Association for Behavior Analysis International

Over the past few years, there has been a growth of discussion about cultural, diversity, and inclusion (DEI) issues within the field of behavior analysis (Conner, 2019; Fong et al., 2017; Wright, 2019). It is commonly agreed upon that behavior analysts should practice with cultural awareness and humility. However, more research is needed to support such an implementation effort. This symposium contains three presentations that address DEI from the knowledge level leading to two examples of how we can turn the discussion into research-based actions to create behavior analysts who are culturally aware and competent from the lens of supervision and early intervention model development overseas.

The target audience should have knowledge about the ethics code within the field of behavior analysis.

Quantitative research on the manipulation of variables to increase culturally aware conversations within the field of behavior analysis, including in supervision, is emerging. The current research seeks to add data to the under-researched area of teaching culturally aware verbal behavior to supervisors. Two participants completed a self-paced online training program focusing on the use of culturally sensitive verbal behavior in supervision sessions while their verbal behavior was monitored in baseline and intervention conditions. Results were evaluated using a multiple-baseline design and showed an increase in the use of culturally sensitive verbal behavior across baseline levels to intervention levels. Additionally, social validity measures indicate the behavior acquired was important, methods were easy to use, and all participants felt they could accurately perform the skill in the absence of additional training.

Bridging theory and practice has the challenge for many new special education teachers, particularly in the field of early intervention. Teachers often find great difficulties in providing curriculum and instruction tailored to the child’s needs. Lack of a standardized curriculum for early intervention may result in the disagreement and even conflict in goal setting and instructional design. Moreover, inadequate pre and in-service training and supervision often lead to burnout and teacher attribution. Taking advantage of technological innovation and cumulated data, we proposed a complete system for early intervention services which include the following components: (1) pre-service training, (2) individualized evaluation and program planning, (3) continuous supervision, (4) frequent teacher-parent communication. Upon receiving the initial success in our own school sites, we implemented parts of this system in two additional early intervention centers. Through surveys and interview data, we found such a standardized system had the potential to improve teachers’ instruction. However, the different operations and dynamics in other schools proposed new challenges that should be taken into consideration when replicating any standardized systems.