Search

Multiple baseline designs—both concurrent and nonconcurrent—are the predominant experimental design in modern applied behavior analytic research and are increasingly employed in other disciplines. In the past, there was significant controversy regarding the relative rigor of concurrent and nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs. The consensus in recent textbooks and methodological papers is that nonconcurrent designs are less rigorous than concurrent designs because of their presumed limited ability to address the threat of coincidental events (i.e., history). This skepticism of nonconcurrent designs stems from an emphasis on the importance of across-tier comparisons and relatively low importance placed on replicated within-tier comparisons for addressing threats to internal validity and establishing experimental control. In this article, we argue that the primary reliance on across-tier comparisons and the resulting deprecation of nonconcurrent designs are not well-justified. In this article, we first define multiple baseline designs, describe common threats to internal validity, and delineate the two bases for controlling these threats. Second, we briefly summarize historical methodological writing and current textbook treatment of these designs. Third, we explore how concurrent and nonconcurrent multiple baselines address each of the main threats to internal validity. Finally, we make recommendations for more rigorous use, reporting, and evaluation of multiple baseline designs.

Abstract Education and related services are relying increasingly on empirically supported treatments (ESTs), which have been shown to improve student outcomes through rigorous research. Many organizations have developed review systems [...]

Abstract The best available evidence is one of the three basic inputs into evidence-based practice. This paper sets out a framework for evaluating the quality of systematic reviews that are [...]

Abstract The best available evidence is one of the three critical features of evidence-based practice. Best available evidence is often considered to be synonymous with extremely high standards for research [...]

Abstract The research to practice gap in education has been a long-standing concern. The enactment of No Child Left Behind brought increased emphasis on the value of using scientifically based [...]

In our previous article on threats to internal validity of multiple baseline design variations (Slocum et al., 2022), we argued that nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs (NCMB) are capable of rigorously demonstrating experimental control and should be considered equivalent to concurrent multiple baselines (CMB) in terms of internal validity. We were fortunate to receive five excellent commentaries on our article from experts in single-subject research design—four of whom endorsed the conclusion that NCMBs should be considered strong experimental designs capable of demonstrating experimental control. In the current article, we address the most salient points made in the five commentaries by further elaborating and clarifying the logic described in our original article. We address arguments related to classic threats including maturation, testing and session experience, and coincidental events (history). We rebut the notion that although NCMBs are strong, CMBs provide an increment of additional control and discuss the application of probability-based analysis of the likelihood of threats to internal validity. We conclude by emphasizing our agreement with many of the commentaries that selection of single-case experimental designs should be based on the myriad subtleties of research priorities and contextual factors rather than on a decontextualized hierarchy of designs.

The goal of Direct Instruction (DI) is to teach content as effectively and efficiently as possible. To do this, instructional designers must identify generative relations or strategies that allow the learner to respond correctly to untaught situations. The purpose of content analysis is to identify generative relations in the domain to be taught and arrange the content in such a way that it supports maximally generative instruction. This article explains the role of content analysis in developing DI programs and provides examples and nonexamples of content analysis in five content domains: spelling, basic arithmetic facts, earth science, basic language, and narrative language. It includes a brief sketch of a general methods of conducting a content analysis. It concludes that content analysis is the foundation upon which generative instruction is built and that instructional designers could produce more effective, efficient, and powerful programs by attending explicitly and carefully to content analysis.

Direct Instruction (DI) teaches challenging academic content to a range of diverse learners. In order to do so, DI includes a complex system for organizing and directing teacher–student interactions to maximize learning. This system includes: instructional formats that specify the interactions between teacher and student, flexible skills-based groupings, active student responding, responsive interactions between students and teachers, ongoing data-based decision making, and mastery teaching. In this article, we describe each of these main features of the system, define their functions, reveal how they are interwoven throughout all DI lessons, and provide specific examples of their application during instruction. Our goal is to describe and clarify critical features of DI lesson presentation and teacher–student interaction so that instructional designers, teachers, and other practitioners can use existing DI programs effectively and include these features in newly developed programs.

Value. It is a word we hear all too often in today's healthcare system, whether we work in delivery, insurance, equipment supply, or policy. I suspect readers have lost sleep [...]

As the number of applied behavior analysts continues to grow, ethical practice and decision making become increasingly important. Specifically, improving behavior analysts’ ethical decision-making repertoires is critical to effective and ethical behavioral service delivery within the field of applied behavior analysis (ABA). This article proposes that the evidence-based practice (EBP) of ABA (Slocum et al., 2014) provides a framework to support fluent ethical decision making. The purpose of this article is to (a) review the importance of ethical decision making related to the practice of ABA, (b) introduce and summarize EBP of ABA, (c) review the three main components of EBP of ABA, and (d) discuss the broader role that EBP of ABA can play in the field of ABA. We tie the EBP of ABA to current Behavior Analyst Certification Board ethical standards and present actions that behavior analysts can engage in to support their ethical decision making throughout.

We conducted a stimulus preference assessment to identify preference for praise delivered in English versus Spanish for bilingual students. Next, a concurrent‐operant reinforcer assessment was used to evaluate the reinforcer efficacy of praise in each language. Participants showed limited to no preference for one language over another. One participant showed a slight preference for Spanish praise and Spanish praise functioned as a slightly more potent reinforcer. If a participant did not prefer a specific language of praise (i.e., undifferentiated preference or equal percentage of approaches), both languages were considered to be similarly reinforcing.

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) most often includes extinction as a treatment component. However, extinction is not always feasible and it can be counter‐therapeutic if implemented without optimal treatment integrity. Researchers have successfully implemented DRA without extinction by manipulating various parameters of reinforcement such that alternative behavior is favored. We extended previous research by assessing three participants' sensitivities to quality, magnitude, and immediacy using arbitrary responses and reinforcers that maintain problem behavior. The results were used to implement an intervention for problem behavior using DRA without extinction. Our findings indicate that arbitrary responses can be used to identify individual and relative sensitivity to parameters of reinforcement for reinforcers that maintain problem behavior. Treatment was effective for all participants when we manipulated parameters of reinforcement to which they were most sensitive, and, for two participants, the treatment was less effective when we manipulated parameters to which they were least sensitive.

We would like to thank the various people who helped in so many ways to make this special issue of Education and Treatment of Children (ETC) a reality. This list [...]

Behavioral contrast occurs when a change in the rate of reinforcement in one context results in a change in behavior in the opposite direction in another context. Research findings with nonhumans regarding the symmetry of positive and negative contrast have been mixed, especially regarding the relative influence of preceding and following schedules of reinforcement. Research has also been mixed regarding the extent to which systematic within-session contrast is demonstrated. Despite applied implications of contrast, the vast majority of research has been conducted with nonhumans. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the differential influence of preceding- and following-schedules of reinforcement on positive and negative behavioral contrast, as well as within-session contrast, with adult humans with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities in a 3-component human-operant arrangement. Positive contrast was found in 5 of 6 cases, whereas negative contrast was found in only 2 of 6. The effect of the following schedule was larger with positive contrast, but the effect of the preceding schedule was larger with negative contrast. There were no systematic within-session effects characteristic of behavioral contrast.

This study investigated the effect of a large group narrative intervention on diverse preschoolers’ narrative language skills with aims to explore questions of treatment efficacy and differential response to intervention. A quasi-experimental, pretest/posttest comparison group research design was employed with 71 preschool children. Classrooms were randomly assigned to treatment and comparison conditions. Intervention consisted of explicit teaching of narrative structure via repeated story retell practice, illustrations and icons, and peer mediation. Children’s narrative language and comprehension were assessed at Pretest, Posttest, and 4 weeks after treatment. Statistically significant differences between treatment and comparison groups were found on retell and story comprehension measures. A priori classification criteria resulted in 28 percent of the participants identified as Minimal Responders on the story retell measure and 19 percent as Minimal Responders on the story comprehension measure. Children who were dual-language learners did not have a different pattern of response than monolingual English speakers. Low-intensity narrative intervention delivered to a large group of children was efficacious and can serve as a targeted language intervention for use within preschool classrooms. A culturally and linguistically appropriate, dynamic approach to assessment identified children for whom intensified intervention would be recommended.

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a model of professional decision-making in which practitioners integrate the best available evidence with client values/context and clinical expertise in order to provide services for their clients. This framework provides behavior analysts with a structure for pervasive use of the best available evidence in the complex settings in which they work. This structure recognizes the need for clear and explicit understanding of the strength of evidence supporting intervention options, the important contextual factors including client values that contribute to decision making, and the key role of clinical expertise in the conceptualization, intervention, and evaluation of cases. Opening the discussion of EBP in this journal, Smith (The Behavior Analyst, 36, 7–33, 2013) raised several key issues related to EBP and applied behavior analysis (ABA). The purpose of this paper is to respond to Smith’s arguments and extend the discussion of the relevant issues. Although we support many of Smith’s (The Behavior Analyst, 36, 7–33, 2013) points, we contend that Smith’s definition of EBP is significantly narrower than definitions that are used in professions with long histories of EBP and that this narrowness conflicts with the principles that drive applied behavior analytic practice. We offer a definition and framework for EBP that aligns with the foundations of ABA and is consistent with well-established definitions of EBP in medicine, psychology, and other professions. In addition to supporting the systematic use of research evidence in behavior analytic decision making, this definition can promote clear communication about treatment decisions across disciplines and with important outside institutions such as insurance companies and granting agencies.

This study examined the effects of online reading instruction for at-risk fourth-grade students in Philadelphia. The authors used a multiple baseline design to assess the extent to which the students increased their oral reading rate given systematic supplemental online reading instruction. Tutoring consisted of 4 sessions per week with 50-min lessons of instruction delivered over Adobe Connect™. Analysis of the multiple baseline across participants revealed gains in oral reading fluency for all participants when placed into the synchronous online tutoring program. Participating students and tutors reported an awareness of increased reading skills and value of synchronous online instruction. Teachers and parents generally reported that students demonstrated increased reading skills after receiving instruction.

All students, including those with significant cognitive disabilities, must participate in accountability testing under NCLB regulations. Each state must provide an alternate assessment for students unable to participate in general accountability testing. Carefully designed alternate assessment systems have the potential to go beyond meeting federal reporting requirements by providing meaningful information about student progress that can guide decision making at the classroom and district level. In this paper, we discuss issues related to alternate assessment, including (a) balancing standardization and individualization, (b) setting performance criteria, (c) establishing links with progress monitoring and instruction, and (d) addressing special challenges of rural school systems that must be considered in designing and implementing an alternate assessment system that can fulfill this vision.

Alternate assessments are the means through which students with significant cognitive disabilities participate in accountability testing, thus measurement validity of alternate assessments is a critical aspect of state educational accountability systems. When evaluating the validity of assessment systems, it is important to take a broad view of validity that acknowledges its many facets. Evidence regarding six aspects of validity of Utah's Alternate Assessment (UAA) is presented in this paper. These six aspects are: (a) test content, (b) performance standards, (c) administration of the test, (d) reliability of scoring, (e) stability of scores, and 09 impact of use of UAA. Results of the validity study conducted on UAA are presented along with recommendations for improving the system based on these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes the procedures employed to develop a generic scoring rubric to evaluate students' responses on functional behavior assessment cases. The generic rubric was then used to develop case specific scoring rubrics. The components of the generic scoring rubric, its effectiveness to reliably score students' responses across cases, and its utility in evaluating students' responses for errors are described. The components of the scoring rubric helped in reliably scoring students' responses. The importance of scoring rubrics, in the context of the recent mandates of accreditation agencies like National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, the limitations of the scoring rubric, and suggestions for further research are discussed.

All students, including those with significant cognitive disabilities, must participate in accountability testing under NCLB regulations. Each state must provide an alternate assessment for students unable to participate in general accountability testing. Carefully designed alternate assessment systems have the potential to go beyond meeting federal reporting requirements by providing meaningful information about student progress that can guide decision making at the classroom and district level. In this paper, we discuss issues related to alternate assessment, including (a) balancing standardization and individualization, (b) setting performance criteria, (c) establishing links with progress monitoring and instruction, and (d) addressing special challenges of rural school systems that must be considered in designing and implementing an alternate assessment system that can fulfill this vision.

This study examined the feasibility of teaching phonological manipulation skills to preschool children with disabilities. Forty-seven children, 4–6 years old, enrolled in a special education preschool, were randomly assigned to receive training in one of three categories of phonological tasks (rhyming, blending, and segmenting) or a control group. Results indicated that children were able to make significant progress in each experimental category, but that they demonstrated little or no generalization either within a category (e.g., from one type of blending task to another type of blending task) or between categories (e.g., from blending to segmenting). Although the children's level of cognitive development significantly predicted some learning outcomes, it did not appear to limit the learning of phonological tasks.

We review the conceptual and empirical literature on the relation between oral reading rate and reading comprehension. Three lines of conceptual analysis converge on this relation: (a) application of basic behavior analytic principles suggests that fluent decoding should produce better reading comprehension through direct and indirect relations, (b) behavior analytic understanding of the importance of the rate of behavior as developed by Skinner, Lindsley and Haughton implies that higher reading rate contributes to improved comprehension, and (c) cognitive theory of automaticity explicitly states that high rate reading sets the stage for effective comprehension. A wealth of correlational evidence indicates that reading rate and reading comprehension covary. These results have been replicated across elementary grades and across a variety of measures of reading comprehension. However, experimental analyses have not convincingly demonstrated a functional relation between the two. Experimental work has yielded results that are mixed at best. Examination of experimental design issues shows that although this is not a simple relation to investigate, behavior analysts can make major contributions to understanding the possible functional relation between reading rate and reading comprehension.

A major schism in modern scientific psychology has occurred between behavior analysts and cognitive psychologists. The two groups speak in different languages, but the languages can be translated so that they are mutually understandable; when either language is translated into the other, similarities emerge from seeming differences. We draw an analogy between the basic units of behavior analysis (the operant and the establishing operation) and cognitive psychology (the production). We argue that both units describe behavior as a function of motivative and discriminative antecedents. In addition, the two perspectives account in analogous ways for ongoing changes in motivation and for control by verbal statements. Adherents of the two perspectives have experimentally analyzed some of the same problems and fashioned similar solutions for applied problems. We conclude that many of the commonly cited differences between the two perspectives are the result of misunderstanding, and that the real differences need not preclude communication and collaboration. The schism can be bridged.