|
| Recent Advances in Academic and Behavioral Interventions in the Classroom |
| Saturday, May 29, 2021 |
| 9:00 AM–10:50 AM |
| Online |
| Area: EDC/DEV; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Kayla Crook (University of Mississippi) |
| Discussant: Timothy R. Vollmer (University of Florida) |
| CE Instructor: Kayla Crook, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Preschool and elementary years are some of the most formative years in school and in child development. During these years, children learn and develop both academic and social skills that are imperative for continuing on in secondary education and adolescence. Behavior analysts offer strategies that teachers can use in the classroom to help facilitate the growth of these important academic and social skills. This symposium addresses just a few of these strategies. The first presentation compares the effects of embedded pictures and kinesthetic movement flashcard interventions on letter-sound correspondence with preschoolers. The second presentation discusses the effects of combined and single mnemonics on literacy skills with preschoolers. The third presentation evaluates the efficacy of the good behavior game with preschoolers. It also investigates whether components of the good behavior game can be faded while maintaining treatment effects. Finally, the fourth presentation, compares differing reinforcement magnitudes within the good behavior game to determine if this parameter of reinforcement has an impact of the good behavior game with elementary school classrooms. The presenters discuss their results within the context of the preschool and elementary school literature and discuss future research directions related to both academic and behavior interventions in the classroom. |
| Instruction Level: Intermediate |
| Keyword(s): Classroom Management, Early Intervention, Embedded Pictures, Mnemonics |
| Target Audience: Classroom teachers and behavior analysts working in school districts |
| Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the presentation, participants will be able to 1) discuss the importance of letter-sound correspondence and provide rationale for using different flashcard interventions, 2) discuss the difference between combined kinesthetic movements and embedded pictures and single kinesthetic movements, 3) discuss ways in which the good behavior game can be implemented with students across age ranges such as preschool and elementary ages. |
| |
| The Effects of Kinesthetic Movement, Embedded Pictures, and Traditional Drill Flashcard Interventions on Preschooler Literacy Skills |
| ALISON RUBY (Louisiana State University), Erica Lozy (Louisiana State University), Sarah Holmes (Louisiana State University ), Jeanne M. Donaldson (Louisiana State University) |
| Abstract: Fluency in letter-sound correspondence, as well as letter discrimination and letter name identification, are the best predictors for future success in reading. Reading difficulties in childhood increase the probability of unemployment, poverty, and crime in adulthood. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of embedded pictures (EP) and kinesthetic movement (KM) flashcard interventions on letter-sound correspondence with six preschoolers. Traditional drill (TD) flashcard interventions were investigated with three of those participants. This study also investigated maintenance, preference, and generalization to un-taught reading skills (e.g., nonsense word recognition) for these interventions. All the interventions lead to increases in letter-sound correspondence compared to the probe only control. Four of the six completed evaluations mastered the stimulus set in the KM condition before the EP condition. The letters in the EP condition had to be switched to KM to reach mastery for three participants. A higher number of correct responses occurred in maintenance for the EP intervention. There was no differentiation in preference for two participants. Two participants preferred the EP intervention, and one preferred TD. The generalization effects were highest for the KM intervention. These results indicate the utility of these interventions in increasing letter-sound correspondence in preschoolers. |
| |
The Effects of Combined and Single Mnemonics on Literacy Skills With Preschoolers |
| ERICA LOZY (Louisiana State University), Sarah Holmes (Louisiana State University ), Alison Ruby (Louisiana State University), Jeanne M. Donaldson (Louisiana State University) |
| Abstract: Students who fail to acquire foundational literacy skills during preschool are likely to read below grade level average in elementary school and beyond and are at a heightened risk for future school failure and poverty. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects, maintenance of, and preference for a combined kinesthetic movements and embedded pictures (CM) flashcard intervention and a single kinesthetic movements (KM) flashcard intervention on letter-sound correspondence with 3 preschoolers who were not in school at the time of the study. Another purpose was to evaluate the generalization of interventions to un-taught reading skills (e.g., nonsense word recognition). In 3 of 4 evaluations, participants mastered the KM set in substantially fewer intervention sessions than the CM set. In 1 of 4 evaluations, the participant mastered the KM and CM sets with little differentiation between the number of sessions. Maintenance data demonstrate a higher number of correct responses for the KM condition across all weeks, however, generalization effects were greatest for the CM condition. Preference varied across participants and was not always consistent with the more effective intervention. Findings demonstrate the utility of pairing kinesthetic movements with flashcard interventions to teach letter-sound correspondence to preschoolers. |
| |
The Good Behavior Game: Maintenance and Side Effects in Preschoolers |
| ELIZABETH FOLEY (University of Kansas), Claudia L. Dozier (The University of Kansas), Sara Camille Diaz de Villegas (University of Kansas), Rachel Jess (University of Kansas), Kathleen Holehan (University of Kansas) |
| Abstract: The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is an effective intervention used to change a variety of behaviors, across populations, and in various settings (see Tingstrom, Sterling-Turner, & Wilczynski, 2006, for a review). There is limited research on the intervention with preschoolers (Foley et al., 2019; Wiskow et al., 2019), the efficacy of the intervention when the GBG is faded or removed (Dadakhodjaeve et al, 2019; Ruiz-Olivares et al., 2010), and the potential side-effects associated with the GBG (Groves & Austin, 2019). We evaluated the efficacy of the GBG with preschoolers and determined whether effortful components of the GBG could be faded while maintaining treatment effects. Furthermore, we conducted a systematic analysis of peer interactions as a potential side effect of the GBG. Results suggest the GBG is an effective intervention for reducing the disruptive behavior of preschoolers and treatment effects maintained as we faded components. Finally, the side-effect analysis showed the GBG was associated with an increase in peer interactions and specific variables (e.g., delivery of reward) were associated with specific types of peer interactions. |
| |
| An Evaluation of Different Magnitudes of Reinforcement Within the Context of the Good Behavior Game |
| KAYLA CROOK (University of Mississippi), Joel Eric Ringdahl (University of Georgia), Karla Zabala (University of Georgia), Kadijah Quinland (University of Georgia), Dan Rowland Mangum (University of Georgia ) |
| Abstract: The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is an evidence-based practice used in classrooms to reduce disruptive classroom behavior. The GBG has been implemented and demonstrated effectiveness across grade levels, disruptive behaviors, and teachers report that it is an easy classroom management strategy to implement. In the current study, magnitude of reinforcement was manipulated to determine if this parameter of reinforcement had an impact on the effectiveness of the GBG. Appropriate classroom behavior increased across three elementary classrooms. The impact of magnitude of reinforcement was idiosyncratic across the three
classrooms. Reasons why magnitude of reinforcement may not have impacted the effectiveness of the GBG are discussed. |
|
| |