Advanced Behavior Interventions

1. Advanced BehaviorInterventions Rose Iovannone, Ph.D., BCBA-D iovannone@usf.edu 813-974-1696

2. Agenda • Refresher of PTR • Data—Developing the progress monitoring system (IBRST) • Linking hypotheses with behavior interventions • Task analyzing behavior interventions • Coaching and fidelity • Data-based decision making

3. Objectives • Participants will: • Develop a task analyzed behavior intervention plan that is linked to an FBA hypothesis that includes: • A prevention intervention • A replacement skill • A functional equivalent reinforcer • Complete a fidelity measure • Make decisions based on data

4. PTR—Refresher

5. What is Prevent-Teach-Reinforce (PTR)? • Research project funded by U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences • University of South Florida • Three central Florida school districts • University of Colorado, Denver • Two Colorado school districts • Purposes: • Answer the call for rigorous research • Evaluate effectiveness of PTR vs. “services as usual” using randomized controlled trial • Evaluate effectiveness of “standardized “ approach

6. Rationale for PTR and the Tools • Research Goals: • Standardizing the process • Steps of process same across all teams • Every PTR intervention plan includes a package of interventions including (a) prevention; (b) replacement skill to teach; (c) reinforcement (functional equivalence) • Making it collaborative and easy for teacher/team participation

7. PTR • Tools to enhance attainment of goals • Individualized Behavior Rating Scale Tool • PTR Assessment • Assessment Organization Table • PTR Intervention Checklist • Task Analysis of Interventions • Coaching/Fidelity Checklists • Intervention Fact Sheets • Fidelity checklist for facilitators

8. Where is PTR in a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS)?

9. Continuum of FBA (Scott et al., 2010)

10. Prevent-Teach-Reinforce: PTR • Four step process (aligned with problem solving process): • Goal Setting (Identification of Problem) • Functional Assessment (Problem Analysis) • Intervention (Intervention Implementation) • Coaching and fidelity • Evaluation (Monitoring and Evaluation of RtI) • Optional Step: Step 1—Teaming

11. Step 1-Goal Setting Identify the problem Behaviors to increase/decrease Set up IBRST

12. Setting up the behavior rating scale

13. Behavior Rating Scale • Scale is developed prior to implementing the intervention • It is a progress monitoring tool • Data are reviewed each time the team meets or a consultant/facilitator talks to the teacher

14. Most Important Thing • Defining the behavior in observable, measurable terms • Guidelines: • Would someone who is unfamiliar with the student know when the behavior is happening? • Would everyone record that the behavior is happening with the definition supplied? • Describe the exact motor (physical and verbal) behaviors the child performs when doing the behavior

15. Defining Behaviors Non examples Examples Grabs clothing of peers by pinching and bunching fabric with his fist Hits peers and adults on their bodies by slapping with hand (moderate intensity), pinching flesh with fingers (leaves mark), punching by making a fist with hand and making contact with peer/adult bodies • Grabs • Hits

16. Components of BRS • Scale—5 point foundation • Can be flexible and add or subtract Likert scale points • Can be creative and use columns/rows for different time periods/people, etc. • Key—Vital for teacher • Definition of behavior • Directions—over what time period of day will they be rating the behavior? What do each of the anchor points represent as perceptual estimates? • Practice • After setting up, ask teacher to rate student’s behavior from earlier in the day or previous day • Adjust if necessary

24. Analyze the Problem Step 3: Functional behavior assessment

25. Methods • Direct • Observations • Functional Analysis (control variables; manipulate conditions) • Indirect • Interviews • Rating Scales • Checklists • PTR—uses observations (by facilitator) and indirect (PTR Assessment)

26. Organizing FBA Data • Assessment Organization Table • Competing Behavior Pathway • Initial Lines of Inquiry

27. Assessment Organization Table • Lists all of the data for team review/consensus • Allows facilitator to clarify information • Leads to a more accurate hypothesis • Important considerations: • Clarify the contexts-behaviors-function link • Behavior may have multiple functions • The functions may be present in all contexts or some contexts may lead to one function while another context may lead to a different function

30. Linking Hypothesis to Interventions When Michael is: (a) required to transition from non-preferred to preferred activities, within and outside of the classroom, when corrected or told to stop/wait during transitions PREVENTION INTERVENTION: What intervention will modify the transition request, correction, reprimand so that it is no longer a trigger?

31. Linking Hypothesis to Interventions He/She will scream (behavior) What do we want the student to do instead of screaming? What is the replacement behavior/skill to be taught to the student?

32. Linking Hypothesis to Interventions He/She will scream (behavior) What do we want the student to do instead of screaming? What is the replacement behavior/skill to be taught to the student?

33. Linking Hypothesis to Interventions As a result, he/she (a) escapes/avoids/delays the transition from a non-preferred to a preferred activity and protest the transition How will we make sure that the replacement behavior gets the same outcome as did the problem behavior (e.g., escape)?

34. Jeff Hypothesis Inappropriate Appropriate

35. Step 4 Behavior Interventions

36. Behavior Intervention Plan Development: Essential Features • Behavior interventions selected • Team/teacher provides description on how interventions will look in classroom setting • Facilitator guides the team/teacher by using ABA principles to develop most effective intervention that matches the team/teacher context • Each intervention selected is described in detail by task-analyzing steps, providing scripts, describing adult behaviors, NOT student behaviors • After plan developed, time is scheduled to train the team/teacher the strategies prior to implementation • Plans for training students and other relevant individuals • Support provided once plan is implemented

37. Hypothesis Link When Jeff is presented with demands to start non-preferred academic tasks, specifically independent writing, he will walk around the room, talk to and touch peers, put his head down, tap his pencil and not initiate writing. As a result, he avoids/delays non-preferred tasks . Behavior Disengaged-walk around room, bother peers, Reinforce Avoid/delay non-preferred task Prevent Teacher request to start the non-preferred task Setting Event None identified

38. The Three I’s Function-Based Support Plans will be effective when IRRELEVANT A prevention intervention that modifies the context so that the problem behavior is no longer necessary to perform is included. INEFFECTIVE The replacement behavior serves the same function (obtains the same outcome) as the problem behavior - if it doesn’t work, the student won’t do it. INEFFICIENT The replacement behavior works at least as quickly and easily as the problem behavior - if it works but is harder to perform, the student won’t do it.

39. Jeff-matching hypothesis to interventions Problem Behavior Disengaged Maintaining Consequences Reinforce ESCAPE!!! Setting Events NONE Prevention Triggering Antecedents Request to do a non-preferred task = writing Replacement Behavior (equivalent or incompatible) Engage in Task Modify trigger Choices Environmental support

40. Next Activities • Team provided menu of interventions • Team can select interventions: • Homework (between meetings) • Individually or jointly • During meeting • Discussion • Voting • Role of facilitator: • Less “telling” • More “questioning”

44. Selecting Interventions • Review Hypothesis • Ask team guiding questions to aid in selection • Tip: • If meeting time is limited, start with Teach intervention • Replacement behavior has been identified on Behavior Rating Scale and Hypothesis (appropriate behavior hypothesis) • Develop the teach/reinforce intervention • Prevention intervention is last one to develop

45. Developing Interventions • Teach and Reinforce: Ask team “How will you teach the replacement behavior and how will you be able to provide escape/attention (function) when the student performs the behavior?” • Prevention: Ask team, “How will you modify the (antecedent) so that it will no longer be aversive and trigger the problem behavior?” • Facilitator guides team to develop the intervention into discrete steps adult performs when implementing the interventions

46. Basic Steps of All Interventions • The following features need to be identified when developing interventions: • When • Specific times of day/routines/subjects • Contexts—within routines/subjects, specific events in which intervention steps will initiate • Dosage—how much of the intervention needs to be implemented (e.g., frequency, duration, etc.)? • How • Similar to defining behaviors in observable and measurable terms • Verbal behaviors adult will perform • Motor behaviors adult will perform • Materials necessary and how they will be used in implementation • Phases-acquisition, practice/feedback, mastery, generalization, extension, maintenance • Responses to different scenarios • Student responds • Student does not repond

47. Scripted Teaching • Task analysis of interventions • Lost art • Method of providing scaffold of support to teachers who do not have adequate training in content (e.g., reading, math, behavior) • Allows teachers to do strategies • Features—highly structured with scripts and times for implementation • Integral part of Direct Instruction (DI)

50. Developing Behavior Intervention Plans PTR Style • Why do we task analyze? • Ensure teacher can implement the interventions • Matches teacher context to intervention implementation • Matches teacher skill level to intervention • Allows fidelity to be measured • Provides data for decision-making • Why do we make sure we link the interventions to the hypothesis and ensure link to the function? • Research has shown that interventions developed to match the function are more effective than providing general, evidence-based strategies that are not linked to function (e.g., self-management that does not provide functional equivalence, token economies, etc.)