Final Project 1
gicalderon27
anafinal.docxRunning head: ACTION RESEARCH 1
ACTION RESEARCH 2
Evaluating the Effects of Behavioral Interventions on Off-task/On-task Behavior in Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Action Research Study
Abstract
During the teaching-learning process of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), educators must frequently address off-task behaviors that interfere with classroom instruction and contribute to poor academic performance. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, all students, including those with ASD, started to attend their classes at home through distance learning sessions. This change led to an increase in the frequency of student’s off-task behaviors. Due to this change, the analysis of strategies to minimize them was crucial. This research project aims to examine the effects of behavioral antecedent and consequent strategies to decrease students’ off-task behaviors and increase the performance of positive behaviors, such as time on task and requesting assistance or attention. The data collection process took place through the observation, the Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST), and the Event Recording Tool. These methods helped identify the factors that influenced the students’ off-task behaviors and record their frequency in real-time. In conjunction with the literature review, these methods allowed the application of the best interventions for decreasing students’ off-task behaviors and increasing their compliance with academic tasks. Based on the results of a functional behavioral assessment, the researchers applied a behavioral intervention plan. Data were collected before, during, and after implementing the interventions to show to what extent the interventions were effective. The action research demonstrated that the behavioral antecedent and consequent interventions decreased the off-task behaviors in the students and increased the performing of replacement skills such as time on task and the requesting of assistance or attention. Comment by Arbelo, Dr. Floralba: Very well written. Good detail, all aspects of your study are covered here.
Keywords: Autism Spectrum Disorder, off-task behavior, behavioral intervention, replacement skills, distance learning
Evaluating the Effects of Behavioral Interventions on Off-task/On-task Behavior in Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Action Research Study
Introduction and Statement of the Problem Comment by Arbelo, Dr. Floralba: This is a level 2 heading and should have been left aligned.
In our profession as behavior therapists, we work with students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) who exhibit off-task behaviors during their presentation and performing of non-preferred demands and activities. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, these students experienced significant environmental changes when they started to attend their classes at home through distance learning sessions. This situation implied changes in the context and instructions of academic activities. Consequently, off-task behaviors increased during this time at home learning school. Instead of taking care of prescribed schoolwork, the students preferred to do unrelated things. They avoided eye contact with instructors and materials frequently and did not follow instructions by moving away from the area of learning and making noises or vocalizing out of context. This situation was a challenge for parents who do not have the necessary resources and strategies to deal with the maladaptive behaviors of their children. Parents and caregivers may find themselves struggling to balance their professional and household responsibilities while supporting their children during these uncertain times (Eske, 2020).
This research project aims to examined the effects of behavioral antecedent and consequent strategies to decrease students’ off-task behaviors and increase the performing of positive behaviors, such as time on task and requesting assistance or attention. Investigating the causes of off-task behavior, as well as finding ways to mitigate, it is significant because off-task behavior has the potential to undermine the academic performance and growth of a student (Akey, 2006; Cocea, Hershkovitz, & Baker, 2009; Breakthrough Collaborative, 2009, as cited in George, 2016). Therefore, this change is meaningful for all the persons involved in the teaching-learning process: students, educators, parents, and behavior therapists because students will collaborate in their teaching and successfully engage in distance learning sessions at home.
The data collection process took place through the observation, the Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST), and the Event Recording Tool. These methods helped the researchers to identify the factors that influenced the students’ off-task behaviors and record their frequency in real-time. Also, in conjunction with the literature review, these methods allowed the researchers to apply the best interventions for decreasing students’ off-task behaviors and increasing their compliance with academic tasks. Based on the results of a functional behavioral assessment, the researchers applied a behavioral intervention plan. Data were collected before, during, and after implementing the interventions to show to what extent were effective.
The results indicated that the main functions that kept off-task behaviors on the students were the escape from non-preferred academic activities, attention, and access to preferred activities. At the end of the implementation of the behavioral intervention plan, the students’ off-task behaviors decreased significantly and increased the performing of desired behaviors such as time on task and the requesting of assistance or attention.
Through this action research project, the researchers were able to validate behavioral interventions effective to address students’ off-task behaviors. These interventions are relatively simple to apply and require very little training to understand their use. Therefore, they can be applied by parents at home.
Literature Review
Off-task/On-task Behavior
ASD leads to students having some form of off-task behavior, which affects their learning. Off-task behavior is where the student or child is engaging in inappropriate interactions with their immediate environment that is against the instruction. It is critical to understand how to increase the on-task behavior for autistic students when they are learning at home.
The variety of interventions or intervention approaches that can be and have been effectively applied to disruptive, off-task behaviors is considerable. DuPaul, Wyandt, and Janusis (2011) provided a comprehensive review of these interventions, the most common of which were identified as medications and behavioral interventions. The behavioral interventions, those based on learning theory, were further characterized as being antecedent- or consequence-based ones.
Behavioral Antecedent and Consequent Strategies
There are various behavioral antecedent and consequent strategies that can reduce the task refusal behavior (Pellecchia et al., 2020) and can be useful when the students are engaging in distance learning sessions at home.
Behavioral antecedent strategies are the people, events, and things that come immediately before the problem behavior. In behavioral antecedent strategies, antecedent stimuli are manipulated to evoke appropriate behaviors to differentially reinforce them and reduce inappropriate behaviors that interfere with appropriate behaviors (Miltenberger, 2013). A number of antecedent strategies have been developed to address off-task behaviors in children with ASD. Four commonly utilized strategies to enhance on-task behavior are the delivery of reinforcement on a fixed-time (FT) schedule (sometimes referred to as noncontingent reinforcement or NCR), the high probability sequence, reducing task demands by modifying the length and/or difficulty of assignments, and giving students choices of which assignments or steps to complete first.
NCR involves giving the student access to a reinforcer frequently enough that they are no longer motivated to exhibit disruptive behavior to obtain that same reinforcer. It consists of allowing students to take small breaks during the presentation of non-desirable tasks. Research has shown that NCR decrease disruptive behavior and increase the time engaged in tasks and the compliance to academic instructions (Carr et al., 2000; Kodak, Miltenberger, & Romaniuk, 2003; Waller & Higbee, 2010). High probability request (high-p) sequences consist of having students consistently comply with several directions to perform desirable behaviors, and that momentum persists when a subsequent direction is changed to a perceived undesirable behavior. High-p have been an effective intervention for improving compliance and work completion for students who display challenging behaviors (Maag, 2020).
Reducing task demands by modifying the length and/or difficulty of assignments has been proven to decrease triggering behaviors in children with ASD. Reducing task length, allows children with ASD to decrease any frustrations they could be feeling from the lengthy, difficult task, thus minimizing challenging behaviors that may be exhibited for the purpose of escaping the situation (Luke, 2017). Offering children with ASD choices between activities (e.g., working on math or English), instructional materials (e.g., using a pen or pencil), or environmental arrangements (e.g., where to sit) has been shown to reduce challenging behavior maintained by escape from task demands (Rispoli et al., 2013).
Behavioral consequent strategies are techniques that can be used after the behavior occurs to decrease the reinforcement and provide the student with an alternative behavior (Miltenberger, 2013). Two behavioral consequence interventions that are effective in reducing off-task behaviors are the Premack Principle and Differential Negative Reinforcement of Alternative Behaviors (DNRA).
The Premack Principle (Premack, 1959, as cited in Maag, 2020) states that a high-probability behavior can be contingent upon the occurrence of a low-probability behavior. A high-probability behavior is one that students have a greater likelihood of engaging in when they have free access to preferred activities or objects. High preference activities will be used to reinforce the participation of the students in low preference activities (e.g., school assignments and homework).
The DNRA consists of allowing the students to exit the non-preferred activities for several minutes when they request a break in an appropriate manner (using his/her words appropriately or using a gesture). DNRA has been used in a wide variety of studies to decrease behavior problems maintained by negative reinforcement, and to increase appropriate behaviors, which substitute for behavior problems (Golonka et al., 2000; Marcus & Vollmer, 1995; Piazza, Moes & Fisher, 1996; Roberts, Mace & Daggett, 1995; Etak Steege, 1990, as cited in Miltenberger, 2013).
Reinforcement is a common effective practice that has been used in combination with the other strategies explained above. The teacher and parents may reinforce on-task behaviors with praise or a token that would later be traded in for a desired reward. Reinforcement describes the connection between a student’s behavior and a consequence for that behavior. The consequence is only considered reinforcing if it increases the chance that the student will engage in the behavior again in the future (Wong et al., 2014). An example of using reinforcement in the classroom or at home is a teacher or parent providing an attention-seeking student with a high-five when the student completes a task. In this example, the student likes the attention received when he or she completes the task, and therefore is more likely to continue completing tasks, in order to keep getting those high-fives. Reinforcement is used when the behavior is positive, and the adult wants it to continue. Research showed that the use of positive reinforcement (e.g., positive behavior-specific note to take home), increased on-task behavior of a first-grade student (Bayles, 2020).
Methodology
Research Site and Sample Population
The individuals who participated in the research were two students of third grade (i.e., one girl and one boy) with ASD. They were of Latin origin. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these students were learning from home. They tended to engage in off-task behaviors during learning rather than focus on-task. They avoided eye contact with instructors and materials and did not follow instructions by moving away from the area and making noises or vocalizing out of context. This situation was a challenge because at home the learning is assisted by parents and guardians who might not have as much experience in learning compared to the rest.
The study took place in the students’ homes throughout the distance learning sessions. There was consent from the caregivers and parents, and they were informed about all steps of the action research.
Assessments
The researchers used three assessment tools: the Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST), the observation, and the Event Recording. The FAST allowed the researchers to identify environmental and physical factors that influenced the participants’ off-task behaviors. The tool had three sections. First, there is the Informant-Client section, which collected data on the interactions between these two stakeholders. Second, there was the section for Problem Behaviors Information, which collected information regarding the severity and the frequency of the behavior of the participants. The last section presented questions related to the functions of the problem behaviors (see Appendix A).
The researchers applied a behavior analysis observation using Antecedent, Behavior, and Consequence (ABC) data. The ABC data is a type of data collection that helps with functional behavior assessments. The ABC chart is a direct observation tool used to collect information about the events that happen within the students’ environment. The data collection through observation helped create an image of the possible function of behavior such as access to tangibles and activities, attention, and escape. The observation was an important part of creating interventions to decrease off-task behaviors and increase on-task behaviors of the students (see Appendix B).
The third tool that the researchers used was Event Recording, which allowed them to collect and document the frequency of the students’ off-task behaviors in real-time (Leblanc et al., 2016). The researchers used the tool at specific periods during the distance learning sessions and made tally marks whenever students engaged in maladaptive behaviors (see Appendix C).
Critical Research Questions
Our critical research questions were: 1) What factors influence the students’ off-task behaviors, 2) What are the effects of antecedent and consequent strategies on the students’ off-task behaviors, and 3) What is the effect of antecedent and consequent strategies on the students’ replacement skills (time on task and requesting assistance or attention). Behavior analysts assert that the refusal to carry out tasks by special needs students is a maladaptive behavior, which negatively impacts their ability to attain academic success and perform conventional activities of daily living (ADLs). By finding a good answer to these critical research questions, behavior analysts, caregivers and educators could alter the off-task behaviors of students and ensured they had numerous opportunities to attain their academic and social goals. Additionally, answering these questions was vital in advocating for the inclusion of special needs students in the community.
Reason for Conducting the Study
The researcher wished to alter the off-task behaviors portrayed by the members of the population sample. The objective was to increase on-task behaviors and reduce off-task behaviors while enhancing how the students complied with activities and demands that they did not like. This change was crucial because the refusal of the students to conduct on-task activities is detrimental to their wellbeing as it adversely affects how they socialize, acquire new skills, learn, and become independent.
Therefore, the researcher wished to conduct this study not only to observe the maladaptive behaviors of students with ASD, but also to get insight that facilitated the making of recommendations of corrective actions, which could reverse or minimize the students’ off-task behaviors.
In turn, the study results have serious implications for all people involved in the teaching-learning process: students, parents, educators, and behavior analysts. If carried out successfully, the study will promote actions that facilitate improved student performance in school and social life as well.
Needs Assessment
The researchers conducted the assessment during the Covid-19 outbreak when children started to receive distance learning sessions at home. The process of assessment started with the researcher explaining to the students, their parents/caregivers, and educators all the steps of the research process. Thereafter, the researcher administered the FAST tool. The results of this tool were used to identify environmental and physical factors that influenced the participants’ off-task behaviors. In conjunction with the FAST, the researchers used the observation to deepen the possible function of students’ off-task behaviors (access to tangibles and activities, attention, and escape). During a direct observation, the researchers document the antecedents and consequences of the students’ off-task behaviors. This information allowed the researchers to inquire about the factors that were maintained the maladaptive behavior. Thereafter, the Events Recording Tool was used during a period of two weeks to collect the frequency of the students’ off-task behaviors and construct a baseline before implementing the interventions. During the implementation of the intervention plan that lasted four weeks, the researchers continued using the Event Recording.
The data collected was analyzed to get an idea of the gaps that exist in the current learning model while learning at home. Data were collected to show to what extent behavioral antecedent and consequence interventions decreased the occurrence of off-task behaviors during home learning. The findings were analyzed using the appropriate methods to determine whether there were effects of the intervention on the results.
Intervention
The researchers selected different behavioral antecedent and consequence interventions to decrease the students’ off-task behavior and increase their compliance with academic tasks.
Behavioral antecedent strategies refer to the people, events, and things that come immediately before the problem behavior. During the implementation of behavioral antecedent strategies, the researchers manipulated antecedent stimuli to evoke appropriate behaviors to reinforce them differentially and reduce inappropriate behaviors (Miltenberger, 2013). The behavioral antecedent interventions that were implemented are noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), the high probability sequence, reducing task demands by modifying the length and/or difficulty of assignments, and provide choices.
Non-contingent reinforcement consisted of allowing students to take brief breaks during the presentation of non-desirable tasks in the distance learning sessions. The high probability sequence consisted of begin the demands with tasks that are relatively easy to complete to create a behavioral impulse. The idea is that once compliance is obtained for several high-probability directions that momentum will carry over to a low-probability direction (Maag, 2020). The use of Provide Choices intervention gave opportunities to the students to exert control within his environment in more appropriate ways. Examples of choices included the time or order in which the students completed required tasks, instructional materials (e.g., using a pen or pencil), environmental arrangements (e.g., where to sit) and options of reinforcing activities students had available when they completed the tasks.
The behavioral consequent strategies involved techniques that were used after the maladaptive behavior occurred to decrease the reinforcement and provide the students with alternative behavior (Miltenberger, 2013). The behavioral consequence interventions that were implemented were Premack principle, differential negative reinforcement of alternative behaviors (DNRA) and reinforcement. The use of the Premack principle consisted of the use of high probability behaviors (those performed frequently under conditions of free choice) to reinforce low-probability behaviors. The researchers allowed the students to get involved in a preferred activity just after they completed the required academic tasks. DNRA consisted of allowing the students to exit the non-preferred activities for some minutes when they requested a break in an appropriate manner (using his words appropriately or using a gestures). Reinforcement was also used in combination with the other strategies explained above. The researchers reinforced on-task behaviors with praise, attention, or a token that the students could later exchange for a desired reward.
In conjunction with the behavioral antecedents and consequence interventions, the researchers taught the students replacements skills that allowed them to acquire desired behaviors and reduce the off-task behaviors. As the researchers worked to eliminate the problem behavior, they simultaneously reinforced more acceptable alternatives. Below are the replacement skills and the goals that students should achieve in each one:
Time on task: The student will increase time on task to 10 min independently while refraining from engaging in maladaptive behaviors in 80% of trials across 3 observations (See Appendix D).
Request for assistance or attention: The student will ask for assistance or attention using an appropriate words or gestures independently while refraining from engaging in maladaptive behaviors in 80% of trials for 3 consecutive observations (See Appendix E).
The researchers gave the students different prompts to encourage them to request for assistance or attention during difficult activities, such as verbal and modeling prompts (“help, please”, “can you help me? please”, “what can you do if you need help?”).
Data Collection
The study took six weeks from May 11 to June 20. The first two weeks (May 11-May 23), the researchers recorded the frequency of students’ off-task behaviors to construct a baseline for each student. The following weeks, the researchers implemented the antecedent and consequence interventions and taught replacement skills in each session that they worked with the students during distance learning sessions (from Monday to Saturday). The Event Recording tool gave an accurate baseline, and the graphs showed the evolution of the variables as progress happened. The paper appendices include the datasheets with the weekly frequencies of students’ off-task behaviors and the replacement skills and charts that analyze the resulting data for Student A and Student B independently. The researchers used a mixed research approach (quantitative and qualitative approaches) to find the effectiveness of the intervention. The researchers conducted the study by
· Applying and analyzing the parents’ surveys.
· Conducting home observation and then data analysis.
· Collect data in baseline and analyze the data.
· Implement the intervention plan.
· Collect data during the intervention and analyze the data.
The datasheets recorded the number of occurrences of the off-task behaviors among the students while they were engaging in their daily academic activities. Researchers recorded data while implementing the interventions through observations. Student A and student B showed the off-task behaviors by ignoring the demands and avoiding eye contact with instructor and materials, and not following instructions by moving away from the area and/or making noises or vocalizing out of context. This behavior started after 3 minutes of the delivery of the demand and ended when they complied, or the demand was removed.
The average weekly frequency of students’ off-task behaviors and replacement skills was recorded. The parent was involved in the collection of data on the behavioral pattern observed. The study involved the use of data sheet by placing tally mark every time the students displayed off-task behaviors and engaged in the replacement skills. At the end of the intervention, the total marks per behavior were counted per student to make the final count. The total was imputed in table to create XY graph. The data was analyzed through visual inspection, where student behavioral patterns were examined to determine the effects of the intervention. The visual inspection was meant to help assess the impact of the intervention by checking the changes in mean frequencies of the maladaptive behavior and replacements skills.
Once the data collection for the construction of the off-task behavior baseline began, the researchers realized the need to include a new replacement program (request for assistance or attention) to teach students due to the complexity of academic activities. Teaching this replacement skill allowed students to lessen the frustrations they felt with difficult tasks, thereby minimizing the challenging behaviors they might exhibit to escape the situation.
Findings
Through the data collection process, the researchers could investigate the factors that influenced the students’ off-task behaviors. These factors were increase of duration, amount, and complexity of the tasks, a non-stimulating learning environment, lack of the use of reinforcers to increase on-task behaviors, and parental reinforcement of their children's escape behaviors and avoidance of academic assignments. For example, in the Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST), parents noted that when problem behavior occurred, they generally gave students a break from tasks, or usually tried to calm them down, or tried to engage them in preferred activities.
Through the observation, the researchers corroborated the information given by the parents on the FAST. For example, during an observation, one situation presented was that the mother told the student A that it was time to start his school tasks, the student avoided eye contact with his mother and continued watching TV. Then, the mother allowed the student to continue watching TV. Another situation observed was when the student B was doing a social studies task of large duration. The student began to make loud noises and vocalizations out of context. Then, the student’s father told the student that he could finish the task later. The score summary of the FAST indicated that the main functions that kept off-task behaviors was escape and attention/preferred items (social). The observation allowed to verify that functions.
|
Table 1 Weekly Average of Students’ Off-task Behaviors |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Note. BL= Baseline, Tx= Treatment, W=Week |
From the graphs (see Appendix G) and tables (see table 2 and table 3), we could visually analyze the results to respond the third research question: What is the effect of antecedent and consequent strategies on the students’ replacement skills (time on task and requesting assistance or attention)? This involved inspecting the line graph to determine if the students’ replacement skills were changing and if the change occurred in the desired direction. From the graphs above, one could see there was an increasing trend in both students for the two replacement skills. During the baseline phase, student A stayed focused on academic tasks for 10 minutes, 7% of the trials presented, and the student B 10% of trails. This percentage showed the average by a week. Once the intervention started, the time on task increased through the weeks in both students. Student A increased this replacement skill from 8% to 87% of opportunities per week, and student B moved from 10% to 83%.
|
Table 2 The Weekly Average of Students in Replacement Skill Time on Task |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Note. BL= Baseline, Tx= Treatment, W=Week |
Concerning the other replacement skill taught, during the baseline phase, the student A requested for assistance or attention in 8% of the trials presented and student B in 13%. After implementing the interventions, the trails in which students A and B requested help or attention using appropriate words or gestures increased. Student A was able to request assistance or attention using appropriate words or gestures independently while refraining from engaging in maladaptive behaviors in 82% of trials, and Student B in 85% of trials. Both students reached the goals set by the researchers.
|
Table 3 The Weekly Average of Students in Replacement Skill Request for Assistance or Attention |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Note. BL= Baseline, Tx= Treatment, W=Week |
The study showed that behavioral antecedent and consequent interventions, which addressed the students’ off-task behaviors, had a positive impact on home school learning. These findings coincide with the results obtained by other researchers who have demonstrated the effectiveness of different behavioral interventions in reducing off-task behaviors such as noncontingent reinforcement (Carr et al., 2000; Kodak, Miltenberger, & Romaniuk, 2003; Waller & Higbee, 2010), high probability request (high-p) sequences (Maag, 2020), differential negative reinforcement of alternative behaviors (Golonka et al., 2000; Marcus & Vollmer, 1995; Piazza, Moes & Fisher, 1996; Roberts, Mace & Daggett, 1995; Etak Steege, 1990, as cited in Miltenberger, 2013), reducing task demands (Luke, 2017), provide choices (Rispoli et al., 2013), and reinforcement (Bayles, 2020).
The antecedent strategies allowed to prevent and reduce the student’s off-task behaviors. The delivery of reinforcers after the students completed a required time on non-preferred tasks was an effective strategy. The students engaged with more frequency on non-preferred tasks and stayed the required time when they received a preferred activity after finishing the tasks. Also, the teaching of the replacement skills such as request for assistance or attention was effective in reducing the off-task behaviors because the students could manage the frustrations due to the difficulty of the tasks with positive behaviors.
Further Reflection and Continuing Questions about My Action Research Journey
Through this action research project, the researchers were able to validate behavioral interventions effective to address students’ off-task behaviors. These interventions are relatively simple to apply and require very little training to understand their use. Therefore, they can be applied by parents at home.
In future research, what we researchers would do differently is change the selection of the research application scenario, which would be the school. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the researchers were only able to study the participants in their homes. Also, the researchers would select a larger sample, which cwould lead to more significant results. The effect of behavioral interventions on other maladaptive behaviors displayed by students will also be studied. Therefore, another additional question that this research posed for the investigators is what is the effect of behavioral antecedent and consequent strategies on students' verbal aggressive and isolation behaviors?
Due to the successful result of this action research, we will certainly continue to implement replacement skills in ASD students struggling with off-task behavior. In general, the researchers plan to use initial assessments to construct baselines, design strategies to intervene in the maladaptive behaviors, and evaluate these strategies comparing the results with the baseline. Through the reflection, the researchers were able to mark the practices used and they will continue to grow by using these skills. In conclusion, the behavioral therapy and replacement skills implemented on the third-grade students with ASD were successful at lowering the off-task behavior exhibited and increasing the student attitudes towards learning.
The researchers learned that action research is useful in their practice as behavioral therapists because it provides them with the opportunity to critically examine the methods and interventions implemented and how they impact their clients. This process can be beneficial for the parents because they can learn and apply successful interventions to address the maladaptive behaviors of their children. The researchers pretend to use in the future this process to improve their daily practice as behavior therapists and future educators.
Conclusion
The study indicated that the behavioral antecedent and consequent interventions and the teaching of replacement skills influenced off-task and on-task behaviors of students with ASD in the desired direction. The graphs provided a visual of how much off-task behaviors and the replacement skills changed from the non-treatment phase through to the treatment phase. One lesson the researchers were able to learn from this action research project is that studying the findings of other researchers is an important step in the success of future research and the improvement of their practices as behavior therapists and future educators. Also, the objective and accurate measurement of the effects of interventions used on the students’ behaviors through the performing of initial assessments is a powerful and effective strategy.
References
Bayles, B. (2020). Using Positive Reinforcement to Increase On-Task Behavior of a First Grade. Eastern Illinois University
Carr J.E., Coriaty S., Wilder D.A., Gaunt B.T., Dozier C.L., Britton L.N., Avina C., & Reed C.L. (2000). A review of "noncontingent" reinforcement as treatment for the aberrant behavior of individuals with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21(5), 377-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-4222(00)00050-0
DuPaul, G.J., Weyandt, L.L., & Janusis, G.M. (2011). ADHD in the Classroom: Effective Intervention Strategies. Theory Into Practice, 50(1), 35-42.
Eske, J. (2020, May 12). How to manage autism during the COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/autism-and-covid-19
George, K. (2016). Evaluating the effects of formal corrective feedback on off-task/on task behavior of mild intellectually disabled students: an action research study (Thesis doctoral, Capella University). https://search-proquest com.ucamia.cobimet4.org/docview/1767788724
Kodak T., Miltenberger R.G, & Romaniuk C. (2003). The effects of differential negative reinforcement of other behavior and noncontingent escape on compliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 379–382. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-379
Maag, J.W. (2020). Are High-Probability Request Sequences as Low an Intensity Intervention as Portrayed? Journal of Education and Learning; 9(2). https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v9n2p1
Miltenberger, R.G. (2013). Behavior Modification. Principles & Procedures. Piramide Editions.
Rispoli, M., Lang, R., Neely, L., Camargo, S., Hutchins, N., Davenport, K., & Goodwyn, F. (2013). A comparison of within- and across-activity choices for reducing challenging behavior in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22(1), 66-83. doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9164-y
Waller, R.D., & Higbee, T.S. (2010). The effects of fixed-time escape on inappropriate and appropriate classroom behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(1), 149–153. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2010.43-149
LeBlanc, L. A., Raetz, P. B., Sellers, T. P., & Carr, J. E. (2016). A proposed model for selecting measurement procedures for the assessment and treatment of problem behavior. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9(1), 77-83.
Luke, K.A. (2017). Strategies to assist in decreasing escape-maintained behaviors in children with autism spectrum disorder (Master's Thesis).
Pellecchia, M., Marcus, S. C., Spaulding, C., Seidman, M., Xie, M., Rump, K., & Mandell, D. S. (2020). Randomized trial of a computer-assisted Intervention for children with autism in schools. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 59(3), 373-380.
Wong, C., Odom, S. L., Hume, K. Cox, A. W., Fettig, A., Kucharczyk, S., & Schultz, T. R. (2014). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, Autism Evidence-Based Practice Review Group. Comment by Arbelo, Dr. Floralba: Not sure if this is a book but if it is, the title should have been italicized.
Appendices
Appendix A, Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST).
Appendix B, Observation ABC Recording
|
Antecedent |
Behavior |
Consequence |
|
The student was doing a math task involving multiple steps |
The student moved away from the table |
The student’s mother yelled at the student and said him that he should finish the task |
|
The mother told the student that it was time to start his school tasks |
He avoided eye contact with his mother and continued watching TV |
The mother allowed the student to continue watching TV |
STUDENT A
STUDENT B
|
Antecedent |
Behavior |
Consequence |
|
The student was doing a social studies task of large duration |
The student began to make loud noises and vocalizations out of context |
The student’s father told the student that he could finish the task later |
|
The father presented the student different school tasks and told him the order in which he should complete them |
The student avoided eye contact with materials and ran away from the table |
The father gave the students 10 minutes to start to complete the tasks. |
Appendix C, Event Recording
Figure C1
Client: Student A Period: 05/10-05/30/2020
|
Demands and instructions presented |
Target Behavior
Off-task behavior |
Topographic definition Defined as ignoring demands by avoiding eye contact with instructor and materials, and not following instructions by moving away from the area and/or making noises or vocalizing out of context. This behavior starts after 3 minutes of the delivery of the demand and ends when he complies, or the demand is removed. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
|
x |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
12 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
10 |
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
9 |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
7 |
|
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
3 |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
1 |
X |
x |
|
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
Days |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
Total per day |
40% |
33% |
40% |
47% |
40% |
47% |
33% |
40% |
47% |
33% |
40% |
33% |
33% |
40% |
27% |
33% |
33% |
27% |
33% |
27% |
33% |
|
|
Total per week |
|
|
|
|
|
|
40% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
38% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
33% |
|
Figure C2
Client: Student A Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
|
Demands and instructions presented |
Target Behavior
Off-task behavior |
Topographic definition Defined as ignoring demands by avoiding eye contact with instructor and materials, and not following instructions by moving away from the area and/or making noises or vocalizing out of context. This behavior starts after 3 minutes of the delivery of the demand and ends when he complies, or the demand is removed. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
|
x |
x |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
X |
|
|
x |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
x |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
5 |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
x |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
x |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Days |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
|
Total per day |
27% |
20% |
27% |
33% |
27% |
20% |
|
20% |
13% |
13% |
20% |
13% |
20% |
|
13% |
7% |
7% |
7% |
13% |
7% |
|
|
|
Total per week |
|
|
|
|
|
26% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
17% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9% |
|
|
Figure C3
Client: Student B Period: 05/10-05/30/2020
|
Demands and instructions presented |
Target Behavior
Off-task behavior |
Topographic definition Defined as ignoring demands by avoiding eye contact with instructor and materials, and not following instructions by moving away from the area and/or making noises or vocalizing out of context. This behavior starts after 3 minutes of the delivery of the demand and ends when he complies, or the demand is removed. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
12 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
7 |
|
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
x |
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
1 |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
Days |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
Total per day |
33% |
27% |
40% |
33% |
27% |
27% |
33% |
27% |
40% |
27% |
33% |
33% |
40% |
40% |
|
27% |
33% |
20% |
27% |
20% |
20% |
|
|
Total per week |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
34% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25% |
|
Figure C4
Client: Student B Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
|
Demands and instructions presented |
Target Behavior
Off-task behavior |
Topographic definition Defined as ignoring demands by avoiding eye contact with instructor and materials, and not following instructions by moving away from the area and/or making noises or vocalizing out of context. This behavior starts after 3 minutes of the delivery of the demand and ends when he complies, or the demand is removed. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
15 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
X |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
5 |
X |
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Days |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
|
Total per day |
20% |
20% |
13% |
13% |
20% |
13% |
|
13% |
7% |
13% |
13% |
7% |
7% |
|
7% |
0% |
7% |
7% |
0% |
7% |
|
|
|
Total per week |
|
|
|
|
|
17% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5% |
|
|
Appendix D, Time on task
Figure D1
Client: Student A Period: 05/10-05/30/2020
Figure D2
Client: Student A
Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
Figure D3
Client: Student B
Period: 05/10-05/30/2020
Figure D4
Client: Student B
Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
Appendix E, Request for assistance or attention
Figure E1
Client: Student A Period: 05/10-05/30/
Figure E2
Client: Student A
Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
Figure E3
Client: Student B
Period: 05/10-05/30/2020
Figure E4
Client: Student B
Period: 06/01-06/20/2020
Appendix F, Graphics of Students’ Off-task Behaviors
Appendix G, Graphics of Students’ Replacements Skills (Time on Task and Requesting) Assistance)
Graph G1
Graph G2
Graph G3
Graph G4
off-task behavior
STUDENT B
Measurement Type: Percentages Measurement Units: weeks
Off-task behavior 05/10-05/23/2020 05/24-05/30/2020 05/31-06/06/2020 06/07-06/13/2020 06/014-06/20/2020 BL 33 25 17 10 5
% of opportunities
off-task behavior
STUDENT A
Measurement Type: Percentages Measurement Units: weeks
Off-task behavior 05/10-05/23/2020 05/24-05/30/2020 05/31-06/06/2020 06/07-06/13/2020 06/014-06/20/2020 BL 39 33 26 17 9
% of opportunities
TIME ON TASK
STUDENT A
MEASUREMENT TYPE: PERCENTAGES MEASUREMENT UNITS: WEEKS
Time on task 05/18-05/23/2020 05/25-05/30/2020 06/01-06/06/2020 06/08-06/13/2020 06/15-06/20/2020 7 8 25 57 87
WEEKS
% OFF OPPORTUNTIIES
TIME ON TASK
STUDENT B
MEASUREMENT TYPE: PERCENTAGES MEASUREMENT UNITS: WEEKS
Time on task 05/18-05/23/2020 05/25-05/30/2020 06/01-06/06/2020 06/08-06/13/2020 06/15-06/20/2020 10 12 37 58 83
WEEKS
% OFF OPPORTUNTIIES
REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE OR ATTENTION
STUDENT A
MEASUREMENT TYPE: PERCENTAGES MEASUREMENT UNITS: WEEKS
Request for assisstance or attention 05/18-05/23/2020 05/25-05/30/2020 06/01-06/06/2020 06/08-06/13/2020 06/15-06/20/2020 8 13 48 68 82
WEEKS
% OFF OPPORTUNTIIES
REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE OR ATTENTION
STUDENT B
MEASUREMENT TYPE: PERCENTAGES MEASUREMENT UNITS: WEEKS
Request for assisstance or attention 05/18-05/23/2020 05/25-05/30/2020 06/01-06/06/2020 06/08-06/13/2020 06/15-06/20/2020 13 22 52 70 85
WEEKS
% OFF OPPORTUNTIIES
