A comparison of performance feedback procedures on teachers' treatment implementation integrity and students' inappropriate behavior in special education classrooms

被引:121
作者
Digennaro, Florence D.
Martens, Brian K.
Kleinmann, Ava E.
机构
[1] Syracuse Univ, Syracuse, NY 13244 USA
[2] Western New England Coll, Springfield, MA 01119 USA
关键词
avoidance contingency; directed rehearsal; feedback; functional behavior assessment; treatment integrity; special education;
D O I
10.1901/jaba.2007.40-447
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This study examined the extent to which treatment integrity of 4 special education teachers was affected by goal setting, performance feedback regarding student or teacher performance, and a meeting cancellation contingency. Teachers were trained to implement function-based treatment packages to address student problem behavior. In one condition, teachers set a goal for student behavior and received daily written feedback about student performance. In a second condition, teachers received daily written feedback about student performance as well as their own accuracy in implementing the intervention and would be able to avoid meeting with a consultant to practice missed steps by implementing the intervention with 100% integrity. This latter package increased treatment integrity the most above baseline levels. Higher levels of treatment integrity were significantly correlated with lower levels of student problem behavior for 3 of the 4 teacher-student dyads. Three of the 4 teachers also rated both feedback procedures as highly acceptable. Implications for increasing and maintaining treatment integrity by teachers via a consultation model are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:447 / 461
页数:15
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], HDB SCH PSYCHOL
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1969, Behavior modification in the natural environment
[3]  
COSTENBADER V, 1992, SCHOOL PSYCHOL REV, V21, P95
[4]  
DiGennaro FD, 2005, SCHOOL PSYCHOL REV, V34, P220
[5]  
ELLIOTT SN, 1988, HDB BEHAV THERAPY ED, P121
[6]  
Erchul W. P., 2002, SCH CONSULTATION CON
[7]   PROMOTING PRINCIPALS MANAGERIAL INVOLVEMENT IN INSTRUCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT [J].
GILLAT, A ;
SULZERAZAROFF, B .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 1994, 27 (01) :115-129
[8]  
GRESHAM FM, 1989, SCHOOL PSYCHOL REV, V18, P37
[9]  
Gutkin T.B., 1999, HDB SCH PSYCHOL, V3nd, P598
[10]   Is the behavior of academic change agents controlled metaphysically? An analysis of the behavior of those who change behavior [J].
Lentz, FE ;
Daly, EJ .
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY, 1996, 11 (04) :337-352