M.Baker_ABA626_Week4_Discussion

docx

School

National University College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

626

Subject

Statistics

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by CoachMoon7958

ABA 626: Week 4: CONDUCTING STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS, CONDUCTING REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS AND MEASURING SEL COMPETENCIES DURING THE ASSESSMENT PHASES 1 ABA 626: Week 4 Discussion Conducting Stimulus Preference Assessments, Conducting Reinforcer Assessments and Measuring SEL Competencies during the Assessment Phases Baker, Michelle National University

CONDUCTING STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS, CONDUCTING REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS AND MEASURING SEL COMPETENCIES DURING THE ASSESSMENT PHASES 2 ABA 626: Week 4 Discussion Conducting Stimulus Preference Assessments and Reinforcer Assessments “Reinforcement is essential to the survival of most living organisms, enabling them to learn and change in ways essential to maintaining their existence, thriving, and reproducing (Mayer et al., 2018, p. 99).” Creating successful intervention plans often requires a Behavior Analyst to identify and utilize an effective Reinforcer. Because preference is relative to the individual and ever changing, there are several procedures were utilized to identify potential reinforcers. A Stimulus preference assessment assists a behavior analyst in identifying potential stimuli, which can act as reinforcers, by identifying “preferred” items. In contrast, a Reinforcer assessment runs tests on those preferred items, in a variety of methods, used to determine which reinforcers are responsible for the client’s contingency to target behaviors, and measures the effects (Cooper et al, 2020, p. 268). During a stimulus preference assessment, the Behavior Analyst’s goal is to identify the preferred stimuli, rank the relative preferences (in terms of high or low preference), and identify under which conditions the preferred item may not act as a reinforcer. There are many different approaches to stimulus preference assessments and these approaches are grouped into 3 categories; ask, free-operant (FO), and trials based. The ask category involves directly asking the client and/or family members or teachers, the FO category involves observing the client without disruption to collect data on duration that the client is interaction with a contrived or natural reinforcer, and the trials based category involves introducing single or multiple stimuli and testing it against each other to determine the reinforce (Cooper et al, 2020, p, 268). There are many different approaches to take when conducting reinforcer preference assessments (RPA), such as, duration-based assessments, free operant assessments, single-stimulus

CONDUCTING STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS, CONDUCTING REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS AND MEASURING SEL COMPETENCIES DURING THE ASSESSMENT PHASES 3 assessments, paired-stimulus assessments and/or multi-stimulus assessments. “With RPAs, usually several items are repeatedly presented and the individual is observed to determine which items s/he repeatedly (1) approaches, (2) chooses, (3) with which s/ he spends the most time and/or (4) consumes (Mayer et al, 2018, p. 106).” Reinforcer preference assessments are conducted in the moment, in concurrent schedules, in multiple schedules and/or progressive ratio schedules. In the moment reinforcer assessments require the behavior analyst to quickly identify which stimuli is the Reinforcer. Concurrent schedules reinforcer assessments compares the effects of two stimuli by alternating the use of each reinforcer during an observation period and measuring which produces higher rates of response. Multiple schedules reinforcer assessments compare the effects of two stimuli by presenting the stimuli on two different days of observation, with a specific discriminate stimulus (SD). Progressive ratio schedules reinforce assessments involve increasing the response effort and then the SD is presented. As a behavioral analyst when receiving a new school-aged client, I would implement a stimulus preference assessment in a natural free operant setting; at school. I would utilize the ask category to determine the preferences according to the teachers in the client’s class and, then, I would utilize a FO condition and contrive the preferred items in the classroom and observe without disruptions, while measuring the preferences high to low. Measuring SEL Competencies during Functional Assessments A functional behavior assessment or FBA is a 4-step process used to identify the problem behaviors interfering with a child’s ability to learn or adapt to social settings. A Direct assessment is the first step taken, when performing a functional assessment. The first step to an FBA is to gather information with indirect and direct observations/data collection. Direct assessments look at environmental relationships within the clients’ life. Direct assessments

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

CONDUCTING STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS, CONDUCTING REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS AND MEASURING SEL COMPETENCIES DURING THE ASSESSMENT PHASES 4 include; standardized tests, Criterion Referenced assessments, Curriculum- Based assessments, Ecological assessments, Scatter plots, ABC Data, and Direct Observation. “Directly observing and recording the behavior of the person in the natural setting can be especially valuable in the goal-setting process (Mayer et al., 2018, p. 69).” That is, direct assessment can aid in writing goals and interventions for your client. Taking ABC Data on a client performing SEL contingencies at school or using Scatter plots to identify when a client’s utilizes the SEL competencies the most. According to the article, Social and Emotional Learning: A Framework for Promoting Mental Health and Reducing Risk Behavior in Children and Youth , SEL competencies utilize "systematic classroom instruction that enhances children's capacities to recognize and manage their emotions, appreciate the perspective of others, establish prosocial goals, and solve problems, and use a variety of interpersonal skills to effectively and ethically handle developmental revenant skills (Payton et al., 2000, p. 179).” During the assessment phase, SEL competencies can be measured by conducting direct observations of the client in the school setting. “In developing a rating scale for determining how well programs teach SEL competencies, the goal was to describe a progression that, if followed, would promote student self-efficacy and mastery of these competencies. Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) was the primary source for developing operational definitions of the ratings in this scale. According to SCT, self- efficacy is a primary determinant of skill mastery (Payton et al., 2000, p.183).” With that being said, during direct observation assessments, trials-to-criterion would be a good design for measuring SEL competencies during observations because it measures the amount of practice response opportunities needed to master a skill. In addition, self-efficacy should be defined for each student, individually, in order to record valid and reliable data.

CONDUCTING STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS, CONDUCTING REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS AND MEASURING SEL COMPETENCIES DURING THE ASSESSMENT PHASES 5 References Cipani, E., (2018). Functional behavioral assessment, diagnosis, and treatment: a complete system for education and mental health settings . New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company, LLC, p. 34 – 36. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L., (2020). Applied behavior analysis , 3rd edition , Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education, p. 49 - 392. Mayer, G. R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., Wallace, M., (2018). Behavior analysis for lasting change , 4th edition , Cornwall-on-Hudson: Sloan Publishing, p. 123 - 165. Payton, J. W., Wardlaw, D. M., Graczyk, P. A., Bloodworth, M. R., Tompsett, C. J., & Weissberg, R. P. (2000). Social and emotional learning: a framework for promoting mental health and reducing risk behavior in children and youth. The Journal of School Health, 70(5), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2000.tb06468.x