Pages:7 (2148 words)
Document Type:Case Study
Hypothetical Case Study
Two students, Jack and Bob, determined as aggressive by their educators and chosen using purposive sampling, made up the participants of the study. The two are, at present, enrolled in a behavioral support classroom setting. Neither has knowingly taken part in any research or been involved with self-monitoring or tactile prompt interventions. Both were enrolled in the very same class, require behavioral support, and suffer from various disabilities.
The setting of the research was a self-contained classroom, with the two students referred for serious behavioral issues. Both took part in a behavioral support unit-developed token-economy points system. For system maintenance, a fresh point sheet was utilized every day. Individual sheets illustrated frequency measure tables, for how many times each child displayed aggressive conduct. Sessions (of a ten-minute duration for each subject) were conducted in the course of routine scholastic instruction/teaching on regular school days, occurring thrice daily at the most. Information was collected either manually (i.e., on paper) or digitally (i.e., on a laptop). Information gatherers observed subjects as discreetly as they could. For decreasing reactivity, observers observed lessons for several weeks before gathering information for research. All subject response opportunities were recorded on the information acquisition form, in addition to whether or not participant response was right. Right responses implied those where the opportunity of dependent variable performance was followed by relevant behavior on the part of the staff (Petscher & Bailey, 2006).
On the other hand, a wrong response entailed opportunities not being followed by staff conduct, or if the staff’s conduct was improper, or if target responses were performed without any opportunity arising. The share of right behaviors was computed (number of right reactions/ (right reactions negative reactions) * 100%) at every session’s ending. The sole exception here involved bonus-point related information acquisition, recorded in the form of frequency data. In the intervention stages, independent variable occurrence, in addition to whether their absence or presence was deemed by the observer as right or wrong, was noted as well.
Information was gathered in regular classroom settings. Subjects knew researchers were observing them but were unfamiliar with the study’s variables of interest. Subjects were observed as inconspicuously as could be, with a datasheet and clipboard utilized for recording subject opportunities to engage in target behaviors.
Appropriate dependent variable to be targeted from the graph with an operational definition
Dependent variables for the research were determined based on example, classroom observations, from specific educator requests. Pilot observations indicated every instructional assistant did, at times, display conducts of interest; however, their uniformity and regularity had to be dealt with. Staff conduct was all associated with a token-economy points system adoption.
Disruptive behavior management. A chance at addressing disruptive conduct on a student’s part was identified if the student physically or verbally disturbed others within the classroom. An appropriate reaction to the opportunity involved the subject telling the disruptive student in question to remove the relevant point from his/her record. Record is considered to be areas where points were accorded included sticking to directions, using polite gestures and language, abiding by classroom order, etc. Information was gathered and charted as a percentage of appropriate respondent conduct.
Encouraging Appropriate Conduct: Opportunities for urging students to engage in the right conduct in the class were identified if the student didn’t perform the required task for five seconds at a minimum. Teaching assistants were required to use this opportunity for redirecting the child to conduct him/herself appropriately. A right reaction implied the participant was taking a minute to instruct the child on precisely what conduct is required from him/her. This information was presented in the form of a percentage of the right participant conduct.
Appropriate independent variable to be used from the graph
Training. Low rates being determined upon visual baseline information analysis required a training session to be organized for discussing participant expectations. The study’s first author introduced study objectives, processes, expected outcomes, and dependent variables in a meeting with participants at a tiny office attached to the study setting. Tasks were made clear, and situations explained using modeling. Post-tests were administered to participants where they were…
…prompted incorrect aggressive student conduct. After the first nine training sessions, he still did not improve in the area of delivering required non- aggressive conduct. Just as in Jack’s case, introducing tactile prompts and self- monitoring combined gave rise to swift, definite improvement in non-aggressive conduct manifestation from session ten onwards. Upon removal of tactile prompts, a 100% response was maintained in case of disruptive aggressive conduct management and prompting proper student conduct. However, the response proved to be more inconsistent upon extension of session duration at the maintenance stage.
Outcomes indicate that tactile prompts notified participants to pay attention and respond appropriately to student behavior. Proper target response delivery on participants’ part (for instance, disruptive conduct management after its occurrence) indicates their response was influenced by the collective stimulus of student conduct and tactile prompt. Maintenance of high target conduct levels following removal of tactile prompt indicates participants are now able to respond appropriately only to student conduct, potentially facilitated, over time, by self- monitoring.
Internal validity of the study
Independent variable impacts are replicated for several diverse participants. When every single-case study design logic element is demonstrated, participant-wide MB design controls for two or more primary internal validity threats such as (a) historical events (for instance, a staff or curricular modification within the class) which may concurrently impact several subjects and (b) maturation/exposure of participant to experimental/clinical setting and procedure (Carr, 2005).
The external validity of the study
Inter-Subject replication constitutes a key process in the establishment of an external study finding generality. Furthermore, the subject design-wide multiple baselines contribute to external study validity through several inter-subject replications.
Social validity of the study
Participants were required to complete anonymous questionnaires on their views regarding independent variables, their perceived improvements in their behavior, and whether or not they believed target behaviors proved helpful. They used a 5-point Likert scale to answer individual questions. According to one participant, the research and associated procedures were helpful, while according to the other, it was very helpful. The latter further noted that taking part…
Bailey, J. S., & Burch, M. R. (2018). Research methods in applied behavior analysis, 2nd edition. Routledge.
Barlow, D. H., Nock, M., & Hersen, M. (2009). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior for change (No. Sirsi) i9780205474554).
Carr, J. E. (2005). Recommendations for reporting multiple?baseline designs across participants. Behavioral Interventions: Theory & Practice in Residential & Community?Based Clinical Programs, 20(3), 219-224.
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward W.L. (2020). Applied Behaviour Analysis (Third Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Petscher, E. S., & Bailey, J. S. (2006). Effects of training, prompting, and self?monitoring on staff behavior in a classroom for students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39(2), 215-226.
Disruptive behaviors in elementary and secondary educational settings have long been a concern for educational administrators, teachers, and courts. The issue is exacerbated when considering disruptive behaviors exhibited by special education students. Given the requirements for a free and public education (FAPE) and the goal of least restrictive environments (LRE), there seems to be a balancing of interests between the needs of the child in special education and the
The teachers acknowledge that the other disruptive behaviors propagates the destruction of the school property therefore computer-based management results in the upstaging of the security of the school properties. This eminent vandalism is prominent in the cases where the students would like to have money selling the school properties. The teachers separately attribute the poor morals of the students to inexperience and the ignorance of the students. Involving of computer-based
Performance Disruptive behavior impacts students' ability to learn. In both the regular and special education classrooms, teachers must manage disruptive behavior and help students stay on task. It is especially critical with reading instruction in the beginning of a student's academic career. Struggling readers, without intervention, often struggle throughout their school years. Peer-assisted learning strategies (PALS) have been shown to be effective in keeping students on task and thus enabling
Education Applies to Power and Life Chances Why is education important? Education depicts the ability to reason basing on the individual know-how of the acquired reading and writing skills. Further, individuals gain from the spectrum of imparted knowledge that enables them to surge deeper into unexplored aspects to bring beneficial changes to the society. Additionally, education occurs as a force that propels individuals to reach their potential and to become fully
The goal especially at this Behavior Intensity level is to provide corrective action rather than punitive. This can be initiated by the use of visual or non-verbal prompts, proximity or even a subtle verbal warning. The goal is to alert the student to the 'annoying' behavior and to demonstrate that this behavior won't be accepted without yet resorting to punishment. For the student that insists on either becoming distracted easily
Behavior Management EDFD260 ASSESSMENT A: BEHAVIOUR Management PLAN Discuss your overall philosophy of behaviour management. Refer to theoretical models / approaches which have influenced you. On the whole, behavior cannot be controlled, but can only be guided. This overall philosophy of behavior management in the classroom, built in part on Glasser's Choice Theory and stemming strongly from Bill Roger's Theory of discipline, especially the concept of directional choices (Andrius, 2012). These theories both