. The existence of child effects suggests that problem behavior may be better understood when it is conceptualized as involving a process of reciprocal influence between adult and child.

An examination of teacher instruction and student engagement involving adolescents with and without challenging behavior.

“…While there is some variation in recommended amounts depending upon whether instruction is focused on new information versus practice, the observed rates are dramatically less than recommended amounts under either condition. This mirrors previous findings showing minimal interactions between teachers and students as it relates to opportunities to respond and engagement with the curriculum (Carr et aL, 1991;Montague & Rinaldi, 2001;Wehby et aL, 1998). Given the wellestablished relationship between engagement and achievement (Greenwood et aL, 2002), this finding is especially frustrating.…”

“…However, teachers of students with behavior disorders have been found to use fewer questioning strategy practices within instructional sequences and provide, generally, less instruction with this student population (Carr et aL, 1991;Wehby et aL, 1998). Further, the use of effective teaching practices occurred infrequently with students identified with behavior disorders Walker, Severson, Feil, Stiller, & Golly, 1998;Wehby et aL 1998).…”

“…When students fail, school becomes aversive and, often, students' disruptive behaviors may be displayed as an avoidance of the academic tasks presented in the classroom environment (Carr, Taylor, & Robinson, 1991). Under such conditions problem behaviors tend to deter student interaction, resulting in limited engagement with the teacher and instruction Gunter, Denny, et aL, 1993;Tice, 1990).…”

“…Subsequently, teachers interact less with the students or use less effective learning strategies within the classroom setting . As a result, general interactions with students exhibiting challenging behaviors are lower in frequency as teachers identified the student's aggression with a greater severity (Carr et aL, 1991;Wehby et aL, 1998). Students may engage in undesired behaviors to avoid interaction with the teacher and engagement with the instructional content.…”

Task as Reinforcer: a Reactive Alternative to Traditional Forms of Escape Extinction

“…The fact that escape extinction can produce negative side effects and can suffer from logistical impediments and limited social validity has led some to almost entirely dismiss the strategy (Carr, Taylor, & Robinson, 1991;Dunlap et al, 1991) and others to refine analyses to design treatments reducing or precluding the need for escape extinction (e.g., Athens & Vollmer, 2010). Among other things, these analyses and treatments have benefited from consideration of The Matching Law (Baum, 1974;Herrnstein, 1961), which basically states that the relative rate of responding on one alternative will match the relative rate of reinforcement provided on that alternative.…”