Article reference ?using APA format (5 points): Summarize the purpose of the study (at least 3 sentences 10 points): What/who are the subjects and setting (at least 4 sentences 10 points
- Article reference using APA format (5 points):
- Summarize the purpose of the study (at least 3 sentences – 10 points):
- What/who are the subjects and setting (at least 4 sentences – 10 points):
- What experimental design did the authors use?(at least 2 sentences – 10 points):
- Summarize the results of the study? (at least 4 sentences- 10 points):
- What are your criticisms of the study? What is a possible future direction for the research? In other words, what should come next if you were going to conduct the next study? (at least 5 sentences- 5 points):
DUE 10/14/22 by 11:59 PM EST
ARTICLE LOCATED IN ATTACHMENTS
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13998136
Self-management within a token economy for students with
learning disabilities
Article in Research in Developmental Disabilities · May 1997
DOI: 10.1016/S0891-4222(96)00045-5 · Source: PubMed
CITATIONS
17 READS
1,084
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Self-regulation View project
Animal Assisted Physical Activity View project
Al Cavalier
University of Delaware
29 PUBLICATIONS 491 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Ralph P Ferretti
University of Delaware
46 PUBLICATIONS 1,276 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Al Cavalier on 30 June 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Pergamon Research in Developmental Disabilities, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 167-178, 1997
Copyright © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in the USA. All fights reserved
0891-4222/97 $17.00 + .00
PII S0891-4222(96)00045-5
Self-Management Within a Classroom Token Economy for Students With
Learning Disabilities
Albert R. Cavalier, Ralph P. Ferretti, and Amelia F. Hodges
The University of Delaware
Students with disabilities who are served in restrictive educational settings often
display inappropriate behavior that serves to preclude their integration into the
mainstream. One approach to managing di~cult behavior is a levels system (Smith
& Farrell, 1993), which O'pically consists of a hierarchy of levels in which students"
must meet increasingly demanding standards of behavior before advancing
through the hierarchy. In the present study, two middle-school students with
learning disabilities participated in a classroom-wide token economy based on a
levels system. The levels system, which was used in a self-contained classroom,
targeted the acquisition and maintenance of academic skills and social behaviors
with the goal of integrating these students into an inclusive classroom. The m'o
participants showed little or no progress within the levels system because of a very
high rate of inappropriate verbalizations. Therefore, a self-management system
that involved training on the accuracy of self-recording these verbalizations was
added to the levels system for these students. In addition, the investigator dis-
cussed with these students the consequences ~f inappropriate behavior and so-
cially appropriate behavioral alternatives. A multiple-baseline-across-subjects
experimental design revealed that the intervention resulted in a substantive reduc-
tion in inappropriate verbalizations, as well as greater progress through the levels
system. Implications of these findings Jor the use of self-recording within u token
economy, the importance of students' accuraev ~f self-recording, and methodolog- ical issues are discussed. © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd
The order of authorship for the first two authors was determined randomly.
Amel ia E. Hodges is a teacher at Glasgow High School in Newark. DE. Requests for reprints should be sent to either Albert R. Cavalier or Ralph P. Ferretti at the
Department of Educational Studies, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716.
167
168 A. R. Cavalier, R. P. Ferretti, and A. E. Hodges
Most instructional approaches for children with learning problems place the primary emphasis on external agents (teachers, parents, counselors, and other professionals) to arrange the instructional conditions, monitor student perfor- mance, and implement appropriate classroom contingencies. Kazdin (1975) identified many potential drawbacks to the heavy reliance on external agents, including: (a) the external agent may not notice many important student behav- iors, especially when the agent is simultaneously monitoring many children in classroom situations; (b) the external agent is associated with the contingencies and, therefore, becomes discriminative for the occurrence of the desired behav- iors; and (c) the desired behaviors may not transfer to situations in which externally-administered contingencies have not been in effect. As a consequence of these limitations, and motivated by the movement to educate individuals with disabilities in inclusive settings, there has been increasing interest in the devel- opment of procedures that reduce students' dependence upon highly structured learning programs and increase their capacity for self-regulation (Ferretti, Cav- alier, Murphy, & Murphy, 1993; Ryan, Weed, & Short, 1986).
The training of self-management skills holds the promise of reducing students' dependence on others and ensuring greater control over their own learning. These skills include the self-definition of the to-be-accomplished goal, self-recording of information about task performance, self-evaluation of task performance relative to self-defined or externally-established standards, and self-reinforcement (Ferretti et al., 1993). Each of these components has been the focus of previous interventions, either in isolation or as part of a multicomponential intervention designed to affect behavior change. Self-recording procedures have received particular attention be- cause of the well-documented therapeutic concomitant known as reactivity (Lloyd & Landrum, 1990; Nelson & Hayes, 1981). Reactivity refers to changes in a client's behavior that arise from observing and recording that behavior. While the theoretical mechanisms that underlie reactivity effects have been the subject of considerable discussion (Ferretti et al., 1993; Nelson & Hayes, 1981), the effects nevertheless have been demonstrated across many different behavioral domains (see Lloyd & Landrum, 1990).
The effects of self-recording on the attention-to-task of students with learning disabilities have been comprehensively studied (Hallahan & Sapona, 1983; Kneedler & Hallahan, 1984; Lloyd, Bateman, Landrum, & Hallahan, 1989; Snider, 1987). However, the investigation of its use with other classroom behaviors, especially disruptive or inappropriate behavior, has not. been as extensive. In one experiment, Broden, Hall, and Mitts (1971) obtained a 48% increase in study behavior with an intervention package consisting of self- recording and praise from a counselor. In a second experiment, self-recording alone resulted in an initial decrease in inappropriate verbalizations, but this effect gradually dissipated back to pre-treatment levels. In both experiments, student recordings of the target behavior differed markedly from the recordings of an independent observer. Thus, the effects of self-recording on the disruptive behavior of students with learning disabilities were equivocal.
Self-Management and Token Economy 169
While positive results have sometimes been obtained with inaccurate sell'- recording (Ferretti et al., 1993; Hallahan & Sapona, 1983), reactivity to self- recording may be enhanced when accuracy is high (McLaughlin, Burgess, & Sackville-West, 1981). Accuracy may be especially important when the target skill is particularly difficult for a student to perform (O'Leary & Dubey, 1979), when a student is having trouble discriminating instances of the target behavior from non-instances (Snider, 1987), or when the self-recording activity is not intrusive enough to engage the student's attention (Loper & Murphy, 1985). While behavior may improve in the absence of accurate self-recording, grossly inaccurate self-recording raises a fundamental question about the degree to which the independent variable (self-recording) is responsible for behavior change (Snider, 1987), that is, the inference that self-recording is responsible for behavior change is not warranted when self-recording accuracy is low.
A self-management package might be particularly effective as an adjunctive intervention for students with learning disabilities who fail to keep pace with their peers in group motivational systems such as classroom token economies and assertive discipline programs. Programs such as these place an especially heavy emphasis on external control and thereby minimize students' responsi- bility for managing their own behavior. For example, Knapczyk and Livingston (1973) observed improvements in the reading accuracy of junior high school students with mental retardation who were participating in a classroom token economy. On a non-academic task, Seymour and Stokes (1976) obtained in- creases in work productivity after self-recording was added to an existing token economy.
In this study, we sought to evaluate the effects of an intervention consisting of self-recording, discussions about the consequences of inappropriate behavior. and praise for appropriate behavior on two students with learning disabilities. The motivational system in effect in the classroom was a token economy called the levels system (Smith & Farrell, 1993) that employed the acquisition of points. The purpose of this system was to strengthen appropriate academic and social behaviors identified in students' IEPs. The overarching goal in this self-contained classroom was to integrate students into classrooms with non- disabled peers.
Both students selected for participation in this study failed to make progress in the classroom-wide levels system because of excessive inappropriate verbal- izations. Therefore, the intervention was developed as an adjunct to the levels system that could provide heightened individualization lbr student needs. The goal of the intervention was to reduce the occurrence of students' inappropriate verbalizations and thereby hasten their progress within the classroom-wide token economy. The intervention included training self-recording to a criterion level of accuracy.
170 A. R. Cavalier, R. P. Ferretti, and A. E. Hodges
M E T H O D
Participants
The two students who participated in this study were males aged 13 years, 11 months and 13 years, 5 months (referred to as S1 and $2, respectively) who were enrolled in a combined seventh and eighth grade self-contained class. S 1 performed at a grade equivalent of 4.2 in reading and 5.3 in mathematics on the Wide Range Achievement Test; $2 performed at a grade equivalent of 4.3 in reading and 5.7 in mathematics on the same instrument. Full scale IQ scores on the WISC-R were 83 and 96, respectively. They had no known physical or sensory disabilities or medical problems. They also met the state's classification criteria for students with learning disabilities and were placed in a self-contained special education classroom in a public middle school.
In the classroom-wide levels system, points were assigned by the teacher in 25-minute intervals throughout the school day, contingent upon performance of different levels of behaviors in the following categories: being present in the appropriate area, attention-to-task, use of appropriate language, positive inter- action with others, and compliance with instructions. Points were used to motivate progress through each of six levels and could be exchanged for a variety of primary and secondary reinforcers, including activity reinforcers. Different students had to earn a criterion number of points each day for that day to "count" toward the next level.
The general criteria for achieving successive levels after Level 1 were as follows: Level 2 = 5 days of criterion performance; Level 3 = 10 days of criterion performance; Level 4 = 15 days of criterion performance; Level 5 = 20 days of criterion performance; and Level 6 = 30 days of criterion performance of which the last 15 days had to be consecutive. A student continued at a given level until s/he met the performance criterion for the next level. Classroom management and motivational systems that are structured with a system of performance-and-reward levels such as this one are "widely used, although not widely researched" in elementary and secondary classrooms (Scheuermann & Webber, 1996, p. 12).
The students were chosen for this study because they were not advancing in the levels system. At the end of the 6th week of participation in this system, the majority of the students in class had progressed to various points between the end of Level 2 and the beginning of Level 4. The two students had achieved only 3 criterion days at Level 1. The teacher described these two students as exhibiting the following characteristics: high levels of distractibility, strong sensitivity to criticism from others, poor impulse control, and difficulty in understanding and applying abstract concepts. The most prominent and prob- lematic characteristic was a stable and very high level of inappropriate verbal- izations, because it interrupted instructional activities and thereby prevented the progress of these students through the levels system. In addition, these inap- propriate verbalizations distracted the entire class, instigated other students to
Self-Management and Token Economy 171
engage in inappropriate behavior, and necessitated a high frequency of teacher prompts and reprimands. School records indicated that both students had not responded to previous implementations of point-based contingency systems.
Procedures
The intervention was evaluated using a multiple-baseline-across-subjects experimental design (Barlow & Hersen, 1984). Sessions were conducted during the students' normal classroom activities. Sessions were 50 minutes in duration and were conducted twice daily, once in the morning and once in the afternoon. The target behavior was inappropriate verbalization, defined as: (a) talking audibly to the teacher or teacher's aide without raising a hand and being acknowledged; (b) talking audibly to another student during designated quiet times; (c) talking audibly to the teacher or teacher's aide with threatening words, curse words, or derogatory comments; (d) talking audibly to another student with threatening words, curse words, or derogatory comments, and (e) talking audibly to himself. Data on these target behaviors were collected by the students and an independent observer using event recording.
Data collection under baseline conditions continued for each student until relative stability was established. The intervention condition was initiated for S 1 on session 20 and for $2 on session 52. Throughout the course of the interven- tion, the investigator discussed a number of potential problem situations and alternative strategies for dealing with these situations based on principles of self-management. Periodically, the student was reminded that the purpose of the training was to help him understand how to better deal with problem situations at school and advance through the levels system. These discussions were motivated by findings that suggest that a student's understanding of problem situations and awareness of alternative strategies heighten the effects of self- management training (Brigham, Hopper, Hill, de Armas, & Newsom, 1985).
The definition of inappropriate verbalizations (referred to as "talking-out" with the students) was read to a student and he was given the opportunity to ask questions and discuss any parts of the definition that he did not fully understand. An event recording sheet was shown to the student and he was instructed to make one slash mark for each talk-out. The observer then modeled the self- recording behavior in a mock session and the student was given the opportunity to ask questions and discuss the procedure (Brigham et al., 1985). Students were told that the accuracy of their recording was important, that it would be checked during a training phase until they could self-record with at least 85% accuracy for four consecutive sessions, and that on the day that they reached this criterion they would be taken to McDonald's after school. Accuracy checks on a student's self-recording were then conducted until the student reached the criterion. The definition of the target behavior was reviewed with the student each time accuracy was calculated during this phase. Percent of agreement was calculated
172 A. R. Cavalier, R. P. Ferretti, and A. E. Hodges
by dividing the smaller number of recorded behaviors by the larger number of recorded behaviors and multiplying the result by 100.
During this self-recording training phase, which was also Level 1 of the levels system, accuracy checks were performed during 100% of the sessions. During Level 2 and 3, accuracy checks were performed at least once per day and without the student's knowledge, that is, they were told accuracy would be monitored but they were not told the specific times, and these were not obvious to the students. The observer was positioned out of the student's field of vision and appeared to be engaged in other classroom activities.
At the end of each session, the student and observer together totaled the number of recorded inappropriate verbalizations and, if the performance crite- rion was reached, a reinforcer was administered. The criterion for reinforcement was a decrease of at least five behaviors from the previous session' s count. This defines a schedule of differential reinforcement of diminishing rates of behavior (DRD), which is a special case of differential reinforcement of low rates of behavior (Deitz & Repp, 1973; Schloss & Smith, 1994). The reinforcer for the first 10 sessions was 15 minutes of free time paired with praise. If a student advanced to the next level in the levels system, he received the praise and increased privileges inherent in progression through the system. The self- management intervention continued until a student reached the terminal objec- tive of no more than three inappropriate verbalizations per 50-minute session for 10 consecutive sessions. This level of inappropriate verbalizations was deemed acceptable by regular and special education teachers. When S1 reached the terminal objective, $2 began the self-management intervention condition. The performance of S 1 continued to be monitored using a multiple probe technique.
RESULTS
The primary data are those recorded by the observer rather than the self- recordings of the students. As displayed in Figure 1, the number of inappropriate verbalizations by S 1 across the 20 sessions of baseline was relatively stable at a high level, averaging 65.7 per session. This operationalizes the teacher's opinion that these behaviors were occurring at an unacceptable frequency.
On Session 21, the first day of the self-recording intervention, the data reveal an immediate decrement in the frequency of the target behavior. This was followed by a steady and continual decline. During each of the last 29 inter- vention sessions, the number of inappropriate verbalizations was below the terminal objective of three or fewer per session, that is, from Session 38 until the end of the study, inappropriate verbalizations by S 1 were virtually eliminated.
Comparison of the observer's recordings and the student's recordings of inappropriate verbalizations in Figure 1 reveals that the student consistently under reported his behavior until Session 32. After this point, the student's recordings map onto those of the observer almost perfectly. As displayed in
Self-Management and Token Economy 173
o ~ $ I £
~_ 0 o
m c
~ $2 ~ Z
Baseline Intervention Observer Data 1 . . . . Subject Data
'/ / 2J, Sessions
FIGURE 1. The number of inappropriate verbalizations by both students as a function of experimental conditions. Arrows indicate sessions in which students achieved new levels within the levels system.
Figure 2, for every session after Session 35 the observer's recordings and the student's recordings achieve 100% agreement.
During the first 16 sessions of the baseline condition for $2, his frequency of inappropriate verbalizations per 50-minute session ranged from a low of 32 to a high of 98, with an average of 66.3 per session. At the end of Session 15, the classroom teacher mistakenly delivered a stern reprimand to $2. Because of this, one of the investigators reviewed with the teacher the nature and purpose of the experimental protocol. While these circumstances did not occur again during the course of the study, the immediate effect was a complete suppression of the target behavior during the next session and a low frequency during the following two sessions. Over the next four sessions, the number of S2's inappropriate verbalizations steadily increased. From Session 22 through Session 51 (i.e., the remainder of the baseline condition for $2), inappropriate verbalizations oc- curred at a relatively stable frequency, averaging 60.1 per session.
On Session 52, the first day of the self-recording intervention for $2, the data reveal an immediate decrement in the frequency of the target behavior. There- after, inappropriate verbalizations showed a relatively steady decline. The number of inappropriate verbalizations during each of the last 10 intervention sessions was below the terminal objective of three or fewer per session.
Comparison of the observer's recordings and S2's self-recordings of inap- propriate verbalizations reveals that, like the first student, $2 consistently underreported his behavior during the initial sessions of the self-recording intervention (see Figure 1). Again, like the first student, S2's inappropriate verbalizations continued to decrease during this period of inaccurat
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.