Inside Behavior Analysis
Volume 2 | 2010 | Number 2
The President's Column
By Patrick C. Friman
The conventional purpose of the president’s column is to share some of the major developments in the Association and decisions of the Executive Council (EC). In doing so, the presidential column usually starts out with comments on exciting times, new developments, growth, and success. However, what remains in my mind from the recent annual convention is conflict. This is not to say that the times are not exciting or that nothing new has developed or that we have not grown in positive and important directions. Quite the contrary, as perusal of this newsletter will quickly reveal, the times they are exciting, new developments abound, growth could be our middle name, and success is in the air. But for good or for ill, conflict is in our midst. The reason for the apparent digression above is to let interested readers know what to expect of a president during these interesting times. Very simply, expect mediation and compromise. When I do marriage counseling, I inform both partners that the marriage is my primary client. As president of ABAI, I see the organization as my client, not particular factions, parties, or positions. So what is this big conflict that leads me to promote my role as mediator, you may ask yourself? Here is a hint: it rhymes with cactus—and, if events at the annual convention in San Antonio are any indication, it can function like one (i.e., grabbing it incautiously quickly produces pain). I speak, of course, of practice.
Two major events have brought behavior analytic practice to center stage. The first is the ground-breaking paper on behavior analytic treatment of autism published by the late and great Ivar Lovaas in 1987 and the second is the widespread acceptance of functional analysis and assessment technologies, especially, but not only, by the educational community in the United States. Behavior analytic practice was always a possibility. With the success of applied behavior analysis in general, and the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis in particular, it became a probability. And with the two events I mentioned above, it became an actuality. Although some prescient members may have envisioned the growth in practice we have witnessed in the past decade or so, I number myself among the many taken by surprise by the size and rapidity of that growth. The size is reflected by the amount of practice-based activity at the recent annual convention. ABAI activities on behalf of the practice of behavior analysis dominated the conversations EC members had with ABAI members during the entire convention. Practice-related conversations emerged on the River Walk, in the bar, foyer, ad hoc meetings, SIG meetings, Practice Board events, and at numerous other events. For EC members, the convention was suffused with all things practice, and then more practice, and then even more practice. As one particularly illuminating example, I went to a meeting on the role of science in ABAI and, smack me in the forehead and ask me why it slopes, if talk there didn’t turn to practice, too. Throughout the convention, practice-minded members regularly approached EC members as they wandered through the site (presumably in search of a practice-free moment) and shared with them their thoughts and opinions about ABAI’s role in supporting practice.
Perhaps because I work with adolescents so often, I tend to employ adolescent metaphors and analogies to understand and explain my world. Adolescence is a period of rapid growth and development, some, and often much, of which is painful and awkward. There are many goals in adolescence, but two dominate—the quest for identity and independence. In those respects, the mounting dynamics in the practice dimension of ABAI is not unlike adolescence. The field is experiencing enormous growth, and this has been accompanied by painful awkward moments. The myriad practice-related events at the convention and beyond are good examples.
Parents are almost always unprepared for the changes that accompany adolescence, especially in their first-born. There are similarities here, too. For example, parents marvel at the rapidity and size of the growth that occurs in their children as they develop into adolescents. As president of our parent organization, I too marvel at the rapidity, size in the growth, and change in practice. I hope it does not shake your confidence in the EC unduly when I say we were not fully prepared for it. Central to the growth that our field is experiencing is the desire by practice-minded members to establish their own identities and obtain increased independence from the parent organization. The EC, along with the Practice Board, Education, and Science Boards, has been trying to provide support and guidance to practice-minded members across the organization. There has not been much objection to the support, to the extent that it has been provided. In fact, some have asserted that more support is needed and wanted. But, apparently, the guidance has caused upset, most notably with regard to ABAI’s Model Licensing Act.
ABAI, as an organization, has formally supported licensure for behavior analysts. This support is consistent with the long-term goals of practice-minded members—licensure maximizes professional identity and independence. Unfortunately licensure can be difficult to achieve. One of my most treasured professional moments was the receipt of my license as a clinical psychologist in 1988. But obtaining that license was unlike a day at the beach, there were several requirements that were expensive for the state of Nebraska to establish and difficult for me to meet. In some states licensing may be nearly impossible, at least in the short term, because budgetary constraints have temporarily eliminated options for licensure of new professions (licensing new professions is an expensive state enterprise). The bottom line is that if licensure were the only option, some professional behavior analysts would not be able to practice. Fortunately, there is another option, certification. Certification is much easier to obtain and it supplies some of what practice-minded members want, identity and independence. Perhaps not as much as would be supplied by licensure, but enough to keep members who seek it happy.
Unfortunately, the presence of the certification option establishes a potential conflict between advocates for it and advocates for licensure. Some relevant major goals of the EC are promotion of the identity and independence of practitioners and protection of the values and standards of the organization. As an example, six states (Arizona, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania) have enacted licensure legislation, and that number will continue to grow. In other words, the licensure movement does have viability and momentum. Consistent with the EC goal of promoting the identity and independence of practitioners, we support that movement. But, consistent with the concerns about certification versus licensure mentioned above, there are some states in which that movement, at least temporarily, is not viable. In those states the EC supports certification—until the possibility of licensure is established by the state. In other words, licensure and certification can comfortably co-exist with certification as a needed target and licensure as an ultimate endpoint.
So, there does not appear to be a fundamental basis for conflict here. However, there is another source of conflict and, although it has been perceived as intractable, it now appears to be readily resolvable. By the time you are reading this, it could actually be resolved. I refer specifically to dueling model licensure acts, one from ABAI and one from the Behavior Analysis Certification Board (BACB). You may think of these as dueling pistols. I prefer to think of them as dueling pianos. And, just as the dueling pianos at the recent convention played together in a way that promoted fun for all participants, I believe ABAI and BACB can work together to promote practice for all. The major difference between the ABAI and BACB model licensing acts is in the educational standards each promotes for licensure. The EC along with the Practice, Education, and Membership Boards have advocated for the educational standards defined by the ABAI Accreditation Program. The BACB, on the other hand, has advocated for the standards to be defined by certification requirements through their task analyses and gradual, progressive increases in educational requirements. In a recent council meeting, the EC concluded that the ABAI accreditation standards for education and for state-level licensure were related but distinct domains of concern. As a result of that conclusion, the EC voted to excise the requirement that licensees must matriculate at an ABAI accredited school from its Model Licensing Act. Furthermore, the EC voted to have its representatives (CEO and current and past president) work jointly with the leadership of the BACB (Jerry Shook and Judy Favell) on a common model licensing act, the completion of which should readily allow for a united behavior analytic front to state legislators considering licensure (or certification) of behavior analysts.
There is another dimension to this already complex situation, specifically science. ABAI started out as a scientific organization and succeeded as one. In other words, it has shown it can succeed independent of practice. But could ABAI function, not to mention succeed, as a strictly practice-based organization? This has not been shown to be the case, nor could it, in my view. Science and scientists are critical, not just to the intellectual scope and quality of the organization, but ultimately to the credibility of behavior analytic practice—a type of practice that prides itself not only on a scientifically supported approach to behavior change but on one that is actually defined by scientific support. As indicated above, one of the two fundamental reasons for the rapid growth of behavior analytic practice is the scientific demonstration that behavior analytic methods can have an ameliorative effect on symptoms of autism. Yet, the role of science in ABAI is increasingly the subject of debate, reflected by convention activities such as couch level caucuses, bar table debates, and the symposium on the role of science in ABAI alluded to above. As I write these words, I am hesitant because it feels as if I am giving voice to something that seems almost unspeakable, unthinkable even—the possibility of a non-scientific ABAI. Could it happen? Let’s just say the possibility has been raised. But should it happen? Here I can be much clearer: not now, not ever. Speaking as just one individual, I am a practitioner first and foremost, but I come to ABAI mostly for the science. It fuels my thinking and feeds my work—and I need a lot of fuel and food. If I may be so bold, so do we all.
How can we safeguard the role of science at ABAI? There are several options, four of which I will mention here. These, it should be noted, are supported by the EC. The first is to provide a substantial amount of precious time for scientific presentations at the annual conference, something the program committee now does, and the EC will explore the possibility of providing even more. The second is to assure the quality of presentations at the annual convention. To that end, the EC has resolved that, beginning in 2011, all data-based submissions to the program include data in either graphical or tabular form. Data-based submissions without actual data will be subject to review and rejection by the Program Committee. Third, the EC has asked the Science Board to create and convene a task force to study ways in which ABAI can further support its science base. Task force members will represent the broad array of basic and applied scientists that form the backbone of ABAI. The fourth is less straightforward but no less important. It involves exploring ways to ensure that science is a fundamental part of the education of all professional behavior analysts. Doing this creates a powerful motivating operation for the conduct, teaching, and learning of science. Although it seems self-evident, perhaps it bears saying that requiring science to be part of the educational curriculum better prepares professional behavior analysts to incorporate scientific concepts and findings into their practices and to critically appraise the practice-related promises often made by professionals outside the behavior analytic community. Although it may not be readily apparent, one of the primary reasons ABAI is so actively involved in accrediting education programs for behavior analysts and in the licensure movement is because both safeguard the role of science education for professional behavior analysts in training.
As intimated above, science and education are handmaidens to each other, and both serve and shape practice. The EC has agreed that it is premature to require that the education of behavior analytic licensees meets the standards of ABAI accreditation. Before this requirement is feasible, there must be accredited programs, sufficient in number, to educate all of our licensees. To that end, the ABAI Council has approved the creation of undergraduate accreditation and the revision of accreditation standards at the master’s and doctoral level. The Education Board is strategizing to increase the demand for accreditation so that, over the long term, future generations of behavior analysts will be educated consistent with the science and theory of behavior analysis. Slow but steady progress is being made here. For example, both the M.A. program in Behavior Analysis from Simmons College and the Ph.D. and M.A. programs in Behavior Analysis from the University of Nevada, Reno, have recently been reaccredited. Additionally, the M.A. program in Behavior Analysis at the University of Houston-Clear Lake has been newly accredited. Altogether there are 23 accredited programs at 17 universities and, in order to support behavior analytic scientists and practitioners over the long term, ABAI plans to increase these numbers.
As I review my comments, it looks as if all roads lead to practice—a virtually perfect match for my convention experience this year. But perhaps that is as it should be. Skinner’s vision for behavior analysis was that it could be harnessed to make the world a better place. Merely substitute the word “applied” for “harnessed” and think of behavior analytic practice as applying behavior analytic principles and findings to socially significant problems and the reason all roads lead here is no surprise. In well-trained professional behavior analysts, one finds a fusion of core behavior-analytic values. The raw materials for these values are supplied by the conceptual, applied, and basic science of behavior analysis and the crucible for their development is behavior analytic education. Providing that education, expanding opportunities for practice following its completion, and supplying a steady stream of scientifically derived assessments, treatments, and concepts are goals that are entirely consistent with the mission of ABAI. True, there has been conflict but not over these goals. The conflict has rather been over some details that pertain to the pursuit of these goals and their optimal means of expression in the world—and they have arisen mostly as a result of the extraordinarily large and rapid growth in ABAI. A bone is always stronger at the point of fracture after healing than it was before. I may be a bit of a Pollyanna, but I think something similar can also occur at the points of conflict in the organization. Once these are resolved, and I believe they will be, ABAI will be stronger at the points of conflict than it was before.