Consequence-Based Strategies

• Precise: Calling out is defined as verbalizations made during instructional time without first raising a hand and being acknowledged by the teacher. Interrupting is defined as verbally or physically interfering with another student's ongoing verbal contribution. Leaving seat is defined as moving from her assigned desk/area during instructional time without permission from the teacher.
• Objective: These behaviors are observable and measurable by a trained observer.

2. How the Problematic Behavior Works (Functional Behavior Assessment - FBA):

• Antecedent: The disruptive behavior typically occurs during group discussions or interactive activities when the teacher is focused on other students or presenting information. It may also be preceded by a period of waiting or inactivity.
• Behavior: Calling out, interrupting, leaving seat.
• Consequence: The immediate consequence often involves gaining the teacher's attention (even if it's a reprimand), peer attention (sometimes positive, sometimes negative), or avoiding the assigned task. Sometimes, the behavior appears to be maintained by the sensory input of moving around the room.

3. Consequence-Based Approach:

• Strategy: Planned Ignoring combined with Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior (DRO).

• Description: Planned Ignoring involves the teacher deliberately not responding to Maria's disruptive behaviors (unless the behavior becomes physically unsafe). This means no verbal reprimands, no eye contact, and no other form of attention. Simultaneously, the teacher will provide frequent positive reinforcement (e.g., praise, stickers, small rewards) for periods of time when Maria is not exhibiting disruptive behavior. The DRO could be a timed interval (e.g., every 15 minutes that Maria is quiet and in her seat, she receives a sticker).

• Compassionate Considerations:

  • Understanding the Function: The FBA suggests the behavior is maintained by attention or possibly sensory input. Ignoring is used to address the attention-seeking function. The DRO addresses the sensory component by potentially providing alternative, acceptable forms of stimulation (e.g., a small fidget toy could be provided during quiet times).
  • Positive Reinforcement: The DRO focuses heavily on positive reinforcement, rewarding Maria for desired behavior, rather than solely punishing the undesired behavior. This builds her self-esteem and creates a more positive learning environment.
  • Communication: Before implementing the intervention, the teacher would discuss the plan with Maria in a supportive and age-appropriate way, explaining the expectations and the rewards system.
  • Collaboration: The teacher would collaborate with the school psychologist or behavior specialist to ensure the intervention is implemented correctly and to monitor Maria's progress.

• References:

  • Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Pearson.
  • Miltenberger, R. G. (2016). Behavior modification: Principles and procedures (6th ed.). Cengage Learning.

4. ABA Concepts, Principles, and Techniques:

• Extinction: Planned ignoring is an extinction procedure. By consistently withholding the reinforcer (attention), the disruptive behavior should gradually decrease.
• Reinforcement: Differential reinforcement (DRO) is used to strengthen desired behavior (being quiet and in her seat) by providing positive reinforcement.
• Shaping: Initially, the intervals for the DRO might be short (e.g., 5 minutes) and gradually increased as Maria's behavior improves. This is a form of shaping, reinforcing successive approximations of the target behavior.
• Data Collection: Ongoing data collection (frequency of disruptive episodes) is essential to monitor the effectiveness of the intervention and make adjustments as needed.

5. Least Intrusive and Compassionate:

The chosen intervention (planned ignoring with DRO) is considered relatively least intrusive and compassionate for several reasons:

• Focus on Positive Reinforcement: It emphasizes rewarding desired behavior rather than solely punishing undesired behavior.
• Minimizes Aversive Stimuli: It avoids the use of harsh reprimands or other aversive consequences.
• Respectful and Supportive: It involves communicating with the child and collaborating with other professionals, demonstrating respect for the child's needs.
• Addresses the Function: By understanding the function of the behavior, the intervention is designed to address the underlying need (attention or sensory input) in a constructive way.

However, it's crucial to continuously monitor the intervention's effects. If the behavior does not improve or if it escalates, more intensive interventions might be necessary. The key is to always prioritize the child's well-being and to use the least intrusive, yet effective, intervention possible.

Let's analyze a hypothetical case study and apply ABA principles.

Case Study:

Maria, a 7-year-old in a second-grade classroom, frequently disrupts class by calling out answers without raising her hand, interrupting other students, and getting out of her seat. This occurs multiple times per hour, primarily during lessons involving group discussions or interactive activities. Data collected over a week shows an average of 15 disruptive episodes per day, with each episode lasting approximately 2 minutes. Her academic performance is average, but her disruptive behavior negatively impacts the learning environment for herself and other students.

1. Target Behavior Definition:

• Quantifiable: Disruptive classroom behavior, defined as instances of calling out without raising a hand, interrupting other students' verbal contributions, or leaving her assigned seat without permission.