ABA 510 M6 Project

Evaluation Tool: Individual Student Systems Evaluation Tool (ISSET)

The Individual Student Systems Evaluation Tool assesses how well secondary and tertiary systems are implemented in a school for individual students. There are three parts that the ISSET measures that all have unique features: foundations needed for individual student systems, targeted interventions used for groups of students, and intensive individualized student support interventions. Interviews and a review of permanent products and documented procedures are used to score the ISSET. Interviews generally do not take very long and involve interviewing an administrator for around 15 minutes, a behavior support team leader for around 30 minutes, and five staff members for only a minute each. The types of permanent products used can include up to 5 functional behavior assessments and behavior support plans, a description of targeted interventions that are available to students, and a training material for staff on targeted interventions to name a few. The short interview times for school staff and the use of permanent products to help record data make ISSET efficient and effective without having to use direct observation. Interview questions for the behavior support team leader are geared towards understanding how well the school is prepared to address targeted and intensive behavior support for individuals students. Once all of the data is gathered and scored, two graphs can be made to show the percentage of implementation for each area. One graph shows the percentage of implementation of the unique features that make up each part and the other graph shows the summary score for each part (foundations, targeted, intensive).

Pros - Focuses on the secondary and tertiary systems where more intensive intervention is needed.

- Permanent product review is used which provides relatively good insight without direct observation.

- Staff interview times are short on average and are yes/no questions. Entire evaluation takes 2-3 hours.

- ISSET aids in identifying strengths and weaknesses of a school’s implementation of a tiered behavioral system.

Cons - Indirect assessment. Relies on other people’s opinion, perspective, and documentation.

- Process for acquiring permanent products/ material could take a while.

- Have to work around staff schedules.

Outcome for Student Specific Pathway The ISSET would be an important tool to use in order to advocate for a specific student coming from an autism program into a general education classroom. If the student has behaviors that require secondary and tertiary interventions, it would be necessary to proactively assess the new environment for behavioral systems in place that would help the student to succeed.

Evaluation Tool: Efficient Functional Behavior Assessment: The Functional Assessment Checklist for

Teachers and Staff (FACTS)

The Efficient Functional Behavior Assessment: FACTS is an interview that is given to people (teachers, family, clinicians) who know a student the best in order to help build a behavior support plan for the student. It should be administered by someone who is proficient in implementing function based support, like a board certified behavior analyst (BCBA). The interview only takes about 15-20 minutes and then a short observation should be carried out to validate the results of the interview and to form a hypothesis on the function of the target behavior(s). The FACTS identifies strengths of the student to potentially be used in the intervention as preferred activities or as reinforcement. It also identifies problem behaviors and the specific environments that each behavior is most likely to occur. This provides the BCBA with context surrounding the behaviors and gives insight into possible antecedents and consequences. Once antecedents, setting events, and consequences that maintain the problem behavior are identified, FACTS can be used to help identify a function and to build and develop a support plan by a BCBA.

Pros - Interview takes a short amount of time (15-20 min)

- BCBA can gather important information about target behaviors from people who are close to the student without spending significant time observing.

- Preferred/reinforcement stimuli can be identified without carrying out preference assessments.

Cons - Indirect assessment that relies on the opinions and perceptions of others. Some people who are close to the student may have different perceptions of the student’s behaviors (parent vs. teacher)

- Confidence in the summary statement from the interview may not be high enough to move a plan into development.

Outcome for Student Specific Pathway - By using FACTS to interview people close to the student (home, school, clinic), the BCBA can gain insight into different aspects of their life that may contribute to behavioral interventions.

- FACTS helps to determine and implement a function based treatment within a behavior support plan. This is an important tool to aide FBAs and FAs.

Part 2:

My tool that would allow me to reflect on my consultation services would be based on Bergan’s Model of Behavioral Consultation. Bergan’s model addresses academic social, and behavioral problems while using ABA and a structured problem solving approach to evaluate outcomes. My tool would involve a self rating system which correlates to how each of the 7 components of this model was carried out throughout my consultation. In addition, the consultee would be given the same rating system to rate my consultation services. If applicable, a third party who was heavily involved in treatment but not a direct consultee of mine could also fill out the rating system. By taking the average of my self rating, consultee rating, and a potential third party rating, I could have a good grasp on how I thought my consultation was vs. how others view it in relation to Bergan’s model. Each rating would be accompanied by a brief explanation. By comparing myself to this model, I can ensure that my consultation was effective. The scale for each component would be as follows: 1- Strongly disagree, 2-Disagree, 3- Neither agree nor disagree, 4- Agree, 5-Strongly agree.

1. The consultee actively participated in designing, implementing, and evaluating a plan. The consultee learned what and how to implement what the consultant was teaching.

2. The client can be involved in the same capacity as the consultee is in order to learn problem solving techniques. The involvement was dependent on the ability of the client, the problem itself, and how the consultee wanted the client to participate.

3. There is a knowledge link between consultant and consultee. The consultant became a methodical teacher and the consultee became a student who learned hands on in a clinical environment.

4. Decisions made for the client are based on evidence based practices. Direct observations of the client’s behavior allowed the consultant to suggest methods that are backed by evidence.

5. Consultation seeks to define the problems specific to the client. Consultation was used to determine goals unique to the client.

6. Environmental factors are crucial in controlling behavior and these conditions were altered using behavioral techniques.

7. Focuses on goal attainment instead of what is wrong with the client. Showed progress of client and focused on what has been achieved.

References

Erchul, W. P., & Martens, B. K. (2002). School Consultation: Conceptual & Empirical Bases of Practice (3rd Ed., p. 93). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: New York.

Brinkman, Tara M, et al. “Writing Comprehensive Behavioral Consultation Reports: Critical Elements .” International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, vol. 3, no. 3, 2007, pp. 372–383.