The CAMI Tests: Reinforcement in the Classroom

We need to be aware that too much or too little of a good thing can make reinforcement more or less effective.

After seeing some trends over the past year in regards to reinforcement, I presented a quick reinforcement segment during a recent in-service specifically to address some common mistakes made by teachers (and support staff who help them). Some common issues I’ve seen include continuing reinforcement procedures long after they had been shown to not increase behavior, choosing rewards that were excessive in cost (effort, time, and money), or choosing rewards that are not easily accessible and therefore not appropriate, and finally recommending rewards that teachers and parents did not agree were appropriate.

Here is a quick summary that I handed out to attendees. Recently this was updated in order to be more consistent with behavior analytic principles. Please feel free to give me feedback.

The CAMI Tests

In a school setting, we use prizes and other positive events in an attempt to reinforce the behaviors we would like to improve. However, these consequences for behavior will most likely not be successful as reinforcers unless they pass the four-part CAMI tests:

Conveniency Test. Is the reinforcer typically available in a school setting? If not, can it be obtained with little inconvenience and at a cost affordable to staff or parents? A reward system is less likely to be maintained if the cost of obtaining items creates too much of a strain of time, effort, or funds.

Acceptability Test. Do the teachers approve of using the consequences with this child? Do the parents approve the use of the reinforcer with their child? Philosophical differences can create disagreement and therefore inconsistency between implementors.

Example: Janie loves sugary foods and will do just about anything to get them. However, Janie’s parents are using a low sugar diet with Janie. Therefore using food, especially those with high sugar content, might be unacceptable to use. Also, the school has now implemented minimal nutritional value standards. The teacher checks school policy and seeks approval from administrators and the general education teachers before proposing the use of edibles.

Motivation Test. How much access does the student have to the reward? Too much or too little access to a reward will affect the child’s motivation for it. A child who gets too much will have little desire to earn more. A child who gets too little can have strong desire to earn more or give up because he feels he will never get any. When it comes to motivation, be aware of the following 4 conditions that influence reinforcer effectiveness.

1. Deprivation/Satiation: Often referred to as not getting enough or getting too much of a good thing.

Deprivation: Not having access to something that is highly desirable (hungry, thirsty, tired, etc.). This is often used to make an item or activity more valuable or desirable to someone

Example: Joey hasn’t played with his favorite stuffed animal since last yesterday. Because he hasn’t played with his stuffed animal today, he is deprived, therefore, he wants to play with his favorite toy.

Satiation: Satiation refers to having too much (like the full feeling from eating too much pizza). If the same reinforcer is used over and over again, it will lose its reinforcing value.

Example: If Joey played with his stuffed animal when he got to school today, then again before and after lunch and now his teacher offers playing with his stuffed animal to get him to work he may say, “No!” Because his is satiated with stuffed animal play. (it’s a stretch I know, but work with me here)

2. Immediacy: A reinforcer must be delivered as quickly as possible following the target behavior that we are looking to increase, especially on newly targeted skills. The longer the amount of time that lapses between the behavior we want to see increase and the time the reinforcer is delivered, the less valuable the reinforcer will be, and the less likely that a connection between the behavior and its resulting consequence is made.

Example: We’re trying to teach Shaley to raise her hand to get the teacher’s attention. She spontaneously raises her hand to get the teacher’s attention in class, but we don’t respond to this until 5 minutes later, we’ve most likely lost the reinforcing value of whatever we’re delivering for that target behavior. We are now reinforcing whatever Shaley is doing, 5 minutes after hand raising.

3. Size: This refers to how much of the reinforcer you get/are giving.

Example: If Shawn reads 1 sight word card, and he earns a cup of popcorn, we will quickly satiate him and have to look for new reinforcers. A better way to reinforce might be a small cup of popcorn after reading 15 to 20 sight word cards, or completing all his reading work.

4. Contingency: Reinforcement delivery must be contingent, meaning, access to a reinforcer only occurs after the target behavior has been demonstrated.

Example: Brandon’s mother tells him he can read his book after he finishes his chores, Brandon proceeds to get out his book and read on the couch. Although the contingency is stated, it is not being enforced. Until the mother can limit and then provide access to the book provided that chores are complete

Improvement Test. Does the behavior improve or increase as a result of obtaining the “reinforcer”? Just because we think an item, activity, or praise is positive does not mean it works as a reinforcer. What makes an event a reinforcer is that it is successful helping to increase the frequency of the behavior. So if it is consistently not working, it’s time to change.

Example: Thomas rarely completes his multiplication quizzes. You decided to let him play a math game on an iPad when he finishes his multipication quiz. You follow this procedure and you see an increase in how often he completes his multiplication quizzes. Due to the improvement in desired behavior, you might be able to assume that playing math games on the iPad is indeed a reinforcer for quiz completion.

Please note that this is only a guide for implementing reinforcement procedures in the classroom or at home. It is not intended nor shall it be misconstrued as specific advice. Before engaging in any major behavior change program you should consult an expert or highly trained professional such as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

Back it Up: Positive Practice in Action

Under most circumstances, I recommend positive reinforcement strategies to foster behavior. Punishment is the application of a negative event or the removal of a negative event. It has been used to reduce disruptive, annoying, and self-injurious behaviors. The term punishment has come to take on a negative connotation due its misuse over the years. However, when used correctly and ethically, certain forms of punishment have been shown to be very effective changing behavior.

Today I’m going to talk about what I call “Back it Up”. This is a term I use when I want a student (or my own kids) to “fix” a problem behavior, usually one that creates a problem for others. It is based on a behavior analytic procedure called overcorrection. Overcorrection consists of restitutional overcorrection and/or positive practice overcorrection. It combines the reductive effects of punishment and the educative effects of positive practice. I’m sure many of you have heard the stories of the child caught smoking and then having to smoke a whole pack of cigarettes. The difference here is that you want the person to practice the correct behavior. Clearly they already know how do it incorrectly, so I wouldn’t have the child practice the incorrect one.

“Back it Up” can occur in several forms. One form is restitution, which is having the person do what a normal individual might do to correct a situation. A child knocks over a another child’s toys, he picks them up. Restitution is intended to help the individual experience the effort needed to restore the damage and may cause them not to repeat the behavior because of the inconvenience of correcting or rectifying the situation. This may cause the person to realize that time and effort are needed to correct irresponsible action. Combine this with a caring atmoshpere and the person may decide to take responsibility for his/her actions. This makes this form of punishment better than other forms because of the intention to teach appropriate behavior and responsibility for ones actions. This is more of a treatment package because it’s not solely a punishment procedure, rather it’s a combination of positive punishment and positive reinforcement. You’re adding an aversive event, having to clean up the toys (punishment), but also providing positive feedback for doing it correctly (positive reinforcement). In Love and Logic terms this is referred to as the Energy Drain.

Another form of “Back it Up” is restitutional overcorrection, where the person corrects the product of their misbehavior by restoring the situation to not just as-good-as, but a better state from before the event. If student were to write on his desk, cleaning the desktop would be considered restitution. However, having the student clean all of the desktops in the classroom is restitutional overcorrection. During a tantrum a student might knock over a chair. Restitutional overcorrection would be that the student would then have to straighten all the chairs in the classroom. If the student yells an insult, he may then have to give a compliment to everyone in class, or give several compliments to the offended person.

The third form of “Back it Up” is positive practice overcorrection. In this situation, the person practices an activity using the appropriate desired behavior. Repeatedly placing trash into the trash container. A student who repeatedly enters a classroom loudly might be required to practice the appropriate steps of entering the classroom and being seated. Part of the intervention is predicated on having the person do what a normal individual might do to avoid the situation. As part of a debrief, I might say, “We could do it this way once, or we can practice doing it many times” (notice I don’t say how many times, this is a deviation from the literature which supports setting a number or length of time). A student who repeatedly hugs people without consent, might need to practice asking and accepting being told no.

Recommendations for implementing a “Back it Up” intervention:

1. Continuously and systematically monitoring in order to provide prompts during restitution or positive practice. When behaviors occur at a high rates, differential reinforcement procedures such as DRO, DRI may be a better option, instead of overcorrection. Whenever possible reinforce incompatible behavior, or behaviors that cannot occur at the same time as the problem behavior. (i.e. having hands in lap cannot happen at same time as scratching you)

2. The person may, and can often times be expected to, refuse to cooperate at first. They may be disruptive such as cry, scream, and whine or even escalate to physically aggressive behaviors. This can be reduced by being prepared, offering limited structured choices, or having students setting overcorrection as part of a goal for changing their behavior. The use of positive verbal prompts and authority statements as well as providing time-out first or during overcorrection helps to minimize disruptions. Consistently applying the intervention helps reduce problems in the long term.

3. Selecting and implementing restitutional and positive practice activities can be difficult at times. Considerations must be made for the behavior of concern, the environment, time, availability of staff, materials, etc.

4. If not careful, overcorrection procedures can inadvertently increase the frequency, duration, or intensity of an inappropriate behavior as well as collateral behaviors. An initial increase of behavior or other similar behaviors is sometimes likely due to reinforcing effects created by the amount of attention associated with these interventions. Make sure to provide minimal positive feedback and attention during overcorrection. Also, be sure that this is not the only opportunity the person has to access social forms of reinforcement.

5. Make the practice as closely related to the type of misbehavior as possible. A child may break an item in the classroom and may not be able to replace it, but he could pick up the pieces. He doesn’t just sit against the wall at recess to “think about it”.

6. Keep observation notes and records, data is essential to determining the success or failure of your intervention.

7. Have I mentioned the word positive (not to be confused with reinforcing)? An intervention that is negative and aversive may reduce problematic behaviors. However, the chances of teaching new replacement behaviors are less likely since punishment procedures alone do not teach behaviors. There is also a risk of new misbehaviors or an increase escape/avoidance behaviors as a result of aversive interventions. Remember our interventions should never cause harm.

I have used positive practice to train students to use their calming strategies. For example, when they practice using their strategies in a contrived “time out” or self initiated break situation, they receive acknowledgement and positive attention for doing so. A student might use this as they feel a problem is about to occur or they might use it to stop a violent behavior. This strategy could be used prior to an event and help prevent other, and possibly more aversive interventions. It’s also great as a follow up to an apology. An apology is more readily accepted when you “Back it Up”!

This is not intended nor shall it be misconstrued as advice. As always, before engaging in any any major behavior change program you should consult an expert or highly trained professional such as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

References

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., &; W. L. Heward. (2007) Applied behavior analysis Second Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Education Inc.

Love and Logic http://www.loveandlogic.com

Who’s in Control?

This is a common theme that surfaces in my discussions with teachers and administrators. I felt it important to share again, since it often times seems more difficult for the adults to give up or share control than it is for children. It’s a somewhat more mentalistic perspective than I normally present, but sometimes doing the work starts with mindset.

If you’re anything like me, you may have a difficult time controlling all the parts of your own life. If you have to control another person’s life on top of that, you’re going to get tired very quickly. Throw in a classroom of little lives to control and you’re on the rode to a breakdown sooner rather than later! As parents and teachers we often battle over control with our kids and students. I admit there are many times that I can be found guilty of the crime of power hunger. The hardest part about power and control is recognizing whether you have too much of it or too little. Our behavior tends to give us subtle hints even when we aren’t overtly thinking about it. We usually react when there is an imbalance of control whether we consciously realize it or not.

Often times we talk about children choosing behavior for control. We need to consider that control can take on more than one form. When looking at patterns of behavior, we have to answer the question, is the child attempting to gain control or does he already have it? We frequently feel the need to take charge and remove all opportunities for control. Having an iron fist of control in the classroom or at home is much like squeezing putty in your hands, as you squeeze tighter the putty inevitably seeps out. However by attempting to exert all the power and control you unintentionally lose it. In an attempt to hoard all opportunities for control, you create a condition in which the children make every attempt to gain some semblance of control in their lives.

Here we have two conditions. In the first condition one person has too much control. In the other condition the person has too little. Most people would like harmony in their lives and most of us would like to be fun to be around. In order to create this harmony we have to be able to create a balance of control. To do this, ask yourself these questions:

What is being controlled?
Contrary to popular belief, “control” itself is not a function of behavior. Therefore you must ask yourself what specifically is being controlled? At its most fundamental, behavior occurs either to gain access to something or to escape/avoid something. Knowing the behavioral function will help you make sure you’re addressing the behavior from the right perspective and avoiding unnecessary power struggles. See Functions of Behavior: Everybody E.A.T.S.

Is there a balance?
Good vs. bad, black vs. white, right vs. wrong, action and reaction, there are always forces at work that create a balance. Is control any different? A big step toward progress is to recognize that the scales of control are off balance.

Who has the control?
Does one person have the upper hand in the situation? If the child has the control, you’re going to need to set limits in order to regain some. If you have the control, guess what, it’s time to give some up in order to restore balance.

What am I willing to share?
Sometimes the hardest decision to make is what you are willing to give up, especially when you are used to having it all. Contrary to popular belief, most of the time, providing a child with choices is actually okay. You can have control by setting the limits and providing structure to the choices, the child gets control over which choice to make. Sounds like a win-win situation doesn’t it?

What am I willing to keep?
Sometimes it’s necessary to hold on to the choices. Situations involving safety usually come to mind here. Everybody has some “have to’s”, just don’t let them prevent you from finding some middle ground.

When we have too much or too little control over our lives we become stressed. When this happens we tend to overreact or under react and end up in the power struggles that we are trying to avoid. Remember that if control is not given, it will eventually be taken.

The Shaping Game: Clicker Training in the Classroom?

I love clicker training! Over the years I’ve used clickers to train chickens, dogs, fish (using a visual “click”), and even students in the classroom. My first experience using a clicker for shaping was back in 1999 when I attended a two day workshop by Bob Bailey and his wife, Marian Breland Bailey. I learned to teach a chicken how to discriminate between and peck colored discs. In the 1940s, Marian and Keller Breland, both former students of B.F. Skinner, trained animals for animal acts.

A clicker is a device with a metal strip that when pushed, makes a “clicking” sound. The most common form is the box clicker you would find at the checkout counter at PetSmart. See the picture above to see some examples. These days, animal trainers and teachers can buy all kinds of clickers (and accessories) as well as receive clicker newsletters, attend seminars, books and other training materials. Do a search for “clicker training” on Amazon.com and you can see for yourself.

How does the concept of shaping work? Shaping is a procedure based on the principles of operant conditioning. To use behavior analytic terms, we say in clicker training that an unconditioned stimulus, such as food, is paired with a neutral stimulus (the click), and the neutral stimulus eventually becomes a conditioned stimulus. In plain English, you pair the click sound with giving the learner a treat so that eventually the “click” becomes something that is desired because it is always associated with getting a treat. But that is only the beginning.

Shaping is a process of systematically reinforcing successive approximations to an end behavior. Actions displayed that are not approximations to the end behavior are ignored and not reinforced. Through these experiences, the learner acquires the new behavior. So if I was trying to teach someone to sit in a chair, I would click and reinforce behaviors that brought her closer to the chair until eventually she sits in the chair. (Cooper, Heron, Heward, 2007)

If you’ve never done clicker training, you can easily get warmed up by playing the Shaping Game (also known as the Training Game) with a group of friends or students. You’re going to use a person as your “animal”. You’ve probably played this game before in another form. Remember the Hot and Cold game? The shaping game is similar to the old kid’s game where something would be hidden for a child to find. As the child got closer to the hidden object, someone would say, “You’re getting warmer.” Functionally, “you’re getting warmer” is like the click that tells a learner he is doing the right thing. We actually did this with some special Christmas gifts for our kids. I’ve used a variation of this game, as well as clicker games, in the classroom to teach my EBD students awareness of the response consequence chain. See below how you can play the Shaping Game in the classroom.

The Shaping Game

1. Have one person agree to be the learner (the person whose behavior will be shaped), and have the learner leave the room.
2. Whoever is left in the room will choose a behavior that will be shaped. For example, you may want the person to come in, walk to a particular table in the room, and pick up a glass. Know what you want the learner to do BEFORE you start! Choosing a behavior is important in playing the shaping game. You want to be a humane trainer, and people may be reluctant to do something considered socially inappropriate (like hugging someone they don’t know or who doesn’t like to be touched). Participants are also unlikely to try a behavior they simply can’t do and will result in embarrassment if they try.
3. Now that the desired behavior has been determined, have the learner reenter in the room. She does not know what the behavior is.
4. As the learner starts moving in the right direction, click the clicker. If she goes the wrong way, say and do nothing. Click each time she is approaching or moving toward what you want her to do.

Don’t have a group of students to work with? That’s okay, ask friends or family members to help you practice shaping. This is also a great icebreaker and a fun staff development activity for teachers in behavior support classrooms for EBD and Autism.

Resources:
Check out Karen Pryor’s site for tips and variations on the shaping game:

See TAGTeach use shaping strategies to teach humans and animals alike.

References:
Cooper, John, & Heron, T., Heward, W. (2007) Applied Behavior Analysis Second Edition. Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Belonging Starts with Classroom Environment

Teachers in behavior support classroom must make efforts every day to teach the students that although they can come to us for support, they belong with their peers. This expectation of belonging all starts with how we set up the environment. A good support classroom for EBD students will emulate a general education classroom as much as possible.

Pictured here is of one of the classrooms I support. The desks are arranged in a fashion that is similar to the general education classes on campus. Originally this room had desks set up in individual “offices” along the edges of the classroom. Likewise, rules and procedures mimic what is expected of students in “mainstream” classes. You might also notice the smartboard projector; there is no reason students should not be exposed and allowed access the to technology. In the year and half since installment we have had 0 incidents involving technology usage in our classrooms. I should have taken a before and after, instead I only have an after.

I believe that sometimes in our quest to individualize we go to the extreme. Unfortunately when a classroom is completely individualized, there is no progress towards “normalizing”. For me the first step towards teaching students how to belong begins with the environment.

Functions of Behavior: Everybody E.A.T.S.

This past week I was involved in a few discussions at work about behavioral function and the term “control” kept being tossed about. A few of the teams kept suggesting that control itself is a function of behavior. However, to say a behavior occurs because of control does not truly describe why a behavior occurs. Is the student trying to gain access to something? Is the student trying to avoid or escape something? What exactly is the student trying to control?

Often times, we easily confuse the form of the behavior with the function of the behavior. The form of the behavior can be influenced by many factors including culture, experience, ability level, and sensory needs (among others). Considering all the factors that can bias our interpretations of behavior, it makes it easy to just call it control, or power, or revenge. But regardless of the what it looks like (topography), analyze the behavior for what the student gains or avoids by engaging in the behavior (function). Consider what happens before the behavior (antecedents), and what happens after the behavior (consequences), and other environmental features in your observations and analysis. When you analyze the behavior and the environmental effects you will ultimately land on the following four functions: escape, attention, tangible, and sensory. All of our behaviors can be attributed to one or more of these functions. I like to use the phrase “Everybody E.A.T.S!” to help me remember:

“Everybody E.A.T.S.”

Escape: A stimulus or condition is terminated or avoided as a result of the behavior. For example a child engages in this type of behavior to escape or avoid a demand or non-preferred task or activity. Ever see a child tantrums when asked to sit down to do homework?

Attention: Interaction from peers or adults is gained as a result of the behavior. For example a student repeatedly cracks jokes in class and the other students laugh.

Tangible: Access to tangibles is gained as a result of the behavior. For example, a child tantrums when he is denied a toy at the toy store, but stops when he gets the toy.

Sensory: The behavior serves no other purpose but to provide access to sensory input. A common example is hand flapping or body rocking, but so is nail biting and even eating.

We must avoid using terms such as control, power, or revenge to describe behavior, for they are vague and inaccurate descriptions of what is gained or avoided. Instead all behavior plans should subsequently be based on an analysis of the observed consequences of the behavior. Ask questions, observe, and use data collection and interview forms to gain more information. A goal for assessment and intervention plan is to identify and provide a better way for an individual to get the same function met through acceptable alternative methods. By doing so we can identify ways to remove the need for student misbehavior.

Pairing: Building Relationships in the Classroom

Photo borrowed from Anger Management Resource (http://www.angermanagementresource.com/)

We all have to put in the time and effort to build positive relationships with students. I’ve recently been working with some staff on building positive relationships with the students in their classroom. Pairing, a process of associating oneself with positive reinforcement through consistently matching yourself with positive stimuli, is a helpful strategy to building (and rebuilding) relationships with students.

Whether it’s a home program or within a classroom, pairing can help establish the relationship between teacher and student. I think pairing is a key component at the beginning of any behavioral program and is essential to the failure or success of your program.

One of the basic premises behind a behavioral program is that students will be much more motivated when they are having fun. Therefore, as a teacher or therapist, you must become fun for the student. Pairing is used to help the child get used to the teacher/therapist and look forward to teaching/therapy sessions. A good way to establish instructional control is for teachers to first connect themselves with positive reinforcement. It begins with noncontingent reinforcement. In other words, the student is first reinforced without having demands placed on him or her. This initially could be in the form of a compliment or tangible item (it depends on what is motivating to the student).

In the beginning, the only requirement for getting access to reinforcement (besides the lack of undesirable behavior) is that the student take the reinforcers from the teacher. Technically speaking, the reinforcement is still contingent, as there must be an absence of undesired behavior (tantrums, aggression, SIB, etc.) for reinforcement to be delivered. However the focus for the teacher/therapist is to seek and provide as many positive reinforcement opportunities for the student as possible.

After this is happening consistently (after several hours or even days), the teacher/therapist must gradually fade in demands; slowly increase the response requirement before reinforcement can be given. Eventually the teacher/therapist will be able to gradually present more demands of varying difficulty. Successful pairing will help ensure the reinforcement value of learning is not lowered while at the same time preventing the increasing the value of escape.

Pairing essentially involves 3 elements which must be in close association with each other:

1) The student The learner who is seeking positive reinforcement

2) The teacher/therapist Becomes the conduit by which the student obtains reinforcement.

3) The student’s desires and reinforcers. The student has to want it, or it’s never going to work.

In order to become a reinforcer themselves, a teacher or therapist will have to capture and contrive MOs/EOs and identify strong reinforcers with which they can be paired. Often times this may mean providing limited access to reinforcing items to certain times of day or under certain conditions in order to increase the desire to obtain them. A teacher/therapist may also have to contrive the setting under which this occurs (such as a space with increased likelihood to obtain reinforcement, such as play areas, play centers, etc.). Once this happens, everything associated with the teacher, especially learning itself, becomes reinforcing.

Whether you are a teacher, therapist, counselor, paraprofessional, administrator, or parent; your position alone does not automatically make you a reinforcing person in a student’s life. Pairing is a systematic way to help you establishing trust and connect yourself with reinforcement. It is this association with that solidifies the child’s view of the therapist as fun and reinforcing. The teacher/therapist becomes a bridge between the student and reinforcers.

 

This is a simple description of how the pairing process can be implemented in the classroom or at home. I will expand on this in a future post. This is not intended nor shall it be misconstrued as advice. As always, before engaging in any any major behavior change program you should consult an expert or highly trained professional such as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

 

Got Your Poker Face?

In any poker game having your poker face is essential to outwitting your opponent. Life in a classroom of children with emotional and behavior disorders isn’t all that different. I’ve recently been providing support in a self-contained special education classroom where the students have been engaging is some pretty serious misbehavior. Unfortunately, the staff have let it be known, sometimes by their verbal reactions, but mostly by their nonverbal reactions (facial expression) that those behaviors are not welcome and offensive.

One day after school I had a meeting with all the staff to discuss my concerns. In my discussions I pointed out my observation that when staff reacted and let it be known that the students’ behaviors were offensive and upsetting to them, that the students tended to engage in more aberrant behaviors. In fact, the students tended to escalate their behaviors from just verbal behaviors to physical ones.

Sometimes a student with emotional problems may make comments that are intentionally hurtful. At times they may continue the behavior because it gets a reaction and that reaction is perceived as a positive outcome. In these moments a valuable tool in your arsenal is the “poker face”. The “poker face” is a neutral facial expression that is nonjudgemental and nonthreatening. It can be used to show that their behavior does not bother you (even when it really does).

Consider that history may have shown them that this is how they are supposed to behave. Reacting in a way that shows disapproval actually may validate exactly what they were expecting, that they are disgusting towards others and therefore not worthy of positive attention (yes I know that is somewhat mentalist of me to say).

The “Poker Face” helps put the behavior on extinction by no longer providing the validating positive outcome that usually comes as a result of the behavior. At the same time, you can look for opportunities to praise and reinforce acceptable alternative behaviors. Along with the neutral facial expression of the “Poker Face” you have a combination of interventions for behavior that 1) minimizes your negative attention as a factor maintaining behavior and 2) sets you up to teach and reinforce positive alternative behaviors.

This is an example of how certain misbehavior can be addressed in the classroom. This is not intended nor shall it be misconstrued as advice. As always, before engaging in any any major behavior change program you should consult an expert or highly trained professional such as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

 

What’s the plan?: handling a behavioral crisis

The other day I had a student get very upset with me. Not because of anything I said or did, but because I was someone he was not familiar with. He had asked his teacher for help. His teacher, working with another student, was not available to assist him. She told him he could ask me for help. The student did not like that answer. He began to give me angry looks, and started to posture as if he wanted to fight. I looked at him, so he told me to stop staring. Using my Love and Logic, I responded by saying, “I do what people ask, when they ask me nicely.” He didn’t like that very much.

At this point he charged across the room towards me. I was leaning against a bookshelf with my hand on my chin, (a modified, impromptu modification of the CPI supportive stance), but did not move. He very angrily said he was going to rip my face off if I didn’t leave. I responded by saying, “I hope you wouldn’t, but if you feel the need to, you could try, I would just have to take care of myself and keep us both safe. However a better choice would be to go sit down and wait for your teacher’s help.”

Training to handle this type of situation is essential. I have seen this behavior before, therefore I was able to prepare a quick plan for how I would respond should we enter a full blown crisis. Having a plan helped me to stay calm in this situation:

1. Body position. I positioned my body in a way that wasn’t threatening, but at the same time was also safe and respectful. Coming off aggressively might only prompt the student to return the favor.

2. I set my limits. I could have easily said, “You are not allowed to hit me”, but he almost certainly probably would have tested that limit. So I responded by validating that he did have the choice to become physical. I did not get into a power struggle with him. Instead I informed him of what his choices were and from there he was able to decide which one would gain the more favorable outcome.

3. Awareness of the situation. Yes there was a risk, but I was prepared. My body was in position and I looked for signs the he was going to be physically aggressive. Where were his hands, was he continuing to escalate, was he breathing faster, was he looking for targets? My body was in position and I was ready to do what needed to be done, and in accordance with my training, in the event the student acted out physically.

4. Follow through. Since I saw no escalation, I continued my course of action. I felt no need to repeat my directive. I just gave him time to let the directive sink in and allow him time to process what he was going to do. Thankfully, I did not need to use any personal safety techniques in this situation.

The student grunted, then slowly turned around and walked back to his seat. He then asked if I would help him. I’ll be honest, I didn’t see that coming. But, he asked so nicely, so I acknowledged the appropriateness of his request and proceeded to help.In fact, later we were able to talk about how to get the things he wants sooner using more acceptable behavior choices and bring some closure to the incident.

My main purpose for describing this situation is to point out that this job carries with it a high level of risk. My response in this student could have gone downhill fast. However I responded the way I did being fully aware of the potential risk. I have seen this particular student engage in some highly aggressive and destructive behaviors towards others and his environment in the past. I often tell teachers and parents, “If you’ve seen it once, then you should develop a plan”. A plan keeps me from overreacting or underreacting out of fear. The last thing I want is to escalate a situation because I couldn’t react to a situation appropriately. Developing a plan and understanding the risks of your responses will helps me move forward to work positively in a crisis situation.

 

This is an example of how a behavioral crisis situation was handled. This is not intended nor shall it be misconstrued as advice. As always, before engaging in any any major behavior change program you should consult an expert or highly trained professional such as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

Back through the Drive-Thru: A Follow-up on Brief FBA

Unlike this pharmacy, we cannot go through a drive-thru and ask for a bag of interventions.

A subject I can never seem to get away from is the topic of brief, or as I call them “Drive-Thru” Functional Behavior Assessments. In short, it’s an abbreviated functional analysis, as is commonly practiced in school districts, that frequently produces unreliable results. This is due to the fact that they are typically based on indirect measures of behavior (such as anecdotal reports and subjective rating scales). The professionals conducting functional analyses within a school setting do not directly observe and record quantifiable dimensions of the behavior of significance. I find this inherently problematic. I’ve actually been witness to occasions when the assessor never even observed the child’s behavior prior to writing the FBA summary!

A Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) is intended to be a document that guides educators into making data-based decisions about how to help a youngster become more socially and academically successful in school. However, too frequently the intent of a Functional Behavior Assessment and the reality of a Functional Behavior Assessment are incompatible. Often times, an FBA becomes a formality. In the end, it becomes paperwork that does not serve any real purpose, especially when it comes to helping a child.

I guess this comes back to convenience. Indirect measures of behavior provide quick positive reinforcement for the staff conducting the “assessment” and that is the quick result of a product. Tightening budgets mean less staff. Remaining staff have more responsibilities and less time. Therefore conducting a thorough functional analysis, which would lead to a more reliable diagnosis of function (and in turn a more accurately targeted intervention) gets thrown out the window. It’s a smaller-sooner way of operating, but cost wins because it gets a result. Unfortunately it may not get us the correct result. In the long run we could end up “chasing our own tails” because we hypothesize one function for the behavior and come up with interventions that get no improvement in behavior and we have to start all over again.

This leads to my next point, what is the cost? Let’s assume a table of collaborators has convened and determined a behavior occurs as a function of seeking attention. Let’s also assume that this collaboration yields interventions and agreed to implement them in an IEP meeting. What happens when the interventions are not working and the child does not make any progress? Then the IEP committee might reconvene and agree to change the intervention to some other empirically tested, peer-reviewed, yet arbitrarily selected intervention, because this intervention “works for most kids who display this behavior”.

This could go on several times throughout a school year. That does not sound very cost or time effective. Intervention is not a bag of tricks where if one trick doesn’t please the crowd you just reach in and grab another one. Applied behavior analysis is more like the filing cabinet you open and systematically search for and use only the interventions that have been proven through research to work.

I recently attended a two day workshop by Dr. Brian Iwata. The research shows very clearly that descriptive functional analyses have very low reliability rates. Yet we continue to use them. Only when we move to more experimental methods of functional analysis do we really arrive at reliable determinants of behavioral function.

Recent research by Bloom (2011) and Jensen (2011) describe trial-based FBA procedures that reduce the amount of time it takes to conduct direct functional analysis measures in schools. It is definitely worthwhile to investigate these procedures future applications.