Conditioning ARTICLE

JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS

A CONDITIONING TECHNIQUE APPLICABLE TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CLASSROOMS

RICHARD COLEMAN

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA

A procedure was developed for use in a public school classroom where only one of the children needed treatment, sophisticated apparatus was not feasible, personnel were un- trained in conditioning techniques, and where disruption had to be minimized. Candy reinforcers were contingent upon working behavior. The total candy earned in the session was divided equally among the class. Portable radio control apparatus was adopted to give feedback to the child when he was displaying the desired working behavior. An increase in working behavior and a decrease in talking aloud and out-of-seat behavior was observed for each of the four subjects. When the feedback apparatus was removed, the desired behavior was maintained through candy reinforcement alone in all four subjects.

Studies using a variety of subjects have re- ported on the control of classroom behavior in both institutions and special class settings. Birnbrauer and Lawler (1964) and Birnbrauer, Bijou, Wolf, and Kidder (1965) worked suc- cessfully with institutionalized retarded sub- jects. Zimmerman and Zimmerman (1962), O'Leary and Becker (1967), and Martin, Burk- holder, Rosenthal, Tharp, and Thorne (1968) reported behavioral control with emotionally disturbed subjects in special class situations. Wasik, Senn, Welch, and Cooper (1969) im- plemented effective procedures for culturally deprived subjects in a special school. Meichen- baum, Bowers, and Ross (1968) reduced the inappropriate classroom behavior of institu- tionalized female adolescent delinquents, while Phillips (1968) used tokens and privileges in a residential facility for "pre-delinquent" boys. Nolen, Kunzelmann, and Haring (1967) and McKenzie, Clark, Wolf, Kothera, and Benson (1968) modified the behavior of a group of

'This research was supported by Title VI-A ESEA Grant 69-087 from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. The author wishes to thank Mr. James Barden, Director of North Carolina Title VI Programs, Raleigh, N.C.; Dr. John Burchard and Dr. Barbara Wasik, University of North Carolina; for their generous assistance and invaluable direction; and Dr. Wilmer Cody, Superintendent of Schools, Chapel Hill, N.C. This report is based on a dissertation sub- mitted to the University of North Carolina in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree. Reprints may be obtained from the author, Centre St., Dover, Massachusetts.

special class subjects described as having learn- ing disabilities.

Generally, most of the research concerned with controlling classroom behavior has oc- curred in institutional and/or special class settings in which the entire class received treat- ment, sophisticated apparatus could be used, and personnel could be relatively easily trained in conditioning skills. Because these conditions do not typically prevail, different kinds of con- ditioning procedures would appear necessary in the public school classroom. The recent trend toward non-institutionalization and the growing disenchantment with special educa- tion classes would seem to give additional im- petus to the development of conditioning methodologies applicable to the regular class- room. Dickinson (1968), Madsen, Becker, and Thomas (1968), and Walker and Buckley (1968) reported some success in this regard. Working with a 9-yr-old subject in a regular

classroom, Patterson (1965) developed a pro- cedure in which the subject was signalled when he had earned a candy or penny reinforcer for appropriate attending behavior. At the end of each conditioning session, the total earnings were shared equally with his classmates. The results showed "a significant decrease in the number of responses per minute when com- paring the baseline operant with the condi- tioning scores [p. 373]." However, due to the existence of a number

of methodological problems in Patterson's study, a definitive evaluation of his procedure

293

1970, 3, 293-297 NUMBER 4 (WINTER 1970)

19383703, 1970, 4, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1901/jaba.1970.3-293 by B

ehavior A nalyst C

ertification B oard, W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [13/01/2023]. See the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /term

s-and-conditions) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for rules of use; O

A articles are governed by the applicable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

RICHARD COLEMAN

depends on further research. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to replicate Patterson's technique with several subjects while also making necessary methodological revisions, which were to include; (a) establish- ing inter-observer reliability at 0.80+ before collecting baseline, (b) defining a classroom activity for each subject that would remain constant throughout the study, and (c) utilizing a reversal experimental design.

In addition to evaluating Patterson's para- digm, by replication and methodological revi- sion, another objective of this research was to expand and perhaps to refine Patterson's pro- cedures. Thus, it was proposed that radio con- trol apparatus be adapted to minimize class- room disruption while at the same time permitting the subject and experimenter flexi- bility and mobility not possible with equip- ment using house current.

METHOD From a population of 2752 elementary school

children in grades 1 to 6, teachers, principals, social workers, and school psychology interns submitted 43 names of children who were con- sidered to represent serious behavior problems. Computer analyses of behavior ratings, teacher conferences, and screening observations were made until four subjects from four different schools had been selected as meeting the crite- rion of manifesting a high frequency of overt inappropriate behavior.

Subjects Subject A was an 8-yr-old male first-grade

"repeater" with a history of "extreme unman- ageability, frequent fighting, tantrums, and an inability to function in group situations." His home had recently deteriorated to the extent that he and his brother had been placed with a foster parent. During two screening observa- tions, this subject moved continuously about the room talking to himself and hitting other children.

Subject B was an 8-yr-old male second-grader who had been referred to school psychological services for the past two years because of "rest- lessness, distractability, inattention, and hyper- activity". During one of the screening obser- vation periods, he was observed roaming about the room for the entire 15 min.

Subject C was a 9-yr-old male second-grader

who had been referred for three successive years because of "hyperactivity and disruptive, aggressive behaviors". There was a history of physical aggression against both peers and teachers. During each of three 15-min informal screening observations, Subject C spent most of the time out of his seat sharpening his pen- cil and noisily talking to classmates.

Subject D was a sullen, obese, 12-yr-old female fifth-grader who had a consistent his- tory of "serious behavior problems" anid mar- ginal academic performance. She had been threatened with expulsion because of allegedly running a gang that extorted money from other children. At the time of both preliminary screening observations, Subject D roamed the room at will, talked aloud, hit other children, and refused to conform to discipline. On one occasion, despite teacher warnings, she re- mained out of seat for the full 15-min observa- tion period.

Apparatus The transmitter was a 9-v model airplane

radio unit that activated a Veeder-Root re- settable counter from a range of up to 200 ft (Coleman and Toth, 1970). Pressing a switch transmitted an audible click and registered a count in the recessed window of the digital counter near the subject. Both units were portable and immediately operational.

Procedures A situation was defined for each subject so

that the same kind of classroom activity would occur at the same time of day throughout the study. For Subjects A, B, and C, the situation was one in which the subject was expected to work quietly and independently at his desk while a small group of children met with the teacher for reading. For Subject D, the situa- tion was the first part of an afternoon language class in which the class was expected to accom- plish a written assignment. The three target behaviors were: (1) talking

aloud, defined as any unsolicited verbalization; (2) out of seat, defined as being up from desk without permission; and (3) working, defined as looking at a book and/or writing, drawing, coloring, but not doodling. A noncontinuous or discrete observational

technique was followed in which behavior was recorded during three alternating 10-sec inter- vals of each minute for the 1 5-min sessions.

294

19383703, 1970, 4, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1901/jaba.1970.3-293 by B

ehavior A nalyst C

ertification B oard, W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [13/01/2023]. See the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /term

s-and-conditions) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for rules of use; O

A articles are governed by the applicable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

A CONDITIONING TECHNIQUE FOR ELEMENTARY CLASSROOMS

O'Leary, O'Leary, and Becker (1967) had main- tained that non-continuous observing increases reliability. Insofar as this study was concerned, this observational technique also permitted the observer to look away from the subject to make it less obvious that he was being observed. Two observers recorded data. Inter-observer

reliability was computed for within-interval agreement for behavior occurrence by dividing total agreements by disagreements plus agree- ments for each cell of the three categories of behavior. Reliability ranged from 0.77 to 1.00 with a mean of 0.91. Only one category from one observation session was below the criterion of 0.80 for five days of 20 observations.

Next, baseline data were obtained for each subject until the subjects' behavior appeared relatively stable or until a minimum of 10 baseline observations had been made over a 10-day period. After tabulation of baseline, each subject re-

ceived an individual pre-training session in which the experimenter gave the subject a book or paper and pencil with instructions to pretend he was in class. Working behavior re- sulted in a counter click and an M&cM on a continuous-interval schedule of 10 sec. It was then explained that he and the experimenter were going to do the same thing in his class- room and that each time he heard a "click", he had earned a piece of candy by doing his work. The subject was also advised that the only dif- ference would be that he would share his earn- ings with his classmates. At this point, the subject and the experi-

menter returned to the classroom where the experimenter addressed the class as follows: As you know, (subject's name) sometimes has trouble sitting still and doing his work. This machine is going to help him. Each time it clicks, it means he has earned a piece of candy by doing his work. This machine will also keep score. At the end of the session, (subject's name) will divide his candy among all of you. You can help by doing your work and not bothering (subject's name).

During Condition 1 (CN 1), working be- havior defined as looking at book, and/or writ- ing, drawing, coloring, but not doodling, was conditioned with a counter "click" using a variable-interval schedule with a 10-sec mean. At the beginning of each session of CN 1, and

also on those occasions when the subject ig- nored interruption or harrassment from an- other pupil, the rate of reinforcement for work behavior was increased. Following CN 1, a re- versal phase was introduced in which all ex- perimental manipulations and contingencies were removed. This was in turn followed by a reinstatement of CN 1, thus following an ABA experimental design. To measure the contribution of the appara-

tus itself to the conditioning technique, Con- dition 2 (CN 2) consisted of withdrawing the apparatus from the procedures. The subject was instructed that he had been doing very well with the help of the machine, but that the experimenter now wanted to see how hard the subject would work without it. The subject was told that the experimenter would keep score instead of the machine and that if he did his work, he could earn as much candy as he had with the machine.

RESULTS As can be seen in Fig. 1, there was an in-

crease in working behavior and a decrease in talking-aloud and out-of-seat behavior for all four subjects when comparing baseline with CN 1 data. Reversal procedures resulted in be- havioral frequencies that approximated base- line. Although the data obtained for CN 2 (removal of apparatus) were quantitatively in- sufficient, the frequencies obtained for the two sessions suggested that the control established in CN 1 was maintained in CN 2.

DISCUSSION The conditioning technique developed by

Patterson (1965) and described as CN 1 in this study was effective in controlling classroom behavior and would, therefore, seem useful in classroom situations where the entire class- room population is not being treated, elabo- rate apparatus is not feasible, and staff is essentially untrained in conditioning skills. The radio control apparatus, which was

small, completely portable, and immediately operational, permitted the examiner to enter a classroom unobtrusively and at once begin the conditioning procedures. It also allowed the examiner mobility that would not have been possible with house current. The factor of experimenter mobility would seem to be

295

19383703, 1970, 4, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1901/jaba.1970.3-293 by B

ehavior A nalyst C

ertification B oard, W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [13/01/2023]. See the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /term

s-and-conditions) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for rules of use; O

A articles are governed by the applicable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

RICHARD COLEMAN

BASELINE CN. I REVERSAL CN. I CN.2

45- I TALKSALOUDf-

35- OUTOFSEAT 0.00 30- 25-'7 20 // ' SUBJECT

154

wo-

BASELINE CN. I REVERSAL CN. CN. 2 ~45 35-i

Cr-30- \k No jSUBJECT 525 t /I IB < 20 - '

15JK5W15

BASELINE CN. IREVERSAL CN. I CN.2 Z 45 (j40. 35.J IV I v\ .

> 30- w25t

-2Is 10 9

BASELINE CN. I REVERSAL CN.I Ct42

z ~

SUBJECT D

Fig. 1. Behavioral records showing the relationship between talking aloud, out-of-seat, and working responses for the four subjects.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

SESSIONS

296

19383703, 1970, 4, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1901/jaba.1970.3-293 by B

ehavior A nalyst C

ertification B oard, W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [13/01/2023]. See the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /term

s-and-conditions) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for rules of use; O

A articles are governed by the applicable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense

A CONDITIONING TECHNIQUE FOR ELEMENTARY CLASSROOMS 297

critical in a public school elementary class- room where, to be inconspicuous, one needs to be able to adapt to a typically loose structured and frequently unpredictable regimen.

After behavioral control had been estab- lished, teacher praise was used to attempt to transfer behavioral control from the experi- menter to the teacher. Apparatus was devel- oped consisting of a timer that activated a blinking light using a variable-interval sched- ule with a 3-min mean. The teacher was in- structed to look at the subject when the light was flashing. If the subject were working ap- propriately, she was to praise him. To help support this procedure initially, the teacher was also to administer candy to the subject at the end of the session for completed and pro- ficiently done assignments. During this pro- cedure, the candy was no longer shared. Only one teacher was able consistently to follow instructions in terms of when and how to ad- minister verbal praise. Another teacher was re- acting so negatively to one of the subjects (Sub- ject C) that she refused to praise the child. In general, the teacher's concern for academic ex- cellence seemed to preclude praising just "good" behavior. In any event, the evidence was insufficient to indicate whether or not teacher praise was sufficiently reinforcing to control the behavior of any of the subjects. Although a functional analysis of the vari-

ables contributing to CN 1 was begun in CN 2, the imminent ending of the school year pre- cluded fruition of a systematic analysis of the effects of the various treatment variables. This approach needs considerable research attention.

Institutional and/or special class situations would be expected to be sufficiently different from those in a public school classroom, so that conditioning procedures that have been dem- onstrated to be effective in the former would not be necessarily applicable to the latter. If conditioning procedures could be made ap- propriate to the public school classroom, not only would the need for institutional and special class placements be reduced, but the operations of the classroom and the entire educational milieu could perhaps be put into the testtube of an experimental analysis of behavior.

REFERENCES Birnbauer, J., Bijou, S., Wolf, M., and Kidder, J. Pro-

grammed instruction in the classroom. In L. P.

Ullman and L. Krasner (Eds.), Case studies in be- havior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965. Pp. 358-363.

Birnbrauer, J. S. and Lawler, Julia. Token reinforce- ment for learning, Mental Retardation, 1964, 2, 275-279.

Coleman, R. and Toth, E. The adaptation of com- mercially available radio control equipment to behavior therapy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1970, 3, 221-222.

Dickinson, D. Changing behavior with behavioral techniques. Journal of School Psychology, 1968, 6, 278-283.

Madsen, C., Becker, W., and Thomas, D. Rules, praise and ignoring: elements of elementary classroom control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 139-150.

Martin, M., Burkholder, R., Rosenthal, T., Tharp, R., and Thorne, L. Programming behavior change and reintegration into school milieu of extreme adoles- cent deviates. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1968, 6, 371-383.

McKenzie, H., Clark, M., Wolf, M., Kothera, R., and Benson, C. Behavior modification of children with learning disabilities using grades as tokens and allowances as back-up reinforcers. Exceptional Chil- dren, 1968, 35, 745-752.

Meichenbaum, D., Bowers, K., and Ross, R. Modifica- tion of classroom behavior of institutionalized fe- male adolescent offenders. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1968, 6, 343-353.

Nolen, P., Kunzelmann, H., and Haring, N. Behavior modification in a junior high learning disabilities classroom. Exceptional Children, 1967, 34, 163-168.

O'Leary, K. and Becker, W. Behavior modification of an adjustment class: a token reinforcement system. Exceptional Children, 1967, 34, 637-642.

O'Leary, K., O'Leary, S., and Becker, W. Modification of deviant sibling interaction pattern in the home. Behavior Research and Therapy. 1967, 5, 113-120.

Patterson, G. An application of conditioning tech- niques to the control of a hyperactive child. In L. P. Ullman and L. Krasner (Eds.), Case studies in behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965. Pp. 370-375.

Phillips, E. Achievement place: token reinforcement procedures in a home-style rehabilitation setting for "pre-delinquent" boys. Journal of Applied Be- havior Analysis, 1968, 1, 213-223.

Walker, H. and Buckley, N. The use of positive rein- forcement in conditioning attending behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 245- 250.

Wasik, B., Senn, K., Welch, R., and Cooper, B. Be- havior modification with culturally deprived school children: Two case studies. Journal of Applied Be- havior Analysis, 1969, 2, 181-194.

Zimmerman, E. and Zimmerman, I. The alteration of behavior in a special classroom situation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1962, 5, 59-60.

Received 3 November 1969. (Revised 12 October 1970.)

19383703, 1970, 4, D ow

nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /doi/10.1901/jaba.1970.3-293 by B

ehavior A nalyst C

ertification B oard, W

iley O nline L

ibrary on [13/01/2023]. See the T erm

s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w

iley.com /term

s-and-conditions) on W iley O

nline L ibrary for rules of use; O

A articles are governed by the applicable C

reative C om

m ons L

icense