Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Behavior Therapy For Self-Direction
(USC Thesis Other)
Behavior Therapy For Self-Direction
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
BEHAVIOR THERAPY FOR SELF-DIRECTION by Abraham Ariel A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Education) August 1971 / ARIEL, Abraham, 1938- BEHAVIOR THERAPY FOR SELF-DIRECTION. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1971 Education, psychology University Microfilms, A X ERO X C om pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan i ^Copyright by Abraham Ariel 1971 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA S 0 0 O 7 This dissertation, written by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ABRM^_AI^L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . under the direction of Z t . i . ? . . . . . Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Gradu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y O Dean Drt^...S.epternber..l971„, PLEASE NOTE: Some Pages have i n d i s t i n c t p r i n t . Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS To My Dear Wife and Daughters Ayala, Orit and Sheira ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of a dissertation marks the culmina tion of a long period of research and related preparation which cannot be entirely one person's effort. I wish to express my warm appreciation to a number of people who made significant contributions to this project. I am most particularly grateful to my chairman Dr. R. B. McIntyre, who never failed to offer encouragement and wise guidance, no matter how often or at what hour I sought them. He has exercised a continual benign influence upon my professional development over the past five years. I also wish to express my gratitude to Dr. L. Buscaglia, member of the doctoral committee, for his personal support and his exposi tion of the humanistic values that he both teaches and exemplifies. I am also indebted to Dr. H. Wursten, member of the doctoral committee, whose confidence in me has been a sus taining source of encouragement; to Dr. M. Frostig, who has been a continuous source of inspiration, as well as the prime mover of my involvement in the field of learning disabilities; to Dr. L. J. Peter, for his valuable sugges tions, particularly when the study was being formulated; to iii Dr. J. G. Coss, for his stimulating ideas concerning the nature of the research model; and to Dr. R. E. Orpet, for his generous assistance in the statistical analysis. The marvellous patience and understanding of my wife, Ayala, have given sustenance every inch of the long road to the completion of this study, and her contributions and sacrifices are an integral part of it. The delightful exuberance of our two daughters, Orit and Sheira, has also constituted an unwitting contribution. The study could not have been completed without the active cooperation of the Newport-Mesa School District. I am grateful for the help of Mr. M. H. Hansen, the Coordi nator of Special Education, and of Mr. I. W. Rice, the Rea Junior High School Principal, and especially for the dedi cated teaching and learning of Miss B. J. Glenn, the teacher of the experimental group, who used approaches that were new to her with open-mindedness and a most gratifying success. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.......................................iii LIST OF TABLES.........................................vii LIST OF FIGURES........................................viii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING.................. 1 Introduction and Background of the Problem Statement of the Problem Statement of Hypotheses Definition of Terms II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE......................... 23 Historical Perspective of Behavior Therapy The Self in Behavior Therapy Behavior Therapy in the Classroom III. THE BEHAVIORAL LEARNING MODEL................ 47 The Learning Behavior System The Basic Instruction Model IV. METHOD...................................... 79 Subjects The Setting Observation and Recording Procedure V. RESULTS.................................... 91 VI. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS . . 110 Discussion Implications Limitations v Chapter Page VII. SUMMARY.................................... 121 APPENDICES........................................ 131 APPENDIX A: Student Behavior Pattern Check List and Student Behavior Pattern Profile Sheet.................... 132 APPENDIX B: Student Diagnostic Profile .. 138 APPENDIX C: Academic Evaluation Summary . 140 APPENDIX D: Assessment of Reading Skills.................... 142 APPENDIX E: Assessment of Arithmetic Skills.................. 146 APPENDIX F: Daily Work Schedules, Daily Assignments, and Daily Work Records.................. 149 APPENDIX G: Semantic Auditory Self- Concept Measuring Index . . . 157 APPENDIX H: Burk's Pupil Behavior Rating Scale ..................... 160 APPENDIX Is Off Task Behavior Check List ■.................... 163 APPENDIX J: Individual Daily Behavior Charts.................... 165 BIBLIOGRAPHY................................... 170 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Theoretical Assumptions Contained in the Learning Behavior System ............... 58 2. Prescriptive Educational Environment .... 70 3. Basic Instruction Model .................... 78 4. Comparison of Mean Monthly Achievement Score Gains with Expected Gains for the Educationally Handicapped ................. 92 5. Comparison of Mean Monthly Achievement Score Gains with Expected Gains for the Average Child .............................. 83 6. Pre and Post Mean Scores on Burk's Behavior Rating Scale and t Test Values . . 95 7. Pre and Post Mean Scores on the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index and t Test Valu e s......................... 85 8. Mean Rates of Arithmetic Movement, Correct Arithmetic Movement, and Off- Task Behavior in Baseline and Treatment Period and t Test Values......................107 9. Mean Monthly Achievement Scores Gains and t Tests Values for Experimental and Comparison Groups for Male Subjects...........108 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Behavioral Learning Model ................. 48 2. The Relationship between Associative, Cognitive and Self-Directive Learning. . . . 51 3. Learning Behavior System .................... 52 4. McIntyre S-O-R-E Analysis.......... 53 5. Daily Group Mean Arithmetic Movements Rates..................... 98 6. Daily Arithmetic Movement Rates, Case 104.................................... 99 7. Daily Arithmetic Movement Rates, Case 110................ 100 8. Daily Group Mean Correct Arithmetic Movement Rates .............................. 102 9. Daily Group Mean Off-Task Behavior Rates...........................................104 10. Daily Off-Task Behavior Rates, Case 1 0 2 ...................................... 105 viii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING Introduction~and Background of the Problem The activities and organizational features of public education indicate the expectations and values of the society. The child is supposed to learn by way of the teacher the expected appropriate behavior of the culture. Havinghurst and Neugarten (1962), in describing the role of the school in the community, state: The school teaches the child his culture in both formal and informal ways. There are, of course, the more obvious ways. The school provides the child with the intellectual tools he will need— reading and writing, verbal and quantitative reasoning, and the like. Through its varied curriculum, the school teaches the history of the society, the scientific and cultural achievements of the past, and the opportunities of the future. It orients the child to the culture in which he lives, and attempts to provide him with the social, civic and vocational competencies he will need if he is to be a productive adult member of the group. (p. 114) The school authorities who represent the values of a certain culture seek to educate the children for the purpose of enabling the child to function successfully in that 1 2 culture. The school reinforces values currently desired in conventional society. School authorities seek to motivate the child by providing conditional contingencies in the form of teacher's approval, grades, promotions and awards. They also seek to eliminate and prevent undesired behavior through the use of some form of punishment. The teacher in the classroom makes use of rein forcers; that is, he presents "pleasurable" consequences as a reward for desired academic or social performance, and aversive consequences following those behaviors which he wishes to decrease. The expectation of the school authori ties is that through receiving conditional approval and other rewards, or punishment, according to his behavior and performance, the child learns the values of scholastic achievement and success. Unfortunately, these expectations are not always met. In reality certain students, whether because of family background or past school history, do not respond to the conventional reinforcements available in most school situations. By the time the child is of school age he has internalized the value system (hierarchy of reinforcements) of his parents which he tends to generalize to the adult world in general. If his responses happen to have been 3 (reinforced inconsistently, with similar responses sometimes rewarded, sometimes punished, sometimes ignored altogether, it will be more difficult to motivate him toward the learn ing task. A deviant parent-child relationship may eventuate in total or partial absence of social reinforcers, and hence deprive the teacher of important tools whereby he can affect learning or behavior change. Equally significant is the child's previous history of reinforcement at school. Initially the requirements demanded by the teachers are approximation of the complex jgoal behaviors which should be learned by the end of the J designated school term. To be reinforced effectively a child must achieve a high level of correctness. A child to whom the learning situation is more difficult has a high level of incorrect responses and hence more chance to be negatively reinforced. i Yet another problem is lack of reinforcement for any one element in a chain of responses. Often an entire task or a long sequence of behaviors must be completed before any reinforcement is presented. This type of reinforcement is often called "episodic reinforcement" (Kanfer, 1970) as dis tinguished from "conjugate reinforcement" (Linsley, 1963) whereby a reinforcement is available for every response in a 4 complex chain of responses. Some children, therefore, may be ignored for their effort to complete the task, or they may receive aversive reinforcers through scolding, negative reports to parents and sometimes corporal punishment, even though they have successfully completed many responses in the total chain. Further difficulties arise if the teacher manages the rewards inconsistently, fails to make the presentation of the reinforcement immediately contingent upon the behav ior of the individual child (as opposed to the entire class room group), or fails to provide an immediate rather than a delayed reaction. Such circumstances serve to suppress the child's efforts at school rather than to motivate him. A child with a faulty reinforcement history has little idea of what is expected of him or how to carry it out. He does not per ceive the consequences of his actions, and tends to be impatient, restless and unpredictable. He tries to avoid tasks by engaging in other inappropriate activities or recourse to passive resistance. There is always a relationship between the past, present and future experiences of children. From each expe rience, a child incorporates that which has meaning for him. 5 What he incorporates depends upon his previous experiences, that is, upon the meaning he has already developed. Or, as Burnham (1924) puts it: If a child believes that he can do a thing he is likely to attempt itj and if he begins, the amount of effort put forth depends largely on his believe in the power to succeed. (p. 141) A child who struggles with learning problems, and yet receives continuous teacher and parent disapproval with suggestions of failure, is likely to establish negative pat terns of behavior. If the failure pattern continues for months or years, the child will actually become deficient in fundamental skills, as well as in his approach to learning. A child who is confronted all day and every day with failures— failure to keep up, failure to understand what is required— develops feelings of inadequacy and worthlessness. He perceives himself as "no good" and whatever he does as "no good." He will lack the ability to evaluate himself realistically and encounter tremendous difficulties in orga nizing his wants and goals. Sooner or later these children become categorized as educationally handicapped, emotionally handicapped, having learning disabilities, etc. The fail ure, however, can be viewed as lying not with the children 6 but with the educational system which failed to meet their needs. According to the State of California, educationally handicapped children are those who by reason of marked learning problems, or behavioral problems or a combination thereof, cannot receive the reasonable benefit of ordinary education facilities; but who are not also handicapped by mental retarda tion or obvious physical disabilities for which spe cial programs are already provided elsewhere in the Code. (Education Code of the State of California, Section 6750, p. 336) Administrative Code Section 221 further defines an educa tionally handicapped minor as a minor described in Education Code 6750 whose learn ing problems are associated with a behavioral dis order or a neurological handicap or a combination thereof, and who exhibits a considerable discrepancy between ability and achievement. (p. 118) A greater realization of the remedial potential of the school has resulted in responses to the needs of educa tionally handicapped (EH) children. Special programs have been instituted which are designed to provide the children with a better educational environment, and curricula and methods adapted to their individual abilities and disabili ties. However, the provision of these special classes is only an inadequate first step in the attempt to deal with the problem of these children. A major difficulty is that 7 more often than not, the placement of children in the EH program is considered to be permanent, destroying altogether the concept of remediation. Thus the child remains in the program as long as the school district can provide the classroom facilities, and probably drops out of the school system by the time he reaches sixteen. Trained teachers with adequate diagnostic and reme dial tools are needed if we are to help these children. Dedication cannot substitute for skill and theoretical and practical knowledge and materials appropriate to the child's need. Without these advantages, the teachers are faced with a task whose intense demands they are simply not prepared to meet, and the result is lack of progress on the part of the children and anxiety, frustration and resignation on the part of the teacher. The origin of the present paper goes back to my first year of teaching educationally handicapped children more than ten years ago. The situation was as follows: Seventeen latency and early adolescent boys and girls were placed in an EH classroom within a regular public school arrangement. All the children manifested behavior problems. Some had a background of delinquency, others were often absent, all were difficult to handle. The makeup of the 8 slass constituted a classic example of what Cruikshank (1958) called "education mismanagement." The school autho rities had no clear goal for the children, except to keep them as far as possible out of trouble and away from the activities of the rest of the school. It was impossible to engage in any constructive teaching in the conventional way. I vividly recall some of the children asking during the first week of school, "Teacher, why don’t you hit us? The last teacher used to hit us." The suggested approach was obviously inappro priate. It seemed to me that I had to find some way of making the learning environment more tolerable not less, and possible even enjoyable. I was helped in this aim by one of the students who came to me and asked how he was doing in the class. At the same time he also asked how many times he had participated in the class during the previous hour. At that time I was taking into account the general participation of the stu dents, but as a result of this youngster's question, I decided to keep a precise record of the number of times each student participated. Furthermore, I announced that prizes would be given for good participation, and told the students 9 :hat anybody could keep track of his participation by simply Looking in the teacher's book. Knowing that I was keeping a record of their activ ity in the classroom, the students 1 rate of participation Increased. Later, when the students kept asking me to announce to the class the number of points each had scored E pinned up a record chart on which was written each stu dent's name and the number of times he had participated. The children became enthusiastic about checking their score averyday, and their classroom performance improved consid- srably. In the following months I decided to give a score or a credit, as the children preferred to name it, contingent upon each response. These credits also were marked on a ooard, where each child could see his credit (which served as reinforcer) contingent upon giving the right response aither during the learning process or in terms of the child's social interaction. In addition, the student himself kept a cecord of the daily scores so that he could check his own progress. Credits were given contingent upon each desired response in terms of the learning process, such as solving a problem, reading correctly, and task completion. In 10 addition, credits were given for good social interaction related to positive school activities. Relationship with peers during the lesson and during recess, listening atten tively, courtesy, helping other students were all rein forced. The children traded their credits for such things as toys, snacks, games, free activity periods and later on for classroom and school duties which came to be considered as special privileges. As a result of the systematic dispensing of rein forcers, a dramatic change in the students' behavior and work habits was noticeable. For the first time the children began to enjoy school activities. I no longer had to keep the door of the classroom closed to prevent them leaving— they wanted to remain in the classroom. After using the system for several months the effect of the reinforcers seemed to wear off. The need for addi tional reinforcers became apparent, for many of the children still needed some means to help them develop self-discipline and self-control. At the time I had no other answer to this problem than to change the type and quality of the rein forcers , from time to time, which had short-term effective ness . 11 This account exemplifies what teachers have continu- Dusly done through the ages, i.e., discovered consequences that make the learning environment more attractive, a neces sity when working with educationally handicapped children. Hewett, in the 1967 Special Study Institute for Administration of Special Education, stated that: The behavior modification approach is in many ways a statement of what teachers have been doing in class rooms over the years in the first place. It is, how ever, a broader and more systematic statement of the teaching and learning process. (p. 11) . While the schools have made remarkable progress and are continuing to make progress, there is strong evidence that there is much room for improvement. Most of the drop ping out of school is not due to economic deprivation, but is largely attributable to the inability of the school to provide the child with the conditions that the nature of his growth requires. There is currently an increasing interest in the implementation of operant technique to the learning disability classroom. This approach, which is based on neobehavioristic methodology and experimental learning data, seems to be more explicit and realistic. It seems to be especially well suited for the treatment of learning dis orders by the teacher in the classroom setup. It enables teachers, parents, counselors, and others to deal more 12 affectively with children* and it provides the necessary ingredient for the promotion of successful experience* so necessary in the growth of the learning disability child. Statement of the Problem With the current increasing interest in the imple mentation of operant techniques to humans* behavior therapy'*' has been used in a variety of ways* all of which have shown that relatively better performance occurred as a result of the reinforcing conditions. In simple language we may say that the reinforcers motivate the child to do better in the school situation. However* the systematic investigation of behavior therapy techniques in the school situation is rather novel and in its initial stages. A wealth of prob lems remain to be solved. For example* the application of behavior therapy to older children is a more difficult and uncertain task (Haring* 1967). The learning disorders of older children are more complex and fraught with the emo tional consequences of failure. The children are deficient ■*"The term "behavior therapy" will be used as synon ymous with behavior modification. Both the terms are appropriate for a behavioral model which denotes procedures based on "modern learning theory" (Eysenck* 1965a)* designed directly to alter human behavior labelled as deviant. 13 in both fundamental skills and in their approach to learning and to daily life problems. Both theory and experience in the classroom suggests that junior high school and high school students differ from the primary grade children in their response to the applica tion of operant techniques. The effect of a token rein forcement system is less intense and less lasting. This could possibly be explained by the fact that the thinking of the primary school child is closely tied to the concrete situation present in his immediate experience, while the youngster approaching adolescence has become capable of reflective thinking and self-evaluation, and is able to abandon the concrete in favor of the abstract (Piaget, 1966). In the sixth grade and at the beginning of junior high school, most individuals enter a period of formal operations and with this the tendency to formulate and test hypotheses. He is able to analyze his own thinking and con struct theories which furnish the cognitive and evaluative basis for the assumption of adult roles (Piaget, 1951, 1966). Furthermore, the adolescent can look at himself with some objectivity and evaluate himself with respect to per sonality, intelligence and appearance (Elkind, 1970). He becomes intellectually more mature. 14 It is this important change in the cognitive func tioning of the adolescent that needs to be taken into account in the application of operant techniques at this level. The use of self-evaluative techniques can supplement the token reinforcers. An individual who is able to eval uate himself realistically as in some respect good is said to have a good self-concept. The experience of success therefore leads to a positive self-evaluation and improved self-concept. This in turn is likely to enhance positive behavior. The important point to note is that we consider self-evaluation judgment to be subject to reinforcement. Despite the reality of strong resistance within the socially or emotionally maladjusted child, we can make the same assumptions about him as we do about the average child. "The exceptional child is first a child and second a child with exceptionalities" (Cruikshank, 1958). We must assume that we can handle our human relationship with the child in such a way that avoidance behavior gives way to approach behavior, and the child reaches out for the lesson presented to him. The proposed Learning Behavior System attempts to bring this about by incorporating into operant methodology in the classroom, the adolescent capability for reflective thinking and self-evaluation. It is the author's intention 15 to attempt to develop on this basis a hierarchical rein forcement system, the Learning Behavior System (LBS), in which the reinforcement methodology is shifted according to the phase of learning behavior to which the child has attained. It assumes that various phases of learning take place, and that transition from one phase to the other can be accomplished through scientifically controlled proce dures based on operant methodology. The Learning Behavior System is based implicitly or explicitly on a model of associative, cognitive and self-rdirective learning. As the individual advances he moves from the simpler to the more complex, from the undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and abstract. This paper attempts to offer a therapeutic teaching approach aimed at inducing changes in behavior, learning and personality through a methodology composed of the Learning Behavior System (the reinforcing events and feed back mechanism) used in conjunction with the Basic Instruc tion Model (prescriptive diagnostic teaching). This approach has the goal of providing a student with an educa tional program adjusted to his needs, and providing appro priate motivation, so that optimum learning can take place. It is aimed at gradually rehabilitating the learner into 16 the mainstream of the regular school environment. It is hoped that the ideas in this paper, substan tiated by the results of an experimental program conducted in the public school system, will be of assistance to teachers of the educationally handicapped classroom who are interested in 'structuring more effective accommodations and instruction for their students. Statement of Hypotheses Null Hypothesis A There is no significant difference between the 2 expected academic gains of the educationally handicapped students and their actual academic gains following the experimental treatment, as measured by the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT). Research Hypothesis A There is a significant difference between the expected academic gains of the educationally handicapped The expected academic gains for the educationally handicapped student were taken as the average academic gains of the student throughout his schooling up to the introduc tion of the experimental treatment. This was in turn multi plied by 1.75 months. Refer to Chapter IV for detailed explanation. 17 students and their actual academic gains following the experimental treatment, as measured by the WRAT. Mull Hypothesis B There is no significant difference between the 3 expected academic gains of the "normal" student and the student's actual academic gains following the experimental treatment as measured by the WRAT. Research Hypothesis B There is significant difference between the expected academic gains of the "normal" student and the student's actual academic gains following the experimental treatment as measured by the WRAT. Null Hypothesis C There is no significant difference between the pre and post levels in student behavior pattern as measured by Burk's Behavior Rating Scale (BRS) (Appendix H). 3 The expected academic gains of the "normal" student were taken as the expected progress of the average child in the regular classroom, which for the experimental period is equal to 1.75 months of academic progress. Refer to Chapter IV for detailed explanation. 18 Research Hypothesis C There is significant difference between the pre and post levels in student behavior pattern as measured by the BRS. Null Hypothesis D There is no significant difference between the pre and post levels in student self-concept as measured by the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index (SASCMI) (Appendix g ). Research Hypothesis D There is significant difference between the pre and post levels in student self-concept as measured by the SASCMI. Null Hypothesis E There is no significant difference in rates of arithmetic movement, correct arithmetic movement and off- task behavior between the baseline and the treatment period. Research Hypothesis E There is significant difference in rates of arith metic movement, correct arithmetic movement and off-task behavior between the baseline and the treatment period. 19 Null Hypothesis F There is no significant difference between the means of the two groups (comparison group and experimental group, male only) in academic performance as measured by the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT). Research Hypothesis F There is significant difference between the means of the two groups (comparison group and experimental group, males only) in academic performance as measured by the WRAT. Definitions of Terms Behavior therapy.— "Behavior therapy, also called behavior modification, is a general term, referring to the systematic application of scientifically verified laws of learning to the area of human behavior disorders" (Califor nia State College at Los Angeles, 1969). Self-direction.— "Making a decision as to what course of action is to be followed. The task is not simply to make a selected course of action probably but to decide on an issue. The individual sometimes does this by manipu lating some of the variables of which his behavior is a function" (Skinner, 1953, p. 242). 20 Self.— "A self is simply a device for representing a functionally unified system of responses" (Skinner, 1953, ?. 285). Learning.— Learning may be defined as "the process by which an activity originates or is changed through react ing to an encountered situation, provided that the charac teristics of the change in activity cannot be explained on the basis of native response tendencies, maturation or temporary state of the organism (e.g., fatigue, drugs, etc.)" (Hilgard, 1956, p. 3). ____________ Associative learning.— "Associative learning is con ceived as the addition of bits of experience, knowledge, or awareness to an existing chain of information or sensitive ness" (Wilson, 1969, p. 37). Self-directed learning.— Self-directed learning "is an inner control or self-direction that enables the learner to formulate or create his own interpretations from the bits and pieces of knowledge that make up his associations and from the relationship that he has conceptualized" (Wilson, 1969, p. 99). 21 Cognitive learning.— Cognitive learning "can be thought of as the grasping of connections within the related bits of knowledge; the discovery of cause or significance; insight, or the "ha ha" experience of the Gestaltists; the formulation of a generalization from relevant specifics of experience" (Wilson, 1969, p. 81). Operant learning.— "A simple and very general law of behavior is that a response followed by certain 'conse quences, 1 which in everyday life are called rewards, will in the future occur more frequently" (Staats, 1964, p. 68). Positive reinforcer.— A positive reinforcer "is a stimulus which, when added to a situation, strengthens the probability of an operant response" (Hilgard, 1966, p. 113). Negative reinforcer.— A negative reinforcer "is a stimulus which, when removed from a situation, strengthens the probability of an operant response" (Hilgard, 1966, p. 113). Stimulus and response.— (1) A stimulus may be defined as "a part, or change in a part, of the environ ment"; (2) a response may be defined as "a part, or change in a part, of behavior" (Keller & Schoenfeld, 1950, p. 3). 22 Shaping.— Shaping "consists of reinforcing closer and closer approximations of the desired behavior" (Reese 1966, p. 13). CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Historical Perspectives of Behavior Therapy The basic tenets of behaviorism are not new. The roots of behaviorism can be traced to the idea incorporated Ln the hedonistic philosophy that man is moved to seek pleasure and to avoid pain. The Romans are recorded to have ised an early form of aversive treatment by putting eels in the wine cup as a cure for alcoholism (Zilboorg and Henry* L941). In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the British empiricists* Locke* Hobbes* Hume* Berkeley and John Mill, whose ideas were based on the notion that all ideas rome from experience* drew closer to the behavioristic approach. They contended that experience* rather than innate ideas* is the basis of knowledge. The mind in its original state is a tabula rasa, a blank tablet* which becomes inscribed upon only through experience. Thus 23 24 learning is a direct result of the individual's interaction with his external environment. As Locke puts it: Let us suppose the mind to be., as we say, white paper, void of all characters, without any ideas. How comes it to be furnished? Whence comes it by that vast store, which the busy and boundless fancy of man has painted on it with an almost endless variety? Whence has it all the material of reason and knowledge? To this I answer, in one word, from experience. In that all our knowledge is founded, and from that it ultimately derives itself. (Essay concerning Human Understanding, cited in Boring, 1929, p. 172) The British empiricists developed laws or principles of association which provided the basic ideas for the early behavior theorists. One of these principles was that of contiguity, which contends that when two ideas tend to occur together in time or space they become associated together in the mind. The approach of these men was pre-scientific and decidedly mentalistic, yet their doctrine of association was an important contribution and will always be prevalent in psychology. These general ideas built the ground for rein forcement theory, an experimental or empirical account of how behaviors are learned. William James, the first great American psycholo gist, showed interest in the application of verifiable prin ciples to actual human problems of daily life. This 25 interest in applied psychology places him as a forerunner of the new look of his time, which in psychology came to be known as functionalism and in philosophy as pragmatism. It was James who succeeded in bringing pragmatism before the public. As James phrased it: The pragmatic method . . . is to try to interpret each notion by tracing its respective practical con sequences. What difference would it practically make to anyone if this notion rather than that notion were true? If no practical difference whatever can be traced, then the alternatives mean practically the same thing, and all dispute is idle. Whenever a dis pute is serious, we ought to be able to show some practical difference that must follow from one side or the other's being right. (Cited in Randall, 1942, p. 126) One of the practical areas which interested James was that of human habits. Both bad habits and good habits, he implies, are learned, basically, via the same mechanism. Among other factors, James viewed the formation of habits as largely a matter of practice and reinforcement. In his 1890 classic, Principles of Psychology, he comments: "... We must make automatic and habitual, as early as possible, as many useful actions as we can" (p. 122). The most relevant passages for our present purpose are those in which James set several principles for habit 26 management. Some of these were: The first is that in the acquisition of a new habit, or the leaving off of an old one, we must take care to launch ourselves with as strong and decided an initiative as possible. Accumulate all the possible circumstances which shall re-enforce the right motives; put yourself assiduously in conditions that encourage the new way . . . in short, envelop your resolution with every aid you know. The second maxim is: Never suffer an exception to occur till the new habit is securely rooted in your life . . . continuity is the great means of making the nervous system act infallibly right. The need of receiving success at the outset is imper ative, failure at first is apt to dampen the energy of all future attempts, whereas past experience of success nerves one to future vigor. The third maxim: Seize the very first possible opportunity to act on every resolution you make, and on every emotional prompting you may experience in the direction of the habits you aspire to gain. Keep the faculty of effort alive in you by a little gratuitous exercise every day. (pp- 122-126) Undoubtedly, James had to rely on experience and observa tions in arriving at these conclusions, many of which are advocated by today's educators and psychologists. It was James who realized that factors such as reinforcement, practice, success and failure, have definite roles in the acquisition of new habits. 27 Definitive experimental evidence for the principles of instrumental or operant conditioning were first produced by Edward L. Thorndike. In his early work, "Animal intelli gence; an Experimental Study of the Associative Processes in Animals., " published in 1898* Thorndike paid special atten tion to the empiricists' law of contiguity. In fact* it attempted to account for the problem solving behavior of animals in terms of "associations" (stimulus-response connections) that were strengthened by their results. Thorndike (1911) concluded on the basis of his experiments in what is known as the "Law of effect" that: Of several responses made to the same situation* those which are accompanied or closely followed by satisfaction to the animal will* other things being equal* be more firmly connected with the situation* so that when it recurs* they will be more likely to recur; those which are accompanied or closely fol lowed by discomfort to the animal will* other things being equal* have their connections with the situation weakened* so that* when it recurs* they will be unlikely to occur. The greater the satisfaction or discomfort* the greater is the strengthening or weak ening of the bond. (p. 244) Although Thorndike originally thought that the effect of punishment was simply opposite from the effect of reward* he later abandoned this notion. The law of effect* having undergone considerable revision and reformulation by Thorn dike himself and others* especially by B. F. Skinner* became 28 the main pillar supporting behavior and therapy paradigms. Ivan Petrovich Pavlov made significant contributions to the behavioral stream. Pavlov (192 3) provided experi mental techniques,, controlled conditions, principles and terminology, establishing a large body of data, paradigms, and learning theory which supported the effort of behavior therapy. Although he studied the development of conditioned responses, his most direct contribution to behavior therapy was probably his discovery of the experimental neurosis phenomena, sometimes referred to as Pavlovian experimental neurosis. His preoccupation with a particular response (salivation) in a particular infrahuman species (the dog) seems to have prevented him from expanding his research into the modification of human behavior. At about the same time there was a revolution in psychology, Watsonian behaviorism, which stressed objective observations. In his statement of the goal of behaviorism, John B. Watson (1913) said: Psychology as the behaviorist views it is a purely objective branch of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behavior. (Cited in Watson, 1963, p. 375) Independent of the Russian group, Watson (1919) demonstrated that phobic reactions could be induced in an 29 apparently normal child through the use of clinical condi tioning procedures. His experiment with Albert B, an eleven-month old infant, in the Hopkins laboratory, became known as a classic example of conditioned emotional reac tions. The scientific nature of his investigations and his observational care are remarkable. Unfortunately the family moved away before Watson's experiment could be completed. He subsequently proposed a variety of techniques and methods by which Albert could be rid of his fears, including stimu lus satiation, reconditioning, imitation and modeling. Jones (1924a), Watson's student, followed these suggestions in her treatment of a three-year old boy, Peter, who was afraid of a white rabbit and was, according to Jones, like Albert, though a little older. It is Watson's anticipation of the treatment proce dure which places him in the position of forerunner of the behavior therapy movement. Unfortunately the world was not ready for Watson's ideas and it was thirty years before the^ received general attention. Behaviorism in psychology has continued to have a strong appeal. By 1930, the process of learning became the main focus of research by psychologists. Several psycholo gists emerged— such as Hull, Skinner, Tolman, and Guthrie. 30 They formulated approaches with experiments on animals and observed behavior in a single learning situation. Hull (1951) has attempted to formulate quantitative laws, of human behavior. His contribution to behaviorism stems from his attempt to relate intrinsic factors (called drive or need reduction) to the reinforcement theory. According to his formulation, the goal, when reached, becomes the reward or the reinforcement which reduces the drive and satisfies the need, and causes the action to tend to be repeated. B. F. Skinner is the most prominent of the group who studied the learning process experimentally and who devel oped a systematic theory. In a series of papers beginning in 1930, B. F. Skinner proposed a formulation of behavior which arose out of observations of animal performance. In his book, The Behavior of the Organisms (Skinner, 1938) he described the results of bar-pressing experiments with rats. It is Skinner's term "operant" which makes a clear distinc tion between two types of behavior, respondent and operant. While respondent behaviors are elicited and controlled by stimuli, which precede them, operant behaviors are emitted, and are controlled by stimuli which follow them. These stimuli have either positive or negative characteristics, 31 and in keeping with the Law of Effect, either strengthen or weaken the likelihood of recurrence of the preceding responses. Skinner indicates the importance of the environment to an organism. Operant responses are employed by the orga nism to change his environment; he literally operates on his environment. In the adaptation of organism to environment, either his behavior or the environment undergoes modifica tion . Ferster, associated with Skinner, has moved from the basic research on operant conditioning with infrahumans to work with autistic children (Ferster and DeMyer, 1961, 1962) . Applying the results of learning theory and operant conditioning to the problem of behavior modification, Ferster states; . . . environmental stimuli, rather than underlying illness or intrapsychic conflict, determine and main tain what is labeled as defiant, maladaptive, inappro priate, disadvantageous, or disruptive behavior. (Cited by Krasner, 1965, p. 6) The best description of behavior modification is given by Watson (1962); In a broader sense, the topic of behavior modifica tion is related to the whole field of learning. Studies of behavior modification are studies of learning, with a particular intent— the clinical goal of treatment. (p. 19) 32 The behavior modification approach makes use of both positive and negative reinforcers of various kinds, and in a variety of tasks and situations, in an attempt to determine iow reinforcement variables may be most efficiently utilized to influence the behavior of the human subject toward more effective functioning. It is an attempt to initiate and strengthen desired academic and social behaviors through behavior modification techniques based on the operant condi tioning paradigm. The behavior modification strategy focuses on overt subject responses and the stimuli that control these responses. Rather than view the emotionally disturbed child as a victim of psychic conflicts, cerebral disfunction, or academic deficiency, this approach concentrates on bringing the overt behavior of the child into line with minimum standards required for learning. Length ening attention span, promoting successful accomplish ment of carefully graded tasks, and providing a learn ing environment with gratification and structure for the child in accord with principles of empirical learn ing theory, are its basic goals. (Hewett, 1966, p. 2) According to Ulman and Krasner (1965), the behavior modifier has three main concerns: 1. What behavior is maladaptive? 2. What environmental contingencies currently support the subject's behavior? 33 3. What environmental changes, usually reinforcing stimuli, may be employed to alter the subject's behavior? (pp- 1-2) Prank (1969) also points out three main concerns that the behavior therapist must consider: (1) Which specific behavior patterns require change in their frequency of occurrence, their intensity, their duration or in the conditions under which they occur? (2) What are the conditions under which this behavior was acquired, and what factors are currently maintaining it? (3) What are the best practical means which can produce the desired changes in this individual (manipulation of the environment, of the behavior, or of the self-attitudes of the patient)? (Frank, 1969, p. 419) According to Kanfer and Phillips (1970) the behavior modification approach has the following characteristics: 1. It focuses on behavior. 2. It attacks deviant behavior directly. 3. It encompasses all behaviors as subject to the same psychological principles. 4. It shares its methods of inquiry into human behavior with all other sciences. 5. It requires no special theory-related skills for observers. 6. It recognizes the importance of past events in the formation of learned behaviors. (Kanfer and Phillips, 1970, pp. 51-53) 34 Operant conditioning procedures are educationally based techniques and fit the classroom situation (McIntyre* 1966). They may be used: 1. With a wide range of problem behavior* from the mild to very severe. 2. in a school setting* both with individuals and with groups. 3. In situations where psychodynamic approaches cannot be used. (McIntyre* 1966* p. 5) According to Hewett (1967) the behavior modifier in education has four considerations. 1. He is concerned with helping the child to change his behavior rather than with where the behavior came from. 2. He looks at the child as a potential learner at least capable of learning something. 3. He begins teaching the child at whatever level he may be functioning. 4. The behaviorist approach emphasizes looking at why particular teaching efforts did not succeed and enables the teacher to understand such failures in terms of components of learning which she can do something about. (Hewett* 1967* pp. 66-67) 35 Peter (1968) in his therapeutic teaching approach identifies five educational variables, which have the highest priority in terms of their therapeutic relevance. 1. The child's present functioning. 2. The specific objectives. 3. The developmental curriculum. 4. The eliciting events. 5. The reinforcing events. (p. 2) A school program may be set up in such a way that the child is tangibly reinforced for every appropriate response. He is rewarded upon making correct responses or approximations to the correct responses. It is expected that maladaptive social and emotional behavior will be extinguished, because maladaptive behaviors are not rein forced and therefore no longer "pay off." In fact, they interfere with the child's ability to earn his rewards. The child is therefore motivated to perform appropriately and less motivated to engage in maladaptive behaviors (Hewett, 1969). The Self in Behavior Therapy William James in his book. The Principles of Psychology (1890), devoted his longest chapter to the area 36 of self-psychology. James views man as having a multiplic ity of selves: In its widest possible sense, however, a man's self is the sum total of all he can call his, not only his body and his psychic powers; but his clothes and his house, his wife and children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation and works, his lands and horses, also his yacht and bank account. All of these things give him the same emotions. If they wax and prosper, he feels triumphant; if they dwindle and die away, he feels cast down— not necessarily to the same degree for each thing, but in much the same way for all. (pp. 2 91-292) The values that a man comes to attach to these vari ous selves are based on the feedback that he receives from his environment, and the feelings and emotions it arouses. James attaches a particular importance to the feelings of success and failure that the individual experiences as a result of his interaction with other people. He states: "One may say, however, that the normal provocative of self feeling is one's actual success or failure, and the good or bad actual position one holds in the world." The individual's experiences, and his ability to evaluate himself in the light of these experiences, consti tute the backbone in the formation of the self. Consider James's following statement: Our self feeling in this world depends entirely on what we back ourselves to be and to do. It is 37 determined by the ratio of our actualities to our supposed potentialities; a fraction, of which our pretensions are the denominator and the numerator our success; thus self-esteem = success/pretensions. Such a fraction may be increased as well by diminish ing the denominator as by increasing the numerator. (p. 311) The individual self-evaluation is a direct result of his social interaction (Mead, 1953). For him, self feelings and self-evaluation are not present at birth, but are rather acquired as a result of the individual's interaction with his environment. Sullivan (1947) sees the self as made up of reflected appraisals: "It is built largely of personal symbolic elements learned in control with significant people" (p. 16). Likewise, Rogers (1951) views the self as a product of the individual's self-evaluation and the nature of his experiences. The individual’s self-evaluation is directly related to the aspiration and expectation of goal achievement. One might expect that an individual with nega tive self-evaluation, who has had a past history of failure, is likely to underestimate his abilities and thus lower his expectations. On the other hand an individual with positive self-evaluations, with a past history of success, will approach new goals with expectancy of success. 38 According to Skinner (1953), "A self is simply a ievice for representing functionally unified systems of responses” (p. 285). In actuality, in this view, we deal with the self in terms of overt evaluation and we assume that self-evaluation judgments are subject to reinforcement. The individual must be able to evaluate his actions and judge them to be good or bad before he can attempt to control his behavior. Eval uative processes serve as a connecting tie between disposi tional factors in the individual and situational aspects of the environment. The individual seeks validation of his behavior through transaction with his environment. Thus self-evaluation mediates between the individual cognitive process and overt behavior. Kelly (1955) suggests that we might consider every person as seeing the world from the point of view of the scientist. "We assume that all our present interpretations of the universe are subject to revision and replacement" (p. 15). The evaluation mechanism requires the individual to attend to his own behavior or observe his own behavior. In a way, we can say that the individual becomes a behavior analyst, taking behavior in the widest possible sense. 39 This behavior is trainable; observation becomes a precondi tion to the evaluation, and the individual self-evaluation ability is a precondition to self-control and self- regulation. These self-evaluations and judgments may also serve to reinforce the preceding behavior. According to Skinner (1953): In self-control the individual can identify the behavior to be controlled. . . . The individual "chooses" between alternative courses of action, "thinks through" a problem while isolated from the relevant environment, and guards his health or his position in society through the exercise of "self- control." (pp- 228-229) It is interesting to note that Skinner (1951) was of the opinion that much of the individual's response is not usually under the direct control of external reinforcing stimuli. He therefore made the concept of self-control crucial to the understanding of human behavior. He described self-control as a process in which the individual always has a reinforcing stimulus available but administers it only when it is appropriate to his own behavior: The contention of the self-reinforcement orientation is that self-reinforcement is the means by which the individual implements his self-concept changes. The self-reinforcement mediates between cognitive label and overt behavior. (Marston, 1965, p. 3) What is important in self-regulation is above all that the individual have some understanding, not only of 40 what he is doing, but of how he is doing it. He has a feed back from his own behavior, that is, he knows whether he is getting closer or further away from the derived behavior. In order to help a person make changes, we ought to clarify what it is that he wants to achieve, and this can only be done in small steps. We need to help the individual and make it easier for him to reward himself (Kanfer, 1969). According to Guilford (1967): Evaluation is defined as a process of comparing a product of information with known information accord ing to logical criteria, making a decision concerning criterion satisfaction. (p. 185) Meeker (1969) points out that the school represents an important role in the developing of evaluative processes, which seems to be neglected. This seems to be a vital part in the development of the individual and becomes more cru cial as the child reaches adolescence. Bloom (1956) placed evaluation last in the cognitive domain, because it is regarded as encompassing, to some extent, all the other categories (knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis and synthesis). Also, it is seen as a major link with the affective behaviors where values (liking and enjoying) are the central process involved. 41 Bruner (1961) points out the critical importance of the continuing feedback evaluation process. He describes it as a process by which organisms guide their correlation strategies in perceiving, cognizing, and manipulating their environment. . . . The unhampered operation of this evaluation process is critical in the continuing adaptation of the organism both in the development of adequate cognitive functioning . . . and also in moment-to-moment functioning. (pp. 205-2 06) This evaluative mechanism becomes more and more important as the child grows older. The child at about this age (12 and above), Piaget (1966) states, is able to analyze his own thinking and construct theories. . . . From the functional standpoint, his systems are significant in that they furnish the cog nitive and evaluative bases for the assumption of adult roles. (p. 339) In sixth grade and at the beginning of junior high school, most individuals enter a period of formal operations and with this the tendency to formulate and test hypotheses, to carry out logical operations on symbolic and abstract material (Piaget, 1966). The student becomes increasingly less dependent upon concrete empirical experience and becomes more intellectually mature. He is able to evaluate himself with respect to his personality, intelligence and appearance (Elkind, 1970). 42 A more recent trend in behavior therapy thus makes use of various self-control and self-evaluation techniques (Bandura and Kupers3 1964] Ferster, Nurnberger, & Levitt, 1962] Goldiamond, 1965] Harris, 1969] Kanfer, 1966] Kanfer and Marston, 1963a, 1963b] Marston, 1965). However, these studies have limited their investigations to laboratory clinical setups and also primarily adult subjects. Behavior Therapy in the Classroom There is, currently, an increasing interest in the application of operant techniques to classroom programs with exceptional children. Some have tried to combine existing practices, such as giving grades, with operant techniques, while others have been concerned with applying new tech niques. McKenzie, Clark, Wolf, Kathera, & Benson (1968), using a "pay for grades token reinforcement system" have demonstrated that a token reinforcement system with grades as tokens and allowances as backup reinforcers can signifi cantly increase academically oriented behavior. However, it is worth noting that the dispensers of the allowances were the parents, which means that the success of the program relied on the parents 1 cooperation and helpful interaction at home. O’Leary and Beker (1967) demonstrated a token 43 rating reinforcement program which could be used by one teacher in an average size classroom of exceptional chil dren . The work of Birnbrauer, Bijou, Kidder and Wolf (1965) at the Rainier School in Buckley, Washington, have demonstrated that the systematic use of tokens and extrinsic rewards in conjunction with a structured classroom made aca demic training possible for the mentally retarded. Quay (1966) and Patterson and Ebner (1965) rewarded their students by periodically flashing a light on their desks when they were paying attention to the teacher or to an original task. The authors found that children rewarded in this way for appropriate behavior improved dramatically during the time of the study. Kunzelmann and Harings (1966) have applied the Premack and Homme high-probability behavior (HPB) and low-probability behavior (LPB) to a group situa tion. In a program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Homme (1966) used the proce dure of contingency management employing the Premack prin ciple with a group of adolescent dropouts. The youngsters showed a definite improvement in their academic and social behavior. Nolen, Kunzelmann and Haring (1967), in applying behavior modification in a junior high learning disabilities 44 classroom, reported that most of the junior high students "preferred choices for contingent high strength behavior centered on handicrafts, typing, woodworking, organized games, or science units" (1965). The Santa Monica Project represents a major attempt to apply operant conditioning techniques to the emotionally disturbed children in the classroom. In Hewett's work (1968) an attempt was made to provide an environment and program for shaping appropriate learning behavior through the use of a check marks token reinforcement system. He developed a hierarchy of educa tional tasks to fit the needs of the individual child. The hierarchy included: attention, response, order, explora tory, social, and mastery, with achievement representing the highest level. The physical setup of the classroom con sisted of three major centers, paralleling levels on the hierarchy of educational tasks: 1. Order Center (Attention, Response, and Order levels) 2 . Exploratory Center (Exploratory and Social levels) 3. Mastery Center (Mastery and Achievement levels) 45 The children under the experimental conditions worked better, more independently and for longer periods of time without being distracted. They also achieved a higher academic level. Wolf, Giles and Hall (1958) used a token reinforce ment system to improve the academic study behavior of low- achieving fifth- and sixth-grade children. The points which were given for work completed and grades obtained on school report cards, were exchangeable for a variety of things, such as candy, snacks, money and items available from department stores. After a year of these procedures the students showed significant gains on standardized achieve ment tests as compared to the control groups. Broden, Hall, Dunlap and Clark (1970) reported the use of a teacher attention and token reinforcement system to bring about control in a disruptive junior high school special education classroom. The systematic teacher atten tion increased study levels but was limited in its effect. For most of the students, classroom privileges, such as early dismissal for lunch, getting a drink and talking to other students, were more powerfully motivating. Studies which have focused upon variables which are pertinent to the present study are more and more prevalent 46 Ln the literature, and no attempt has been made to encompass all of them here. The studies which were reviewed above were chosen on the basis of their special relevancy to the understanding of the present paper. CHAPTER III THE BEHAVIORAL LEARNING MODEL A good remedial educational program should be based on diagnostic prescriptive teaching where continuous rein forcement and feedback mechanisms are available. Well- regarded theorists and practitioners have put emphasis on diagnostic teaching, and it has proven to be helpful in remedial programs (Frostig, 1967), especially when coupled with continuous reinforcement (Peter, 1965; Valett, 1969). The Behavioral Learning Model (see Fig. 1), which consists of the Learning Behavior System with the Basic Instruction Model, constitutes an additional attempt in this direction. Each element could be used independently of the other; how ever, a combination of both is recommended in order to achieve an optimum educational therapeutic environment. Learning1 Behavior System (LBS) Both practical and theoretical considerations have led to the development of the present Learning Behavior 47 Feedback Behavioral Learning Model Basic Instruction Model 1 Learning Behavior System Analysis of Learner Functional Diagnosis 1 j i 1 f c * 1 1 1 Analysis of Ed. Environment Prescriptive Ed. Environment 1 ! - s 1 ' 1..... ® 1 R 1 Programming Prescriptive Ed. Program ft H W [ r f j | T 8 > , H H _ L § § 1 § P . o f t H 1 E - l Implementation Prescriptive Ed. Procedures ST 3 o o ft M , ft H - “ S2 . h-- H 8 i - L ? 3 1 H Developmental Curriculum I ft 1 W 1 T § ft ft , C O O ft H Hi E4 1 ft a . co Educational Management 1 § C O 1 ■ 8 1 1 | Individualized Instruction 1 L. . . . H 1 ..1 1 . L Fig. 1. Behavioral Learning Model 49 System. It is not a new method of teaching, but a procedure which can be used in conjunction with any method of teach ing. It is an intervening mechanism that has as its major property the capacity of enhancing performance for those aspects of the response complex to which it relates. It is based implicitly or explicitly on an integrated associative, cognitive and self-directive approach to learning. It is composed of a hierarchy of phases which make up a continuum through which the student progresses. Since my first experience with the Law of Effect, I have come to learn that it can be better explained in terms of a system that admits that the organism learns meanings and "what-leads-tp-what" relationships, the learner is fully aware and sensitive to the connection between his response and its reinforcement. Tolman who is primarily a cognitive theorist puts the matter this way: Learning consists in the organism's "discovering" or refining what all the respective alternative responses lead to. And then, if, under the appetite-aversion conditions of the moment, the consequences of one of these alternatives is more demanded than the other, then the organism will tend, after such learning, to select and to perform the response leading to the "demanded-for" consequences. (Tolman, 1933, p. 364) This writer considers learning to be complex and finds therefore that the single theory cannot account for 50 the learning process. A recent attempt by Gagne (1962) to describe eight different types of learning has received the attention of prominent learning theorists. Wilson, Robeck, and Michael's (1969) learning motivation model shows the relationship between associative learning, cognitive learn ing and creative self-direction learning. This writer thus takes an integrated associative, cognitive and self directive view of the learning process (see Fig. 2). The Learning Behavior System (LBS) has as its foun dation a heuristic cyclical learning process as formulated by McIntyre (1967), which includes a "black box" internal environment. According to him the variables that are to be considered in the educational application of basic learning principles are: the environmental stimulus array (S), the organismic variables (O), the overt observable responses (R), and the reinforcement or the effect (E). These compose his basic formulation S-O-R-E (Fig. 4). The positive reinforcement-reward-success experience permits conditioning of feedback stimuli to the organism, so that repetition of desired behavior can be promoted (Mowrer, 1960). The indi vidual who is intrinsically reinforced is highly motivated and self-directed. •51 Self-Directive Associative Cognitive Learner Fig. 2.— The relationship between associative, cognitive and self-directive learning. 52 Environment Stimulus 4J o 0 ) m w w & d •H p o CO d c u co Response Individual Stimulus Response Response Chaining •P u a ) w tw w Response Chaining Evaluation Self- Regulation Directional Evaluation Self- Direction < u m > i •p co -p rtf +J • H » H o u o -H to m to (U < Q e to •P d f t f t 3 > P o a ) > •pH ■ p •H o u d o •rl •p 0 ( D P •H Q 1 ip pH 0 ) C O to to d ) d a > •p 0 ) p o d o u to to < U d • p o ( 0 p •p to d O o •P • pH t o •p d r t f • p •H p -p -p d ( U w P 0 ) ip tp • pH •o d £> d 0 • r ) •p r t f •H - p d t u M < u «p tp • pH Q d 0 • pH 0 - p •P r t f t o P d f -H O J p •p •p d d H H Response Pig. 3.— Learning Behavior System Environment Individual STIMULUS stimulus EFFECT effect brganism •RESPONSE Variables to be considered in the educational appli cation of basic learning principles. S - environmental stimulus array 0 - organismic variables R - overt, observable responses E - effect or reinforce ment, an environmental stimulus event j3 - perceptual or phenomological field : r - covert, internal response e_ - effect or reinforce ment, a response- produced stimulus event Figure 4 McIntyre S-O-R-E Analysis tn CO 54 ' In line with such writers as Spencer (1897), Weis (1939), Murphy (1947), Piaget (1926, 1929, 1932, 1951) and Werner (195 7) it is assumed in the formulation of the LBS that learning occurs through a process in which the learner moves from undifferentiation to differentiation and integra tion, from the concrete to greater cognitive complexity and abstraction. As the individual advances through the LBS phases he moves from the simpler to the more complex, from the more undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and abstract. He proceeds from primarily an associative type of learning through cognition to self directed learning. By means of a continuous self-evaluation and feedback mechanism, the child moves from total depen dency on extrinsic reinforcers, originally required to moti vate the desired academic and social behavior to self- direction and intrinsic motivation. Success in the school setting apparently is one of the most important features in developing intrinsic rein forcement. The student who achieves success in a particular task is spurred by that satisfaction to attempt other tasks, even of a more difficult nature. The student with a pattern of successful achievement approaches a new learning situa tion with confidence (Sears, 1943). 55 The writer postulates six basic phases with the LBS: 1. Response 2. Response Chaining 3. Response Chaining Evaluation 4. Self-Regulation 5. Directional Evaluation 6. Self-Direction The Learning Behavior System; A.n analysis Phase 1. Response.— In this phase learning is char acterized by (1) a single connection between a stimulus and a response* (2) the stimulus and the response apparently becoming integrally bound together (Gagne* 1965). Phase 2. Response Chaining.— This phase brings together a set of individual Ss-R's in a sequence to form more complex responses. Phase 3. Response Chaining Evaluation.— Phase 3 involves differentiated evaluation of the responses within the complex chain. 56 Phase 4. Self-Regulation.— Self-Regulation implies self-reinforcement of operant behavior and presupposes that the individual has the power to obtain reinforcement but does not do so until a particular response has been emitted (Skinner, 1953, p. 242). Phase 5. Directional Evaluation.— Directional Eval uation is an integrated evaluation of complex chains, entailing the ability to make decisions concerning the indi vidual's progress along a certain path. Phase 6. Self-Direction.— The final phase is char acterized by decision-making as to what course of action is to be followed. "The task is not simply to make a selected course of action probable but to decide on an issue. The individual sometimes does this by manipulating some of the variables of which his behavior is a function" (Skinner, 1953, p. 242). The attempt is made to show that each phase of learning described here begins with a different state of the organism and ends with a different capability for perfor mance. According to Gagne (1965) the most important chain of conditions that distinguishes one form of learning 57 experience from another is its initial statej in other words, there have to be certain prerequisites and conditions regarding behavior patterns before the student can move from one phase to another. The conditions for chaining, for example, require that the individual have previously learned stimulus- response connections available to him, so that they can be chained. If this condition is not met, one finds oneself dealing with conditions for establish ing these prerequisite. Ss-R's, and thus likely to draw incorrect conclusions about chaining itself. (Gagne, 1965, p. 60) This generalization applies to the various phases of learning we have described and may be briefly stated as follows (after Gagne, 1965): Stimulus-Response Connections (Phase 1), prerequisite for Response Chaining (Phase 2), prerequisite for Response Chaining Evaluation (Phase 3), prerequisite for Self-Regulation (Phase 4), prerequisite for Directional Evaluation (Phase 5), prerequisite for Self-Direction (Phase 6) The successive phases of the LBS reflect the child's progression from the initial days of special classroom placement to the final days. The implementation may vary from child to child depending upon his initial level of functioning, and his rate of progress. It is possible for TABLE 1 THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS CONTAINED IN THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR SYSTEM LBS Gagne's (Learning Types) Krathwohl's (Affective Domain) Wilson's (Learning Model) Self-direction Characterizations by a value Creative self-direction Directional evaluation Problem solving Organization Conceptualization Self-regulation Principle learning Preference for a value Valuing Response chaining evaluation Concept learning Multiple discrimination Acceptance of a value Response chaining Verbal association Chaining Responding Associative Response S-R learning Signal learning Receiving in 00 59 an entire group to be functioning in the same phase on the same continuum, but most often they will be in various phases. Because of individual differences, some children will, and some will not, progress through the entire range of the LBS in one academic year. The ultimate goal is the child's return to full-time placement in a regular classroom, with the requisite skills to make a good adjustment. The teachers and children con stantly note changes in behavior and performance in terms of the basic goal of developing a well-adjusted, responsible, self-directive, self-actualizing individual, with a healthy image of himself. The children's own record of their suc cessfully completed work provides them with evidence of their continuous growth and provides one basis for self- evaluation . The Learning Behavior System; Basic assumptions and principles Every phase is characterized by entering and contin uing behavior. (An assessment procedure enables the teacher to analyze the child's behavior repertoire and determine the point of entry on the hierarchy.) Once the desired behaviors are acquired a shift of format of operant methodology occurs in accordance 60 with the specific phase. Successive phases follow a sequential developmental progression from the undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and abstract, from dependency on extrinsic to intrinsic reinforcement. Progression along the continuum is at the rate of which the individual is capable. Transitional phases may be arranged according to individual needs (if the student is between phases). Behavior patterns corresponding to the phases of the Learning Behavior System Phase 1. Response.— The student: Does not respond to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. Has a very short attention span; is unable to sit still for any period of time. Demands complete attention of the teacher. Does not apply himself to assigned academic tasks. Is unable to shift from one activity to another without great difficulty. Is unable to accept criticism. 61 Exhibits explosive and unpredictable behavior (temper tantrums and outbursts). Frequently uses socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. Never initiates contact with others concerning related school activities. Is unable to work in group situations. Is unable to see relationships between cause and effect. Phase 2. Response Chaining.— The student: Makes an attempt to respond to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. Has a limited attention span; can attend for short periods of time. Does not demand complete teacher's attention. Makes an attempt to approach assigned academic tasks. Is able to shift from one activity to another without great difficulty. Is able to tolerate a minimum amount of criticism. Does not manifest frequent tantrums and outbursts. 62 Does not frequently manifest socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. Rarely initiates contact with other students in related school activities, is able to work in small groups. Begins to see relationships between cause and effectj attempts evaluations. Phase 3. Response Chaining Evaluation.— The student: Responds to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. Has a longer attention span, can attend for a full session. Occasionally demands teacher's attention, completes at least 80 percent of assigned academic tasks. Is able to shift from one activity to another with ease. Is able to accept criticism. Rarely manifests tantrums and outbursts. Rarely uses socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. 63 Occasionally initiates contact with other students in related school activities. Is able to work in a large group. Sees relationships between cause and effect, makes evaluations. Phase 4. Self-Recrulation.— The student: Responds readily to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. Has a long attention span. Rarely demands teacher's attention. Completes 80 percent or more of assigned academic tasks. Is able to shift from one activity to another with ease. Is able to accept criticism with ease. Does not manifest tantrums and outbursts (is able to control himself). Does not use socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. Often initiates contact with other students in related school activities. Is able to work in a large group. 64 Is able to evaluate his work in terms of task analysis. Phase 5. Directional Evaluation.— The student: Responds readily to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. Has a long attention span. Is able to work independently. Completes assigned academic tasks. Is able to shift from one activity to another with ease. Meets new situations with confidence. Manifests very good self-control. Does not use socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. Often initiates contact with other students in related school activities. Is able to work in a large group. Is able to evaluate his work in accordance with the required standards. Phase 6. Self-Direction.— The student: Responds readily to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. 65 Has a long attention span. Is able to work independently. Completes assigned academic tasks. Is able to shift from one activity to another with ease. Meets new situations with confidence. Manifests very good self-control. Does not use socially unacceptable speech and habit patterns. Often initiates contact with other students in related school activities. Is able to work in a large group. Is able to evaluate his work and make decisions as to what course of action should be followed. The Basic Instruction Model The Basic Instruction Model involves seven educa tional variables that predominate in terms of their thera peutic relevance. 1. The functional diagnostic procedures 2. The prescriptive educational environment program 3. The prescriptive educational program and objectives 66 4. The prescriptive educational procedures, methods and techniques. 5. The developmental curriculum 6. The educational management and teaching strategy 7. Individualized instruction These variables are clustered into four main phases of the Basic Instruction Model: A. Analysis of the learner B. Analysis of the educational environment C. Programming D. Implement ation Analysis of the learner: The functional diagnostic procedures The remedial educational program should be based on careful diagnosis and observations in the following areas: 1. Developmental analysis 2 . Academic achievement analysis 3. Behavioral repertoire analysis The information for making this assessment is derived principally from three sources. For the develop mental analysis, formal testing is used in intelligence, language functions and perception. The standardized tests 67 that may be used for this purpose when learning disorders are suspected in 12-15 year olds, are the Wechsler Intelli gence Scale for children, the Illinois Test of Psycholin- guistic Abilities, the Wepman Auditory Discrimination Test and the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception. For academic achievement analysis standard achievement bat teries such as the California, the Stanford, and the Metro politan are commonly used. The Wide Range Achievement Test is most frequently used for quick individual assessment. The academic testing should be supplemented by informal assessment. Diagnostic inventories have been devised for this purpose with regard to reading and arithmetic (see Appendixes D and E). These inventories are examples of informal evaluative procedures which the teacher can con struct for any area of the curriculum. The teacher can further learn to assess the child's present level of func tioning from behavioral observations as the child works on a task and interacts with teachers and peers. Such observa tions form the basis for the analysis of the student behav ior repertoire. A Student Behavior Pattern Check List has been devised (see Appendix a ) . Such a blending of formal and informal measures should ensure adequate evaluation of the child's present 68 strengths and weaknesses and level of functioning. It is important that the teacher record his find- ingSj which will serve as the basis for the child's program. Appendixes B and c were devised to serve as guidelines to the teachers. They list some important areas that the teacher must be sure to assess. Analysis of the educational environment: The prescriptive educational environment procrram The aim of the special classroom should be the rein troduction of its subjects into the regular classroom as soon as possible. It is of prime importance to organize the school environment to fit the needs of the educationally handicapped youngster. The placement in the special class room should be made in order to provide the student with an educational program adjusted to his individual needs3 for the ultimate purpose of enabling him to return to the main stream of the school environment. It is not always necessary for the student to spend all of the school day in the special class. The principle guiding the following plan is that the more the student is integrated into the mainstream the better are his chances for rehabilitation. 69 The child's total school environment should be sub divided into two major parts: 1. Segregated activities 2. integrated activities The segregated activities comprise the activities in the special classroom. The integrated activities are those which the school provides for the total school population. These integrated activities are further divided into non- academic activities (such as woodshop* cooking* music and art) and the academic activities. The integration of the children into the mainstream activities should be initiated as soon as the student’s social behavior is within the limits of the regular class room standards. Most students would be able to attend the regular classes in nonacademic subjects* taking the academ ics in the special classroom. As the child reaches the approximate academic level in a subject he can proceed to take it in the regular classroom. As much attendance in the regular classroom as pos sible should be encouraged because it allows the child to remain integrated with the majority of his peers* enhances his self-respect and facilitates emotional and social adjustments. 70 TABLE 2 PRESCRIPTIVE EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT Segregated Activities Integrated Activities (Self-Contained Special Classroom) Mainstream Public School Curriculum (Nonacademics) Mainstream Public School Curriculum (Academics) Remedial Academic Program English Math World History and Geography U.S. History and Geography Music Art P.E. Cooking Sewing Gardening Woodshop English Math Etc. Science Metal Shop Agriculture Mixed Choir Girls Glee Band Etc. 71 The student is helped to adjust to the regular classroom if the special teacher, serves as the home-room teacher, until the student is completely integrated into the nainstream program. Continuous communication and feedback between the special teacher and the regular teacher is essential. The special teacher should maintain at least weekly contacts, and be informed of the student's academic and social progress. The special teacher should be notified when special projects or examinations are to take place, or if a crisis of any kind occurs. The continuous support that the special teacher can provide during the period of transi tion may make the difference between a success and failure. The mediating role of the special teacher is thus of immense importance. Programming: The prescriptive educational program and objectives The teacher must create an educational program based on the functional diagnostic information. A sequential pro gram is carefully planned for each child which allows many opportunities for appropriate behavior and personal success. The teacher must be familiar with both the curriculum of the regular classroom and the teaching process. The more 72 carefully the tasks are adjusted to the child's abilities :he greater the possibility that he will learn them. In an environment in which each child is continuously taught at his individual pace and functional level there will be few experiences of failure, and motivation to learn will Increase accordingly. Both short-term (daily, weekly) objectives and long-term objectives (for the month, for the semester) must be formulated by the teacher. The educator who aims to bring a child up to the level of performance for children of his age, cannot afford not to know the path by which to lead the child. Implementation Prescriptive education procedures and techniques.— Children do not all have the same pattern of abilities and disabilities, nor do they all learn in the same way and at the same pace. No particular approach or material is appropriate for all children. The analysis of each child’s strengths and weaknesses in each developmental area, and of tiis academic performance, indicates the specific methods and approaches that should be used in his particular case. For example, a child who has severe auditory disabilities will need to be taught new content visually, whereas a child with 73 severe visual perception deficiences will need to learn through the auditory channel. The task of the special edu cation teacher is therefore to ameliorate each child's spe cific developmental lags and weaknesses, while teaching basic skills and subject matter by methods which utilize his areas of strength and take his disabilities into account. The developmental curriculum.— The educational goals must fit the needs of the child, and the educational mate rial selected by the teacher must fit these goals. The degree of the student's success increases when the tasks presented to him are appropriate for his level of function ing. If they are too high for his abilities, feelings of success and adequacy are supplanted by feelings of helpless ness and frustration. In the Report of the Joint Committee on Health Problems in Education in 1939 it was emphasized that "the curriculum should be so selected, organized and administered that the children will be given worthwhile activities of interest to learn, adapted to their abilities and fitted to their needs" (p. 46). Since little good commercial remedial material is available, the teacher must adapt or create materials. In doing so, he should ensure that they are geared to the 74 Individual child's specific level of functioning, and should be sure to take into account the scope and sequence of the area to be taught, so that a suitable step-by-step progres sion is followed. Educational management and teaching strategy.— The teacher should attempt to create an optimum learning envi ronment. He must provide the child with opportunities for new experiences which will ensure success. He should try to nake the child feel accepted by the teacher and by the group, fostering in the child the self-image as someone of value with worthwhile interests and ideas and the ability to accomplish things. It is important that the child should feel that the teacher is approachable, someone upon whose acceptance, understanding and judgment he can rely, and with whom he can discuss problems. He should feel that the teacher is not authoritarian or detached but actively likes and wishes to help him. This does not mean that he should be encouraged to become dependent upon the teacher. On the contrary, whenever appropriate the teacher should stress the child’s ability to work out his own problems and help him self; his goal should be to help the child to become self- sufficient. He should try to promote self-evaluation and 75 help the child to develop a sense of responsibility for his own behavior. It should be a continuous practice of the teacher to group and regroup the children in the class according to each child's social, emotional and academic development. The variables that need to be taken into account are: 1. Interpersonal relationships— positive and negative interaction 2. Academic abilities (considering each area individually) 3. The daily program and activities 4. The degree to which the teacher can promote leadership in the group, and form a core of teacher aids 5. The degree of mobility in the room The choices that are made in determining grouping may be crucial, because they affect the total climate of the classroom. The commonly used sociometric methods (Krech, 1952) have been extended to include the academic achievement variables. The writer suggests the use of a socio-academic- gram to chart the possible groupings. Ideally we would want each child to be grouped for each subject or aspect of training according to both his social-emotional needs and 76 tiis academic needs. In practice this is not always pos sible, and where a choice has to be made, the social- emotional development must be regarded as by far the most important variable. If a child is at the academic level of a particular grouping, but is immature in social interac tion, it might be possible to gradually integrate him into the group, including him for increasing periods of time. Individual instruction.— While educators generally advocate and support the concept of individualized instruc tion, in actuality very little is done in this direction. Much of the difficulty is attributed to the teachers' lack of training and their resistance to devising programs for each individual child according to his strengths and weak nesses. Most commonly the children are taught as a group, and the practice is justified as constituting group activi ties . But even when small groups are being instructed, there will always be one or two children for whom the teach ing is inappropriate. As John Goodlad (1963) has said: No scheme of school or curriculum organization washes away human variability or the manifold problems of dealing with it instructionally. This being so, much organizational effort clearly is misplaced. (p. 10) A truly individualized program depends first of all upon the teachers' awareness of individual needs, secondly 77 upon the development and initiation of the programs appro priate to them. The teacher will be helped in the task of providing individualized instruction if he can provide self corrective materials. In many instances it may be necessary for him to devise or construct the materials himself. TABLE 3 BASIC INSTRUCTION MODEL Feedback 1 Analysis of Learner 1 1 Analysis of Programming Educational Environment 1 Implementation 1. Functional diag nosis and proce dures of the child's present functioning. 2. The prescriptive 3. The prescriptive educational envi- educational pro- ronment program. gram and objec tives . 4. The prescriptive educational proce dures, methods and techniques. 5. Developmental curriculum. 6. Educational manage ment and teaching strategy. 7. Individualized instruction. 00 CHAPTER IV METHOD Subjects The sample consisted of eighteen junior high school students attending two EH classrooms in the same public school in Southern California. The students were selected from two junior high schools by school administrative per sonnel. All subjects were classified as educationally hand icapped children in accordance with the Education Code of the State of California (Section 6150, p. 336) and in accor dance with the California Administrative Code (Section 221, p. 113). The children were already divided into two classes, one of twelve children (six boys and six girls), and one of six children (all boys). The large class was designated by the coordinator of special education as the experimental group and the smaller as the comparison group. At the outset and at the close of the program, a Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT), Level II, was 79 80 administered to both groups by the district school psycholo gist. The experimental group was also tested with the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index and Burk's Behavior Rating Scale. In addition, baseline data for off- task behavior and arithmetic performance were recorded for this group. The Learning Behavior System as a treatment procedure was included in the experimental group. Other than that the group was initially conducted according to conventional methods, but working toward the principles con tained in the Basic instruction Model (the teacher was in the process of being trained in this approach). The compar ison group was conducted according to conventional methods, no restriction was placed upon the teacher with regard to using reinforcement techniques that he normally used. The Setting The two educationally handicapped classrooms were part of a regular junior high school. The physical setting of these classrooms was basically the same as that of the other classrooms. The children used the other school facil ities with the rest of the school, and most of them attended at least one or two regular classes, primarily in nonaca demic subjects. 81 Observation and Recording In behavioral assessment a valid measure of perfor- nance is the rate, originally suggested by Skinner (1953), and developed into Precision Teaching by Lindsly (1964) at the University of Kansas. As indicated by Kunzelman (1970), "Rates provide a continuous account of many basic processes. Rates allow one to follow a performance for many hours; the condition of the response at every moment is apparent in the record" (p. 29). It has been suggested by Lindsly that the term "movement cycle" may be used for classroom measurement. A movement cycle is defined as that behavior that a dead man cannot perform. A dead man can appear to look at a book, for example (Kunzelman, 1970), but he cannot smile or turn a page. A movement cycle must pass the "dead man test" in order to be designated as a movement cycle. In the class room a movement cycle might take the form of writing numbers or letters, saying numbers or letters aloud (Kunzelman, 1969), or leaving one's seat, or hitting someone. In this study rates were noted for movement cycle of both off-task behavior and for academic performance in arithmetic. What is important here is that the use of this technique makes it possible "to ascertain the probability of these movement 82 cycles when conditions are held constant" (Kunzelman, 1969, p. 2) . A junior college student who served as the teaching aide also served as an observer for off-task movement cycles throughout the baseline and the treatment period. The aide would record each occurrence of behavior classified by the teacher as off-task behavior. Such behavior included: run ning, arriving late to class, not sitting in one's seat, moving the seat around, talking out yelling, talking back to the teacher, swearing, eating in class, pushing or touching others, throwing things, spoiling others' work, hitting, kicking, taking others' property, destroying property, avoiding assignments, being untidy, disobeying, disturbing the class, exploding under stress (temper tantrums). In the area of academic performance, the student recorded the starting and finishing time of activities, and calculated the elapsed time, which the teacher checked. This was then recorded in terms of movement cycles, and the rates were calculated by another college student. Rating the arithmetic performance on the basis of digits completed per minute provided a more detailed analysis of the pupil's performance. 83 Procedure The student's initial designation to the appropriate phase of the Learning Behavior System is determined through the use of the Student Behavior Pattern Check List (see Appendix A). The order of the responses correspond to the characteristic behavior pattern for every phase of the hierarchy. The responses are recorded on a sheet designed for the purpose of obtaining the student behavior pattern profile. The area in which at least 75 percent of the responses fall is considered appropriate for that child. STormally the responses predominate in one phase, although they spread over others. Phase 1. Response In the experimental group all subjects are provided with daily work record sheets (Appendix f )• The student is given a contingent reinforcement for each response in the academic areas as well as in social areas. The reinforce ment is given in the form of candy, money, credits, or other forms preferred by the student. In addition to receiving the concrete reinforcers the student is reinforced by the teacher's approval, expressed through smiles, nodding, hugs, a pat on the back and comments such as good, very good, etc. 84 At the end of the session, the student tallies his credit narks, and the teacher inserts a written comment in the space provided on the work record sheet. Phase 2. Response Chaining The subjects are provided with a daily work schedule sheet, the daily assignment sheet, and the daily work record (Appendix f). The daily work schedule indicates what is expected from the student. It describes the daily classroom activities for both the individual and the group, and also the weight of reinforcers for each activity. The daily assignment sheet reflects the actual program devised for the child for that day, describing the task, the material and the amount the child must complete before receiving rein forcement. The daily work record is the actual recording reinforcement sheet, which the child tabulates and keeps.at his desk. Each child is given contingent reinforcement upon completion of the task, as described in the daily work schedule, in the form of credits. Total effort in any area carries the maximum number of credits allowed for that area (which was decided after a pilot study); for example, if a student completes all of his math assignment and works to the best of his abilities, he receives the maximum number of 85 credits for math even though he had made mistakes in half of the problems. If he is able to achieve 100 percent, then he receives an extra five credits in the effort column. In any other case, a child is allowed to receive only 50 percent of the possible credits. All credits are recorded by the child on his daily work record sheet immediately upon completion of the activity. In addition the child is reinforced by the teacher's approval, expressed both orally and in writing. For example, the teacher may say to the child, "That was excellent, Jim," and also write "Good work, Jim," on the daily assignment sheet in the place provided for teacher's comments. The child is also reinforced on a fixed interval schedule (2 5 minutes) for acting as a responsible student, as defined under expected student behavior on the daily work schedule. Two credits are the maximum allowed in any of these areas, making possible a total of 10, and the child is credited if he works to the best of his abilities. No par tial credit is allowed for these areas. Toward the end of the day, the student is asked to evaluate his total daily work, and his comments are written down in the space pro vided for evaluation on the daily work record. For example, the child may be asked, "How do you think you have done 86 today?" If the evaluation is appropriate to the perfor mance, and matches the teacher's observation, the child is reinforced with 10 credits on an all-or-none basis. Phase 3. Response Chaining Evaluation The subjects are provided with a daily work schedule sheet and daily assignment sheet as in phase 2. The daily work record sheets are somewhat different and suited to this phase (Appendix F). All academic areas are subdivided to include (1) accuracy of work, (2) organization and neatness, (3) task completion, (4) individual tasks, (5) evaluation by students (Appendix f ). Ten credits are allowed for accu racy, 5 for neatness and 5 for task completion (total: 20). Credits are also given for individual tasks. The individual task is determined each day by the teacher, or preferably by the teacher and student together, to help some area of dif ficulty for the child. Examples of such tasks are: master ing a specific times table, writing more carefully or neatly, working in conjunction with another student, controlling negative reactions to frustration, and so on. After each session the student evaluates his work as poor, fair, or good, and is reinforced with 5 credits if his evaluation exactly matches the teacher's evaluation— otherwise he 87 receives no credits. Any such credits are recorded on the work record sheet after the teacher has put his initials in the space provided. As in phase 2 the student continues to be reinforced verbally, to be reinforced on a fixed interval every 2 5 minutes for acting as a student, and to make an overall daily evaluation for which he receives credits. Phase 4. Self-Regulation The subjects are provided with a daily work schedule sheet and daily assignment sheet exactly as in phase 2 but in this fourth phase the daily work record sheet is modified (Appendix F). All academic areas are subdivided as in phase 3. However, the student evaluates his work and rein forces himself in relation to each area, as well as for act ing as a student according to his behavior every 25 minutes. The teacher then reinforces the student for (1) matched self-reinforcement, (2) matched self-evaluation. Ten credits are allowed in each case and dispensed on an all-or- none basis. In addition, the teacher verbally reinforces the student for matched self-reinforcement and matched self- evaluation . 88 Phase 5. Directional Evaluation The students are provided with a daily work schedule sheet, daily assignment sheet and daily work record sheet, similar to that given in phase 2 (Appendix p). The student evaluates his work during the complete session as poor, fair, or good, and reinforces himself on an all-or-none basis. The student is reinforced verbally for matched self- evaluation and matched self-reinforcement. Phase 6. Self-Direction The students are provided with daily assignment sheets only (Appendix F). Each student continues to eval uate his work in each session, and receives the teacher's verbal feedback as to his performance. With the exception of phase 1, the progression is determined according to whether 80 percent of the required criteria are fulfilled in a phase. A transition from one phase to another is only permitted when the student meets the behavior pattern of the next phase. The teacher is also aided with the behavior pattern as assessed by the Student Behavior Pattern Check List. Transitionary phases are pro vided for those students who are between phases. 89 The student trades his credits for activities of his Dwn choosing such as: free activity time, special activity anits, watching television, group games or receiving food or noney and so on. He can also request achievement roles such as room librarian, assistant to the school librarian, room counselor, teacher aide, teacher of the young and other sim ilar privileges. Statistics To Be Used To test for significant difference between the stu dent expected academic gain and the student actual academic gains following the experimental treatment, the student t ratio for correlated samples is used (two-tailed t test). To test for significant difference between the pre and post levels of the student behavior patterns and the student self-concept the student t ratio for correlated samples is also used (two-tailed t test) . To test for significant difference in the rate of arithmetic performance and off-task behavior between the baseline and the treatment period, the student t ratio for correlated samples is also used (two-tailed t test). To test for significant difference between the means of the male experimental group and the comparison group in 90 academic performance* the student t ratio is used (two- tailed t test). Significant level: ct .05 11 Degrees of freedom: df 12 Critical region: CHAPTER V RESULTS Comparison of mean achievement score gains with expected gains is summarized in Tables 4 and 5. In Table 4 the expected academic gain was taken as the average monthly gain of the student through his schooling up to the experi mental training period. This in turn was multiplied by 1.75, representing 1.75 months. As can be seen in Table 4, the resulting t value in reading is 4.197 which is highly significant (p < .01)j the resulting t value in arithmetic is 7.401 which is even more significant (p < .001). The resulting t value for spelling is .709 which is not signifi cant. However, inspection of the spelling mean gains shows that the students progressed at twice their expected rate with the treatment. Table 5 indicates the academic performance of the students following the program in reading, arithmetic and spelling as compared with the expected progress of the 91 TABLE 4 COMPARISON OF MEAN MONTHLY ACHIEVEMENT SCORE GAINS WITH EXPECTED GAINS FOR THE EDUCATIONALLY HANDICAPPED Pre-Test Mean Post-Test Mean Mean Gain Expected Mean Gain t b P Reading 46.66 55.58 8.92 1.25 4.197 < .01 Arithmetic 46.20 64.20 18.00 1.02 7.401 < .001 Spelling 43.40 44.32 1.92 1.00 .709 NS aThe expected academic gains for the educationally handicapped student were taken as the average academic gains of the student throughout his schooling up to the introduction of the experimental treatment. This was in turn multiplied by 1.75 months. .05 < x > to TABLE 5 COMPARISON OF MEAN MONTHLY ACHIEVEMENT SCORE GAINS WITH EXPECTED GAINS FOR THE AVERAGE CHILD Pre-Test Mean Post-Test Mean Mean Gain Expected Mean Gain t To P Reading 46.66 55 .58 8.92 1.75 3.921 < .01 Arithmetic 46.20 64.20 18.00 1.75 7.096 < .001 Spelling 43.40 44.32 1.92 1.75 .129 NS aThe expected academic gains of the "normal" student were taken as the expected progress of the average child in the regular classroom, which for the experimental period is equal to 1.75 months of academic progress. ■<*>= .05 v O GJ 94 average child in a regular classroom, i.e. it was assumed that a "normal" student who is in school for 1.75 months will progress at least 1.75 months in his academics. As can be seen in Table 5 the resulting t value in reading is 3.921 which is highly significant (p < .01). The resulting t value in arithmetic is even greater, 7.095, and is highly significant (p < .001). The resulting t value for spelling is .129 which is not significant. But again, inspection of the spelling mean gains shows that the students surpassed the expected rate of progress of the average child. Their mean gain was greater than the expected 1.75 months progress. Thus, Null Hypotheses A and B were rejected for reading and arithmetic; and the research hypotheses of sig nificant difference between the expected gains and the actual obtained gains in reading and arithmetic were found to be tenable. The probability of obtaining differences as large as those found in the Table 4 and Table 5 analyses would occur by chance less than one time out of a hundred for reading and less than one time out of a thousand for arithmetic. Though the t value for spelling was not signif icant, in both analyses the rate of progress was twice the rate normally expected for the particular children and 95 TABLE 6 PRE AND POST MEAN SCORES ON BURK'S BEHAVIOR RATING SCALE AND t TEST VALUE Pre Mean Post Mean Differ- ence a P 93.83 80.83 - 13.50 2.306 < .05 dk = -05 TABLE 7 PRE AND POST MEAN SCORES ON THE SEMANTIC SELF-CONCEPT MEASURING INDEX AND t TEST AUDITORY VALUES Pre Mean Post Differ- Mean ence t p Evaluative scale 19.67 22.33 2.67 1.515 NS Dynamism scale 13 .50 12.83 - .67 .376 NS 96 higher than the gains normally expected for the average child. Table 6 presents the data analysis for the student behavior pattern as measured by Burk's Behavior Rating Scale. The resulting t value is 2.306 which is significant (p < .05) . The student behavior pattern as rated by the teacher showed improvement in the course of the treatment program. Thus, Null Hypothesis C was rejected and the research hypothesis of significant difference between the pre and post levels in the student behavior pattern was found to be tenable. Table 7 presents the findings for the changes in student self-concept as measured by the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index, Evaluative and Dynamism Scales. The resulting t value for the evaluative scale is 1.515, which is not significant. The resulting t value for the dynamism scale was -.376 which is not significant. Inspection of the mean gains in the semantic evaluative scale shows positive gains, while the mean scores in the semantic dynamic scale reflected a slight loss. Thus, Null Hypothesis D was not rejected and the research hypothesis of significant difference between the 97 pre and post levels in student self-concept as measured by the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index was not found to be tenable. The data on daily group mean arithmetic performance rates are shown in Figure 5. The Daily Behavior Charts help to clarify the general trend that occurred during the base line and the treatment period. The vertical axis represents the movement cycles rates per minute. The horizontal axis represents the successive calendar days. As Figure 5 demon strates , baseline data collected over 6 days showed the rates of performance to be relatively slow ranging from 2.79 to 3.10 movements per minute. When the children were first introduced to the treatment program an immediate change in their rates of performance took place. The overall curve for the group indicates a general increase in response frequency throughout the period, ranging from 4.61 to 2 3.68 movements per minute. Figures 6 and 7 illustrate changes in the arithmetic performance rate of two individual cases. (For all individ ual charts, see Appendix J). Case 104 (Fig. 6) exhibits progression in the Learning Behavior System to phase 3, Response Chaining Evaluation; case 110 (Fig. 7) remains throughout the treatment period in phase 2, Response 98 n C A L E N D A R W E E K S upjjMe ! I i 11! 111! i j! ' i I i ; I : ' ! il! I ! ! MI i} i: ! i 1 ! i ! ! I i i i i11 ■ ; I i:: ■ I ;:;! : i I ' I t i l l ' .COo Ariel SUPERVISOR Teacher ADVISER O SQ 70- 80 9 4 S U C C E S S S V E C A L E N D A R D A Y S MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY DAILY BEHAVIOR CHART OC-s' 6 C Y C L E -1 4 0 PAYS <20 WKS.I *. 2 5 £ WAV?CR RESEARCH CC i V ' o u x 33E1 -KANSAS CITY. KAN'S. 05123 W E E K S • r1 gl‘ c jU! t ? e i l l ■ [ h * i 1 1 n j T i i n : j j j j j < f e r c l i t > j i^jec i r | j |4p' p}thji^t! ic e m e r j t i i 1 1 i I j j! . I i; |; : i; ' j 11 n ■ Mi'iiji '!i; iili!!ii!^ | i !|i!!!|!!!i!i ; * : i i ; | . ; iO S 3 s Q • s o s o to trzr* s / ! ■ • <■— *.* i — S U C C E S S I V E C A L E N D A R D A Y S Exp. Group BEHAVcR Arithmetic AGE LABEL . MOVEMENT CHARTER 99 CALENDAR WEEKS L-U-U-L : l ; P T T T rLi * | ----r-t- iU-ii-U . i i k'- 1 — _ ul.i.i i 1. — ■ • i. 4 __- i— ■ ----U— 1 - <_ J-U-I.il i.l.7.: i. 1:: j : 1:1;: I i j 1 i ' l | ■ ii ij- iiiln M Mi1 A : 111 I f i \ | 1 lllll!TITTTT : 114' i 111 ' 1 1 | | Ii! i-u Uhl; 'illHlihlii iihi T!; i ! ! | i 1 i|ii i ii: iljjj! H i 'I; i | ! ill |ip; •III!! i ! h ! / > .obi ! I!M i hi I iNli iijlli i i i i i ! HN'i i ! ! i i i ; I! I : I i . i . : 11 ! ; I . ( ; , I i I J T T T T T ill ! ! ! i i | ■ 'PI 11 • i — ■ ■—— "rTr M — r — --------1 ------ -—► —-- T ' | —--r-m—“T-------- -rh.. rr7T~~1'~~--— — i 11 . ■ ' • : ii ' : I i : I 1 1 I : ; J‘!ii ~ r !'h - r : " I r i TH H I ! 1 IB 1 i I! 1 ! i inn Hi!' H ! , ; Dll i I h ill' i |; ‘: ! 1 1 ■ i 1111 * i; 1111 : H ! 11 i i 1 ; ...... I 1 ! ! I I Hi 1 I i ■ HHi * i 1 ‘ . 11 i ill: l i 1 t ! i Hip illjii 1 1 i ih HHI i ■ ! ! . | i ■ t ■ ’ ! : I lit iHiiihii.ii l!i‘- lilii Ml: i ■ i' •!! ! i! I • i • • I i ! ! i • i ■ < < ‘ i; it;! ! ! I ! ! , it i l — f - T . . ; ■ ! ! . L i l Mill! HI i!'!! I I jTp ilhn i! hi lilll TTT~ TP I i ’ : ‘ j : i : ! ! I : i! i 111 * 11 ‘ i j t | * ! j i | i j j i i l | i i i i ' i ! i i ' i i ' i l! i !: i IN i 11 i 1' O iO 20 SO 40 50 SO 70 SO 91 Ariel Teacher S U C C E S S E V c C A L c K D A R D A Y S SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY DAI.LY SEHAVlCS CHART (DC-3» ■ © C Y C L S -1 4 C PAYS |20v;K S.) f- . • ^ T w w — • **v I M 1 O I »> 1 f“ l~ > E = “ AV:CR nESEARCM CO DUX 33SI-K A N SA S CITY. KANS. G5103 Fl^ute f t djyenjent I I j i u i j I Liu i!!i i Iii11i iii1i!i i i; i :I ji!:!: :!!:: j: ! I: j ; i!!: ' ! ' IHIS i D ' I ' l l ! [ j : ! : ; : P ! * r ■ r ~ 11 , , 1 • • * • » - i ; 1 • « i 1 • ■,. rr L f - ;____ ;__ • — . . . . t --------- L _ ~ — i I 1 1 & & • i j r * { • l ! . I I 1 I1 ' ' 1 • 1 1 ' ' ! 1 • 1 . . • ; ; ; i . r 1 1 t 1 ;1 ; • i 1 . . ■ : i • ■ I . ■ I • . 1 ■ j | | _ j | ! i . j i i j i ' i liilii! 1 '! 1: 1!: i i 1 ? 11 * ‘ ; 1 1 i i ' ■ i i ‘ 1 i ; ! ! j f J f i ; ■ { 1 i 1 i ! 11 ' 1 i • M j | 1 . . :; 1 ! : ! 11? ! I 1 ' ! ; ! ( ' • i'i:h ill m i iniiih In; r:i‘!l!i iMiiiinl l i ! l l ! i | ! i l ! i i | i l ! ! l ! l i ! ! S ! ! j ! ! : i : l . i i E ■ i ■ ■ i ■ ■ i * • ■ 1 ■ j-f , r - ~ :— 1 — i- - - . r , 1: : i . * 1 . 1 » ' t i • ; • I S i t • • ■ i ■ ■ . . ■ . ! . , 1 i i , 1 ! i ; ’ i M » r * • ■ ................... T r r i , r:~r..... ;r r i : : i'T ii r r r - T ;- :;;: r: n ~ ; *i n r : .. rr ..............* ■ : I ..........; . ■ . ■ • ...................... .. • • • • : ■ O S O 60 70 - 80 90 200 UO 3 2 0 2 3 0 S U C C E S S I V E C A L E N D A R D A Y S D o n 14 Arithmetic SEHAVER AGE LABEL . MOVEMENT CHARTER 100 • i .) o CALENDAR WEEKS v c , * >'o= f I C O O 500 5 2 LU J-L i: i [ : TTjTT7 ■ ! Da < i l + i 4 - M l i . imTr Lt in$]EE Lgjuxt i i i l I!1 1 1 I ! I 1 11 Mil; 1 I « i i ! Mil TTTTTi SEE I i i ■ [ I 1 ! i ! I k \ tr t: T L 1 Hi Dvero^ijEf ii:;i . i R a t e s Hill lLL • r I I I nil in 1 I Ml 1! ' • I . i n . : . ; I i ■ I 1111 I i ! ! ! ' : I i i l : ' i > i1 ■ Ii i! I! "i HL 1 • I iiil 'lill t ' ‘ t » | : i I I I I [ B i n . j I i I I iiil:! 1 TTT h i m ; i i 3 Bi i • i ■ j . 1 ! : i ' 1 1 : ! 1 1 j • i i I F ! ; I i - ' .)— - - - - — --------- -— ; ---------- . , , 7 1 1 ; ; ................. .. 'j ■ . , . t — r - 1 — 1— • ; : ~ T : ~ r r r ’ | i T - 1— r. ’ t t - t 1 : i i — 1 1: ! ! 1 ' • I : t 1 ' , i 1 1 • ' i • : ' , , 1 ■ ' ' . ' 1 1 ; ! : ! ' 1 I 1 iiil: i i i 111 ' I I 1 1 ( i i ! ‘! : 11 I ' • ' 1 i : i■ ! ' ! J 1 1 Hi;'! I ‘ ■ 11: i:I: !; j!:i;' :|i ; ijjij ; M ! ! ■ ' ■ ! ;i;i j | i| : . ' i ! :.! iiM hill! I'VlPli I'lli .OOi '111 i ' l l ! I' i! I i n i rm • 11 I i | t ? I - • t • ; I » i r j i i 11 I I ! 1 1 i ! I! i! I ' 11 r r i i i i * i t i l l i i i i i i l i i i i i 1 1 ; i i i i i i I ! i i i I i i i f H ; 1 1 i ! , ' i i i i i ! i ■ ! i - ; i » » I I i i **•*»«#* O !0 20 30 40 50 60 70- 80 9 * A r i e l T e a c h e r S U C C E S 3 E Y E C A L E N D A R D A Y S SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY 100 lAR WEEKS DAILY SEHAVIOr: CH A RT !DC-3l £ CYCLE-'-AC PAYS l?0 WK5.I ; e = m a v :CR RECEA RCH CO,' BOX 3 AS I -KANSAS CITY . KANS. CG103 ; ! ; ■ H I • • ! j • : • i f : ; ! ■ f ■ j ‘ i ; ; - I ' I ' I ; : ' i . i ; l . i T t . i i ; • . i . l i i . r * ' \ i l - — . . . . L i . . . { n - j . . * . ■ 1 j l r * - T T 1 7 ' ^ : ■ i ■ ■" ~ 1 . : i i , ; L i m . . . g . . . . . . . . . . «— i — ; i . > . ; 1 . i ; ■■; ; — : . 1 — ■ ■ 5 . . . . . . . l | l j ' i i i i i i .... • • 1 ' j ! ' | i i I j L 6 » j — ;— i — — ~ ~ . U — < — F I ; t : ! j i ! 1 ! ! ! | i I ! • ! 1 i ; ‘ . ; ! ; » 1 - i | • 1 ; • i ■ . l l M . I 1 1 1 : i r ; I i ! i i ! ■ 1 ! ! , 1 . ; ! j ' : ' T ~ 1 i 1 1 ■ : 1 : . K| | ! A ' ! h j j [ \ i l i i i i i i i i ; i : : ; " i i : n I 1 ■ : 1 1 ' i i ! . . i i i ; ! i l l ! ! ! i i i i ! ! l l * i l i l i l f j i i ! | i ' ! i • ; ' ; i • ! | ; | l - : ! : ' KUl. ■ * ', ‘tm I JL ^ : ■!;— - . . • • 1 • • ' • ! ' • ' j ' f ! 1 — ---- -1 ------ -----!- j' ■: j:! rr U „i-t . . . . 1 . 1 r * r - • i i •— ■ i ■ — * • ! • ! 1 M I ■ i r I > ! i l ■ 1 III! i > 1 • > • j ! • i i ■ i • 1 r ; ' : ' ' i ■ M -11' 1. : i- . 1r: . tt: -. II- 1 , I • i i' i1: ■ 11 i i ■ i •! I:; -ii i ■ i: i i i I i ! i! i I ! i j; (i! < i i i ■ •: i s; i ■ • ! 1 i i ■ i ! ! | ! M ! ' i i : ! | i1'1 i | ! ; : j ! 1 ! i ! ! i i !!'!:!! ! m h M i . . i ‘ i . i ■ . . > j ■ - H - - - - - - r — ! • I : I . . i . 4 • , 1 ~ r T • • • t " . . . . . . . . . r p i 1 : ■ i ' • ’ • 1 ■ . ■ i r , ■■ r i ' r - i : | : i ■ ' : - • ’ ' 1 ’ j < ■ ' - j . - - j - - - - - 1 I n ! . ■ D | i ■ - : ' ; | i * • ! ; i 1 • 1 • i ' ! : > i : * 1 j ■ 1 1 ; ; i I 1 ! 1 : ' ! ' l : - ! : i ! : I l l : 1 ■ 1 ’ : : i i : i i i i 1 * : ! ; i i l i i i i i ' j l i l i i l i i T - i i ‘ i i j l i ! I i i i 1 ' i ; " ! ! ! i ; 1 !i i i ! ■ ! I ! I ; I ill 11 I»I! •! f •1 ! 11 • i I. j i i;' 11111 t 40 50 60 70 • 80 90 5 0 0 S I O 5 0 0 !3 C 8 4 - 3 S U C C E S S I V E C A L E N D A R D A Y S Ralph 13.5 Arithmetic BEHAVER AGE LABEL . MOVEMENT CHARTER i i ! ! ter- 101 Chaining. As can be seen, the introduction of treatment brought about marked changes in both cases. The rate of performance during the baseline was consistent and rela tively slow ranging from 1.621 to 3.333 for case 104 and from 3.093 to 4.500 for case 110. The overall curve indi cates a general increment in response frequency during the treatment period ranging from 1.807 to 10.2 00 movements per minute for case 104, and from 5.666 to 27.200 movements per minute for case 110. It is interesting to note that the rate of responses of the individual 110, who remained in the same phase of the Learning Behavior System, remained rela tively consistent, while the curve of responses of the indi vidual 104, who moved to a higher phase on the hierarchy of the Learning Behavior System, shows a greater improvement. Consideration of the rates of responses of all the children who progressed through the Learning Behavior System shows the same trend of continuous increase in rate of responses when they moved to a higher phase of the hierarchy. Figure 8 shows the data on the daily group mean cor rect arithmetic performance. This time the vertical axis represents the correct movement cycles rates per minute. The baseline data collected over 6 days showed a fairly con stant and relatively slow rate of correct responses, ranging V . C A L E N D A R W E E K S 5 0 0 jcidrajrdcjt iffrifcrraetji|c ! I ! 1 1 1 i i ‘ 1 i i f I i i ! i I j i ; I ! I O I O SO 30 40 50 60 70 80 S A r i e l T e a c h e r S U G C E S S S V e C A L E N D A R D A Y S MANAGER SUPERVISOR ADVISER DEPOSITOR AGENCY 0 102 • E K S DAILY 9EKAV'.’ OR CHART !DC-3' 6 C Y C L E —1 <10 PAYS <20 WKS.I RE3EARCH CO. POX 33SI-KANSAS CITY. KANS. 05123 r 12 f I i : i ; t 1 I III- mi ! ! i i » " ! i i , n! ■ i' I rrrr ' I ' i I ■ I I ! -LU- : i! > t; I m j i, : i III: ii''' i!;'! : j ? ; | { ■ 1 1 ; . : i j • ( ~ i '• i i i l i i ; I j ' I ; ! M i ; m ' ! j ; ! j ! j ; ■ ! i i 1 1 •' I ' I i I ! I i i | • 1 1 ’ ! I! M1 • . i ' 1 * I 1 1 1 iil'i 1 1 1 ! | ' 1 1 1 i j ! 1 1 ; 1 1 1 j i | ! ; ’ j ■ I m ' j * i i l ! ! j 1 I 1 1 j i j 1 i ; | j 1 1 ! 1 1 1 M , i ' I ! I ! i i l b l i i i i l : 1 I ‘ 1 i! ; f' ■ -■I*,, i ■ . 1 . . : . , . . . . . . I ■ ' • ■!■■■<■■■! K B ' : j , ♦ , i • • ! I M 1 1 ' I i i ! ' i M : i ■ i . T . r - . i n ! ■ 1 ■ i ! ' : ' i ■ : ] ! ! ■ ' - " I : 1 ' : ' . ; ! 1 ; ■ ■ • i I i . ! i • ' I I 1 ■ • ; t I i i i l 1 ' ! : ’ I , : i • ! 1 1 1 ! ■ ! i i i ' : " I ' i i i ' ‘ : j 1 3 ’ ! t >' : ' : • i i I ' ! : ' i ; ' i ; i f f ' 1 ' ■ n ■ . ; : r " ~ - i T n r i v t : t “ r r i “ ■ . M ■ • , • : . j ; i ' i . . : i i i - T 7 f - T - 1 f 1 J \ 1 I 1 • ' i ■ 1 ' ' ) i : : t > : ■ t . » • « I i i • » • : 1 1 ; ; i ■ | i ! * • i • ■ : 1 t 1 1 . J • 1 * n i i i i : i I ! ; ! | j i ' : • ! | ! j 1 i1 v i i i i M i i i i M i M M t i ! ' 1 i ! 1 ’ 1 1 : ! ' B M l I W\\v- i l i l i : n i l i ! ! i ! l H ! 1 : 1 1 1 : : i i r n ? f * ’ * I M t T j i M j l l l i i i l i ! : ! 1 ! . \ ] M l l i n i ; l i i i i j j i : 1 ! ; 1 ! : ; ! 1 ! : ill III. 7 0 • P O S W w w SO so S U C C E S S I V E C A L E K 3 A R D A Y S o too ho s : Exp. Group BEHAVER Correct Arithmetic AGE LAEEL . . MOVEMENT !1| m 103 from 2.53 to 2.84 correct movements per minute. When the children were first introduced to the treatment, an immedi ate positive change took place in their rate of correct movements, and was maintained throughout the treatment period. Although some rates are very slow they nevertheless represent an improvement. They range from 3.75 to 2 3.55 correct movements per minute. This positive trend can also be seen in the individual case illustrated by Figure 9. For the remaining individual daily Behavior Charts see Appendix Figure 9 shows the data on the daily group mean neg ative off-task behavior. Student behavior not oriented toward classroom activities such as running, yelling, swear ing, hitting, kicking (see Appendix I) was classified as negative off-task behavior. The vertical axis represents the off-task movement rate per day. As can be seen in Figure 9 the rate of negative off-task behavior was constant and relatively high during the baseline, ranging from 10.40 to 11.66 movements per day. A marked decrease in overall rate of negative off-task behavior, ranging from 1.00 to 7.60 movements per day, took place.when the training program was initiated, although some rates remained relatively high. In some instances, as illustrated in Figure 10, when the 104 C A L E N D A R W E E K S I ! ! I i ! I ! ! : ! i i C2 bi Q. ! / 5 • Z LU 2 UJ > o 2 I .5 .1 .05 .Q\ .005 .obi I i i i i i i i i I i M i l 15!! I I I i i! I 11! ’ LjL 'III I I I IT^T i I ! i I i I I I ! ! ! t r -------- : 11 ■■' i ! , f !!'■!! iv r '* ■ 1 » i ! ‘ : i ! i i ! ! M - .. ! 1 ——k — .- “HI ' i i n ■ 1 ......... . r i • T f - T - T - • i i > i| ■ m i l 1 i 1:1 I ' : ; 1 H i m i 1 1 : J 1 I j ; . ( i I 1 I j ! ! ; ; M | ( . i , i 1 ’ I t ! ' ! ! ’ ' ; ! ■ ‘ | ■'III! Ii! ii II |l| n i l 1 1 ! ill! 1 ■Ml*. !i| ill 1 Iil | jl H i ■ i 1 i 11 i l i 1 1 i i i i i ] !!!! i i ' ii ii! i t I |ii i 1 1 1 i ! | i l l i i i : ' ! h iilii i I’ 11 * ! l :l! j;i; il i i i i iii'i - f r - r liii ! ! I l i i t i II i i L ill li ii i l i ; i 111! i'il! iiil' + + HI i | »; \ !: III' 111 ■:; i 11 ■; h 'It ; tr i : i 'i iT r r ii r r ; I i i i M i i :i ■ : ; I.: u. : I ■ r —»TT—r - i - t < | ; 1 1 I i I f i ! I • I : 11:1 ji ii! iij I iji Ii 11 i1 jIj ‘, i: I; i i ! 11 |! !i! iiii ill! 1 : i I III * f • • ' I • ! » • > liii! ji i i j i j. I ! I I i i I ' iiii i! iiii! I! *1 1 i ; l ;;i; !'!:v: i r ;~TT:; • 1 1 ! j ! 1 i1! i • !: I i 1 ! I ' ' ' I ; : I i O IO 20 ' 30 40 50 SO 70 80 9* A r i e l T e a c h e r - S U C C E S S I V E C A L E N D A R D A Y S SUPERVISOR DEPOSITOR ADVISER MANAGER AGENCY 0 AILY SEHAV!GP CHART DC-3» Y C L f i - U O p a y s l?0 WK5.J t p t ^ A v ' . C R RE SEARCH CO. f V rir;X 335) -KANSAS CITY . KANS. 05153 i i i S i i i l l i l i h r i i i l ' i i ■'] QffrfTas^ i L S i I l i i i i i i i i ! | ! hi mi; • :n iiii 1 : i ! II ! :l! r, i H; i i! ii.il! : ! • : I ' i i I I I i i ' 'ii Hi.'iMiiii i!!l:: !i|!l iilhi Mil i l l ! i l n l g 50 '(50 /O- 80 SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS > soo no Exp. Group BEHAVER CHARTER " ;cr s .ww i i * t w Off-Task Behavior AGE LABEL . ■ MOVEMENT w tei . 1 j 1 i i J i ii 105 O IOOO 500 o M W t CALENDAR WEEKS fO O 50 j- t o i s Cl L U i n H " Z U 1 2 L U .05 .O l .005 .obi IlUj ! ' I ! I ' l l ! ' i l l . i i l i j rtrrrr: i! ~~r, il iii i ! I! I! I I I I I ' M ilhi m 2 S S 3 11H11 ! l i i i !!i -HH I !| I ! i ! ' I H i T T iT T T _ u i f e i i i Him H i ! : ;i» i ! I i III I I'i ■ ' ■ I r r r r TTTTT liiiil i 1 i 1 1 TtTT i i! i I ■ ' I M i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 } ;J?Ma& h 1 1 • I i liiiil nrrr T T “rrM 8 -U- 1 2 M M fij- g u rie l i a t m i i ; i : ; i i U JJ i i j ■ 1 1 . i ■ i , ■ M * t * ! a .i E k l j B e h a v f l o r i . B j a f c l g s i i i l i i i i ! I ! i Mliil in.i: M l ; i l l i i MjiMIMjl M i ! I I Mi! :i!M; l i i ! II I I ' ! l ! 'Mi I > Hi 11 1 MM I 1 !! il! : i i II!' IM i i j i ■ I!: • j11 i: 11: ' I 'M:T 1 1 : U ib ‘ M i M M i I MI 1 1 i M i li' M . i i h !Si Mi' i'i- M H l i ; i I ! ir i f l ! rr! ii ii EW t ttf H W H Mii t l i *!• ; i ' 1 ii« : ! i : :.!, I i ! I Ivl ; i ! i i i i : 1 1 1 f i i 111. ■ IM > : 'Mill ttM HIM # ' » ■ M i l ! M i l l ! 1 1 1 I ! : ■Mil ! I Ml . • | • « i , • • i » • ■ • ’ * i * • • i • i I • i • . i . j ' i i i I « i i i i r • » » I i i i * i i * • O !0 SO A r i e l T e a c h e r 20 40 50 60 70.- 3 0 91 SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY DAILY SEHAVIOR CHART !DC-8I AYS 120 ftKS.l b e s e * r c k c o , KANSAS C ITY . KANS. C-6133 s ' yRTV £- C Y C L E - M O CA 3 E “ AV!OR FiESE V C V BOX 33SI -KANSi WEEKS i i l g g p sgi<ip2|iTj h^vajori ^at€ i I ! l i i i ! ! l ! i ! l i ' ! ' ! • ; - : 1 ; ' 8 : 1 : 1 " ' I ' : I . : : i ! 11 i ! h ! ' • i j j j • 1 ■ ; ! I 11; I 1 1 i I 1' 11 ! • ■!! 11 ‘ 11 111 !!i ‘ I i ! ' | i I ! i ! i | j1 ‘:;1U • ' i';1111: 1 i H11:1 j i} j: j 11; i i • I ■ ! I : i : I j I 1 1 1 i ! • i i 1 ' • ! . * ! * • • ! ( . * • ' 1 r 1 iiil. ;i: ''I : I • ! f f ■ ■ i I ; I i ; ; i ‘ i ' i I 1 * ! : i j i ! ; ; t j ! I i | i i i i KO 50 60 T O - 80 90 \QO B E O J 20 SUCCESSsvE CALENDAR DAYS Off-Task 12.7 AGE ‘ LABEL . MOVEMENT BEHAVER CHARTER 106 experimental treatment was introduced the student's negative off-task behavior was at once reduced, remained consistently low, and by the end of the period was almost entirely elimi nated . Analysis of the data obtained during the baseline and the treatment period is shown in Table 8. The resulting t value for negative off-task behavior is 10.589 which is highly significant (p < .001). The resulting t value for the arithmetic movement rate was 8.029 which is also highly significant (p < .001). The resulting t value for correct arithmetic movement is 7.581 which is also highly signifi cant (p < .001). A difference as large as that indicated by this analysis would occur by chance less than one time out of a thousand. Thus Null Hypothesis E was rejected, and the research hypothesis of significant difference in the rate of negative student off-task behavior, arithmetic movement and correct arithmetic movement, between the baseline and the treatment period was found to be tenable. Table 9 summarizes the results of analysis of the academic performance of the male experimental group and the comparison group. The resulting t value in reading is 2.685 which is significant (p < .05). The resulting t value for arithmetic is 6.217, which is highly significant (p < .001). 107 TABLE 8 MEAN RATES OF ARITHMETIC MOVEMENT, CORRECT ARITHMETIC MOVEMENT, AND OFF-TASK BEHAVIOR IN BASELINE AND TREATMENT PERIOD AND t TEST VALUES Means Rates Baseline Treatment Period Differ- . a t P ence Arithmetic movement 2 .94 8.10 5.90 8.029 < .001 Correct arithmetic movement 2.58 8.32 5.75 7.581 < .001 Off-task behavior 11.18 2 .92 8.25 10.589 < .001 aoC = .05 108 TABLE 9 MEAN MONTHLY ACHIEVEMENT SCORE GAINS AND t TEST VALUES FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND COMPARISON GROUPS FOR MALE SUBJECTS Mean Experimental Gains Mean Comparison Gains Differ ence t a P Reading 12.500 4.143 8 .357 2 .685 < .05 Arith metic 16 .00 3.286 12.714 6.217 < .001 Spelling .334 - 3.571 3.905 1.584 NS 109 The resulting t value for spelling is 1.584 which is not significant. Thus, Null Hypothesis F for reading and arith metic was rejected and the research hypothesis of signifi cant differences between the comparison group and the male experimental group was found to be tenable. Inspection of the mean spelling scores shows that the experimental group did relatively better than the comparison group, although these differences were found not to be significant. CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND LIMITATIONS Discussion The results of this experiment clearly demonstrate that the development of the Behavioral Learning Model, which consists of the Learning Behavior System (the reinforcing events and feedback mechanism) and the Basic Instruction Model (prescriptive diagnostic teaching), seems to consti tute an important advance toward a more effective educa tional environment for junior high school students. The experimental data gathered in the present study showed that the students1 academic performance and the student behavior patterns both improved greatly. The treatment procedures seemed to be highly effective. Behavioral changes were largely salutary and developed with considerable rapidity. The academic gains in reading and arithmetic were remarkable and far beyond expectations. As indicated in the data analysis in Tables 4 and 5, there were significant 110 Ill iifferences between the expected gains, both for the educa tionally handicapped child and the "normal" child, and the actual obtained gains in reading and arithmetic. In the comparison with the expected mean gain for the educationally aandicapped student, the resulting t value in reading is 4.197 (p < .01), and the resulting t value in arithmetic is 7.401 (p < .001). In the comparison with the expected aca demic gains of the normal child, the resulting t value in reading is 3.921 (p < .01), and the resulting t value in arithmetic is 7.096 (p < .001). Though spelling did not reach the statistically significant level, the achievement gain was almost twice the normally expected gain for the educationally handicapped child and surpassed the predict able gain for the "normal" child during this period which was taken to be 1.75 months. The rate of progress is a most important factor, for if children with educational handicaps are to return to the mainstream of public school instruction, they must bridge the academic gap which will tend to be wide by the time the children are adolescent— they may be three or four years behind in some subjects. The rate of acceleration must therefore be even higher than that expected for the normal child. The mean score gains in both reading and arithmetic 112 in this study indicate the possibility we are approaching this goal. These academic gains were further substantiated by the statistical data gathered using a comparison group. The result of the analysis of the two groups as shown in Table 9 indicates the significant differences obtained in reading (t = 2.685; p < .05) and in arithmetic (t = 6.217; p < .001). Though spelling was found not to be statisti cally significant, the experimental group did better than the comparison group. The most impressive gains in the academic areas, and the substantial changes in the performance rate and the quality of work, can be attributed to systematic teaching combined with systematic reinforcement and feedback mecha nisms deliberately designed to foster increased self- motivation. The positive feedback reinforcement resulted in the students' greater self-confidence and more positive feelings toward the school situation. These results are in accordance with those of Hurlock (1925), who found that children who were constantly praised for their work did sig nificantly better than those who were ignored or reproved. In addition the experience of success in school is a most powerful intrinsic motivation of enjoyment in the act 113 3f learning. Success in one task spurs the student to attempt other tasks that may be more difficult. The student with a pattern of successful achievement approaches a new learning situation with greater confidence (Sears, 1953). The use of self-evaluative techniques in the appli cation of behavior therapy to older children seems to be quite effective. The self-evaluation technique initially supplements the token reinforcers and later on becomes the main factor in the individual's ability to achieve self- control. The individual who is able to evaluate himself realistically as "good" in some respect gains in self-regard and is helped to achieve a sense of identity— a most signif icant consideration for adolescents. A remarkable aspect of the students' self- evaluations in this study was their accuracy. Their rating of their daily performances as poor, fair or good almost always agreed with the teacher's evaluation. This suggests that students are very well aware of the value of their own performances in the teacher's eyes, and in the light of the importance of success as a motivator, the lesson to the teacher is clear. If a youngster is performing badly or only moderately well, he will be well aware of it; if he is 114 bo maintain interest and a belief in his own abilities, the tasks must be adapted so that he does experience success. n It is unfortunate that it is so difficult to record and evaluate changes in self-concept. The changes obtained in this study from the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index were statistically insignificant. This may be explained by the small number of items on the evaluative scale, which pertains to the attitudinal variable in human thinking, and the inconsistent responses on the dynamism scale, which is concerned with power and things associated with it, size, weight, toughness and the like (Osgood, 1957) . . Nevertheless, the teacher observed what appeared to be clear indications of characterological changes— greater cheerfulness, resourcefulness and adaptability, particularly among the students who made the highest academic gains, The student behavior pattern largely improved. The teacher reported that the children were engaged in produc tive activities most of the time. The data analysis on the pre and post levels of Burk's Behavior Rating Scale indi cated significant change (t = 2.306; p < .05) (Table 6). The assessments were further substantiated by the decrease in negative off-task behavior (Fig. 10), which occurred because maladaptive behaviors were not reinforced and 115 therefore no longer "paid off" (Hewett, 1958). The children were motivated to perforin appropriately and less motivated to engage in maladaptive behavior. They became actively engaged in class work, were much more alert, and showed greater independence, original ity and initiative. They acquired habits of resourcefulness and self-help, listened more attentively, followed direc tions more independently and contributed to classroom dis cussions. Since they focused their attention better on their task, the accuracy and quality of their work immensely increased. With success and self-respect, moreover, came a greater ability to accept responsibility and to be thought ful of the rights and feelings of others. Significant differences between the baseline and the treatment period were found in the arithmetic performance rate (t = 8.029; p < .001), in the correct arithmetic per formance rate (t = 7.581; p < .001) and in the off-task behavior rate (t = 10.589; p < .001) (Table 8). These find ings are further substantiated by observation of the daily behavioral charts (Figs. 5, 8, 9). Marked change in the response frequency occurred immediately following the insti tution of the program. Both the arithmetic performance rate and the correct arithmetic performance rate kept at a much 116 higher level throughout the treatment period, while the off- task behavior rate decreased markedly, almost to the point of extinction in some cases. Investigation into the base line data shown in Figures 5, 6, and 7 also indicates posi tive changes in the rate of responses, an improvement which generally remained quite constant as progress occurred through the LBS. Before the program was initiated some concern was felt concerning the criteria that the teacher should use in determining when each child should move to the next phase of the LBS. In practice, such decisions were not difficult to make. It was readily apparent when the desired behavior for the next phase had been acquired, and it was found that the students retained and refined their more sophisticated behavior in the new phase despite the shift of format of operant methodology. In the one case in which the teacher was in doubt, the student himself indicated that he was not ready to assume the responsibilities characteristic of the next phase (Response Chaining Evaluation). Three weeks later the student told the teacher that he felt he was ready to be moved to the next phase, an evaluation with which the teacher agreed. 117 This movement from one phase to the next helps the student to ascend from the plateaus that normally occur when the effect of reinforcers wears off. When this happens the teacher should assess the child's level of functioning and make a decision accordingly. Sometimes heavier backup rein forcers may be needed. More often the teacher would be wise to place the child in an interim phase, gradually introduc ing him to full responsibilities of the new phase. The progression along the LBS continuum is conducted at the rate of which the individual is capable. This may vary from child to child, depending upon his initial level of functioning and his rate of progress. It is possible for an entire group to be functioning in the same phase on the continuum, bur more often they will be in various phases. As the individual advances through the phases of the LBS he moves from the more simple to the more complex, from the more undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and abstract, from dependency upon extrinsic to intrinsic reinforcement. The successive phases follow a sequential developmental progression, in line with well- known theorists such as Spencer (1897), Weis (1939), Murphy (1947), Piaget (1926, 1929, 1932, 1951), and Werner (1957). 118 The individual proceeds from primarily an associative type of learning through cognition to self-directed learning. It should be noted that the program was implemented in the course of the teacher's regular teaching assignment, and her training took place during the experiment period. She was able to examine and put into effect the methods and techniques as the program progressed, a feat which suggests the practicality of helping children through this combina tion of reinforcement and feedback with diagnostic prescrip tive teaching. Implications An unusual aspect of this program has been the focus on junior high school students, in which it differs from most studies involving operant methodology. The learning disorders of the older child are more complex and fraught with the emotional consequences of failure (Haring, 1967). A good remedial program must therefore be sophisticated. It needs to be based on diagnostic prescriptive teaching with the use of a continuous reinforcement and feedback mecha nism. The Behavioral Learning Model— which consists of the Learning Behavior System (the reinforcing events and feed back mechanism) combined with the Basic Instruction Model 119 (prescriptive diagnostic teaching)— constitutes an adequate program for the adolescent with learning disabilities. Each of these elements could be used independently of the others; but to achieve an optimum educational therapeutic environ ment a combination of both is recommended. The teacher assumed a new role. She was not a dis ciplinarian and a dispenser of facts, but a specialized edu cator, trained in therapeutic teaching procedures, using a scientific method, the continuous feedback mechanism, geared to humanistic goals: the intrinsically motivated develop ment of the whole child, his ability to learn, his self- concept, his ability to be self-directed and his concern for others. The classroom could be viewed as a laboratory geared to self-development in which teachers are sensitive to feelings and values, and alert to encourage the students to evaluate their activities, and to examine their ideas, thoughts and feelings about themselves. In a general sense S-R, cognitive and self-directive theories provided the framework and direction for this investigation. Within this general framework, the focus was upon an integrated associative, cognitive and self-directive approach to learning, upon sequential developmental 120 progression from the undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and cognitive. Limitations The writer points to certain limitations in the study. A truly randomsample was impossible to obtain within the practical limits of this study, since there are few public school districts available with a sufficient num ber of educationally handicapped junior high school class rooms. The number of children in this project was rela tively small and no claim is made with regard to the homo geneity of the two groups, except that both meet the State EH criteria. It should be understood that this paper is more in the nature of a progress report of on-going work on the Behavioral Learning Model than a finished study. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a therapeutic teaching approach on the behavior, learning and personality development of the adolescent with learning disabilities. This therapeutic teaching approach is based explicitly or implicitly on an integrated associa tive, cognitive and self-directive approach to learning. The author has attempted to formulate a Behavioral Learning Model which is comprised of a Learning Behavior System (the reinforcing events and feedback mechanism) and a Basic Instruction Model (prescriptive diagnostic teaching). This approach has the goal of providing a student with an educa tional program adjusted to his individual needs and provid ing appropriate motivation, so that optimum learning can take place. It is aimed at gradually rehabilitating the learner into the mainstream of the school environment. 121 122 The sample consisted of eighteen junior high school students attending two EH classrooms in the same public school in Southern California. The children in the sample were already divided into two classes, one of twelve chil dren (six boys and six girls), and one of six children (boys only). The larger class was designated by the coordinator of special education as the experimental group, and the smaller as the comparison group. At the outset and at the close of the program a WRA Level II was administered to both groups, by the district school psychologist. The experimental group was also admin istered the Burk's Behavior Rating Scale and a Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index. In addition Lindsly's precision teaching technique as an assessment measure of performance was carried out for arithmetic per formance, correct arithmetic performance and off-task behavior. The Learning Behavior System as a treatment proce dure was included in the experimental group. Other than that the group was conducted according to conventional methods, but working towards the principles contained in the Basic Instruction Model. The program was implemented in the course of the teacher's regular teaching assignment: her 123 braining took place during the experimental period. The comparison group was conducted according to conventional nethods, but no restriction was placed upon the teacher with regard to using reinforcement techniques that he normally used. The treatment period consisted of seven school weeks. The writer postulates six phases within the Learning Behavior System. Phase 1. Response Phase 2. Response Chaining Phase 3. Response Chaining Evaluation Phase 4. Self-Regulation Phase 5. Directional Evaluation Phase 6. Self-Direction The Basic Instruction Model involves seven educa tional variables considered to be of predominant therapeutic relevance. 1. The functional diagnostic procedures 2. The prescriptive educational environment program 3. The prescriptive educational program and objectives 4. The prescriptive educational procedures, methods and techniques 5. The developmental curriculum 124 6. Educational management with teaching strategy 7. Individualized instruction These variables are clustered into four main phases of the Basic Instruction Model: A. Analysis of the learner B. Analysis of the educational environment C. Programming D. implementation The Learning Behavior System (LBS) is a hierarchical reinforcement system in which the reinforcement methodology is shifted according to the phase of learning behavior to which the child has attained. It assumes that various phases of learning take place, and that transition from one phase to the other can be accomplished through scientifi cally controlled procedures based on operant methodology. Successive phases follow a sequential developmental progres sion from the undifferentiated and concrete to the more highly integrated and abstract, from dependency on extrinsic to intrinsic reinforcement. Each of the postulated phases of learning begins with a different state of the organism and ends with a dif ferent capability for performance. The initial assignment 125 to the appropriate phases of the LBS is determined by means of the Student Behavior Pattern Check List. In phase 1 the student was given a contingent rein forcement for each response in the academic areas as well as in social areas. The reinforcement was given in the form of candy, money, credits, or other forms preferred by the stu dent. In addition to receiving concrete reinforcers the student was reinforced by the teacher's approval, expressed through smiles, hugs, a pat on the back and comments such as good, very good, etc. In phase 2 the student was provided with a daily work schedule sheet which indicated what was expected from him. It described the daily classroom activities for both the individual and the group. The student was given contin gent reinforcement in the form of credits upon completion of the tasks described in the daily work schedule. The student was also reinforced at a fixed interval of 25 minutes if he had behaved as a responsible student. As in phase 1 the student continued to be reinforced verbally. Toward the end of the day the student discussed his daily work and eval uated it as poor, fair or good. The child was reinforced for realistic evaluations. 126 In phase 3 the student work in each academic area was subdivided to include (1) accuracy, (2) organization and neatness, (3) task completion, (4) performance of individual tasks, (5) student self-evaluation. The student was rein forced for each sub-area. The individual task may vary from day to day, according to the student's specific needs. The student evaluated his work during the specific session as poor, fair or good. The student was reinforced when his evaluation matched the teacher's evaluation. The rest of the procedures were the same as for phase 2. In phase 4 each academic area was subdivided as in phase 3, but the student evaluated his own work and rein forced himself according to each sub-area, and also accord ing to his behavior as a responsible student at 25-minute intervals. The teacher reinforced the student for matched self-reinforcement and matched self-evaluation. The teacher also used verbal reinforcement as in previous phase. In phase 5, the academic areas were no longer sub divided. The student evaluated his work for the complete session and reinforced himself on an all-or-nothing basis. The student was reinforced verbally only for matched self- evaluation and matched self-reinforcement. 127 In phase 6 the student continued to evaluate his work for the entire session and received the teacher's ver bal feedback as to his performance. The students traded their credits for activities agreed upon by the students and the teacher— for example, free activity time, special activ ity unit, watching television, going to lunch early and so on. The successive phases of the LBS reflect the child's progression from the initial day of special classroom place ment to the final days. Once desired behaviors are acquired a change of phase and a shift of format of operant methodol ogy takes place in accordance with the individual's specific needs. The implementation may vary from child to child, depending upon his initial level of functioning and his rate of progress. It is possible for an entire group to be on ~ the same phase, but most often they will be in various phases because of the individual differences. The experimental data gathered in the present study showed great improvement in the student's academic perfor mance and the student behavior pattern. The treatment pro cedures seemed to be highly effective. Behavioral changes were largely salutary and developed with considerable rapidity. 128 The academic gains in reading and arithmetic were remarkable and far beyond expectations. As indicated in the lata analysis in Tables 4 and 5 there were significant dif ferences between the normally expected gains both for the educationally handicapped and the "normal" child and the actual obtained gains in reading and arithmetic. In com parison to the expected mean gain for the educationally handicapped student, the resulting t value in reading is 4.197 (p < -01), and the resulting t value in arithmetic is 7.401 (p < .001). In comparison to the expected academic gains of the normal child, the resulting t value in reading is 3.921 (p < .01), and the resulting t value in arithmetic is 7.096 (p < .001). Though spelling did not reach the statistically significant level, the rate of progress was almost twice as much as the normally expected gain for the EH child and surpassed the predictable gains for the "normal" child during this period which was taken to be 1.75 months. These academic gains were further substantiated by the statistical data gathered using a comparison group. The result of the analysis of the two groups as shown in Table 9 indicates the significant difference obtained in reading (t = 2.685; p < .05) and in arithmetic (t = 6.217; 129 p < .001)* though spelling was found not statistically significant, the experimental group did better than the com parison group. The student behavior pattern largely improved. The data analysis on the pre and post level of Burk's Behavior Rating Scale indicated significant change (t = 2.306; p < .05) (Table 6). This assessment was further substan tiated by the marked decrease in negative off-task behavior (Fig. 9). The teacher reported that the children were engaged in productive activities most of the time, they were motivated to perform appropriately and less motivated to engage in maladaptive behavior. The changes obtained in this study from the Semantic Auditory Self-Concept Measuring Index are statistically insignificant. Nevertheless the teacher observed what appeared to be clear indications of characterological changes; greater cheerfulness, resourcefulness and adapta bility, particularly among the students who made highest gains. Significant differences between the baseline and the treatment period were found in arithmetic performance rate (t = 8.029; p < .001), in the correct arithmetic 130 performance rate (t = 7.581; p < .001) and in the off-task behavior rate (t = 10.589; p < .001). These findings are further substantiated by observation of the daily behavioral charts (Figs. 5, 8, 9); marked changes in the response fre quency occurred immediately following the institution of the program. Both the arithmetic performance rate and the cor rect arithmetic performance rate kept at a much higher level throughout the treatment period, while the off-task behavior rate decreased markedly, almost to the point of extinction in some cases. The results of this experiment clearly demonstrate that the application of the Behavioral Learning Model, which consists of the Learning Behavior System (the reinforcing events and feedback mechanism) and the Basic Instruction Model (prescriptive diagnostic teaching), constitutes an important advance toward a more effective educational environment for the adolescent with learning disabilities. APPENDICES 131 APPENDIX A STUDENT BEHAVIOR PATTERN CHECK LIST AND STUDENT BEHAVIOR PATTERN PROFILE SHEET 132 133 STUDENT BEHAVIOR PATTERN CHECK LIST Name_____________________________ Age_______Grade________ Evaluated by_______________________________ Date__________ (Please check the most appropriate descriptive statement about the student) 1. Ability to respond to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. ______Does not respond to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. ______Attempts to respond to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. ______Responds to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. ______Responds readily to an appropriate stimulus as defined by the teacher. 2. Ability to pay attention. ______Very short attention span, unable to sit still for any period of time. ______Has a limited attention span, can attend for short periods of time. ______Has a longer attention span, can attend for a full session. ______Has a long attention span. 3. Ability to work independently. ______Demands complete attention of the teacher. ______Demands a great deal of the teacher's attention. Occasionally demands the teacher's attention. ______Rarely demands the teacher's attention. ______Is able to work independently. 134 4. Ability to complete assigned academic tasks. ______Does not apply himself to assigned academic tasks. ______Makes an attempt to approach assigned academic tasks. ______Completes at least 80 per cent of assigned academic tasks. ______Completes more than 80 per cent of assigned academic tasks. ______Completes assigned academic tasks. 5. Ability to shift from one activity to another. ______Unable to shift from one activity to another with out great difficulty. Is able to shift from one activity to another with out great difficulty. _____JEs able to shift from one activity to another with ease. 6. Ability to accept criticism. ______Unable to accept criticism. ______Is able to tolerate a minimum amount of criticism. ______Is able to accept criticism. ______Is able to accept criticism with ease. 7. Ability to manifest self-control. ______Frequent explosive and unpredictable behavior (temper tantrums and outbursts). ______Occasional tantrums and outbursts. ______Rarely manifests tantrums and outbursts. ______Generally manifests good self-control. ______Manifests very good self-control. 135 8. Ability to control socially disapproved speech and habit patterns. ______ Frequently uses socially disapproved speech and habit patterns. ______Occasionally uses socially disapproved of speech and habit patterns. ______Rarely uses socially disapproved of speech and habit patterns. ______Does not use socially disapproved of speech and habit patterns. 9. Ability to initiate contact with other students in related school activities. ______Never initiates contact with others concerning related school activities. ______Rarely initiates contact with other students in related school activities. ______Occasionally initiates contact with other students in related school activities. ______Often initiates contact with other students in related school activities. 10. Ability to work in group situations. ______Is unable to work in group situations. ______Is able to work in small groups. ______Tolerates work in a large group. ______Is able to work well in a large group. 136 11. Ability to see relationship between cause and effect and to make evaluations. Unable to see relationship between cause and effect. _______Begins to see relationship between cause and effect, attempts evaluations. _______Sees relationship between cause and effect— makes evaluations. _______Is able to evaluate his work in terms of task analysis. _______Is able to evaluate his work in accordance with the required standards. _______Is able to evaluate his work and make decisions as to the course of action he should follow. 13 7 STUDENT BEHAVIOR PATTERN PROFILE SHEET Behavior Teacher's Category LBS Phases Comments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 APPENDIX B STUDENT DIAGNOSTIC PROFILE 138 139 STUDENT DIAGNOSTIC PROFILE Student's Name____________ B.D._________ C.A.____ Grade_ Child's Deficits (-) and Strengths (+) 1. Sensory Modalities ______Visual Auditory______Haptic 2. Memory ______Visual-Motor______ Auditory-Vocal_____ Haptic 3. Conceptual Mode ______Concrete Functional______Abstract 4. Child's abilities in ______Association among modalities ______Visualization ______Analysis, synthesis & reproduction of patterns ______Substitution of one symbol for another ______Common-sense judgement (cause and effect) Additional Observations: Perception and Sensory Motor Development Language and Verbal Expression Higher Cognitive Processes Emotional and Social Development APPENDIX C ACADEMIC EVALUATION SUMMARY 140 141 ACADEMIC EVALUATION Language Arts: Reading a. Skills b. Comprehension Language a. Oral communication b. Written communication c. Spelling d. Handwriting Arithmetic a. Computation b. Concepts c. Application Social Studies a. Information b. Concepts Study Skills a. Location Skills b. Organization Skills Work Habits a. Individual Activities b. Group Activities Social Skills a. Relationship to other students b. Relationship to adults c. Major interests d. Most effective reinforcements APPENDIX D ASSESSMENT OF READING SKILLS 142 143 ASSESSMENT OF READING SKILLS KNOWING THE ALPHABET (Please note any substitutions above the letter, any insertion where it was made. Underline repetitions, circle any omissions.) 1. Lower case z y x w v u t sr q p on m lk j ihgfedcba 2. Capitals ZYXWVUT S R Q P O N M L K J I H G F E D C B A CONSONANT SOUNDS Make the sound of each of the following letters: w v h j x z s q n g p r c f m b l d y k (g/j) (k,c) CONSONANT DIAGRAPHS sh wh th ch sheep shell whip wheel what there this chain chick chair INITIAL CONSONANT BLENDS. Read the parts of words. cl-ap cr-owd fl-ag pr-int pi-an fr-og tr-ee br-ook bl-ank gr-een gl-ad dr-op sw-ing wr-ite sl-ed sp-in sn-ow sw-eep sc-old sm-all kn-ow sk-in sc-an tw-in st-ep str-ong spr-ing spl-ash FINAL CONSONANT BLENDS la-nd gi-ft lo-ng be-It mi-lk so-ng du-mp bu-lb pi-nk ke-pt me-It ba-rik de- sk mi-Id se-lf si-lk fa-ct chi-Id 144 WORDS WITH SHORT VOWEL SOUNDS at ten it on up cat met in of us an leg fit top cut cap best win got but sat swept pig box run land tender milk drop under stand rented stick pocket lunch match neck print bottle supper napkin check middle ob j ect trumpet sack bench pick rock duck path next chip box rug inch WORDS WITH LONG VOWEL SOUNDS ate be ice old use late see nice go tune pay keep ride rose fruit stay eat die oak huge pale seat pie road cute name cream kite toe pure take steep drive boat unite maple read kindly before fuel 145 WORDS WITH: oi oy, aw. oil toy law queen toil boy flew quit spoil plow new quite au ou, ow, ue, qu auto out now saw autumn shout joy draw caught toy join found WORDS WITH; aj. ew, ue mail drew true pail threw paid blew blue sail new WORDS WITH; ar, ur, ir, or, er, air car turn bird yard curl shirt hurry third fork fur or her stair air for dew town loud house dark fair APPENDIX E ASSESSMENT OP ARITHMETIC SKILLS 146 147 ASSESSMENT OF ARITHMETIC SKILLS -ADDITION- 1. No carrying 5 3 15 24 20 2 J5 3 5 8 25 82 31 124 253 43 16 50. 5 4 165 324 538 600 167 20 175 421 256 200 403 609 4252 3526 402 100 15 173 4052 1042 1342 2315 1604 2557 7000 2678 3467 1000 2 3 25 35 342 561 5 4 10 13 12 312 JL 1 32 22 123 126 107 6352 1353 240 1234 2114 300 423 1000 3422 148 2. Carrying 6 5 17 38 68 42 2 2 _4 7 27 18 557 967 456 378 43 48 385 547 967 1256 1397 4567 548 67 569 3578 9678 309 659 3508 3437 28 107 796 1397 3060 2046 7559 8 34 43 453 5 45 67 39 6 13 59 45 367 1496 3567 6709 175 385 9675 356 239 67 1072 568 3000 5030 7090 798 905 2908 685 178 5025 APPENDIX F DAILY WORK SCHEDULES, DAILY ASSIGNMENTS, AND DAILY WORK RECORDS 149 150 DAILY WORK SCHEDULE COLUMN NUMBER CREDITS 1. Reading Skills and Comprehension 20 2. Spelling and English 20 3. Math 20 4. Social Studies and/or Science 20 5. Effort 20 6. Student Evaluation 10 7. Expected Student Behavior 40 a. Cooperation b. Listens attentively c. Follows instructions independently d. Is thoughtul of the rights and feelings of others e. Returns to seat and gets back to work 8. Special Projects Completed on Time 20 9. Group Activity ____ 10. Individual Goal 40 151 DAILY WORK RECORD - PHASE 1 Student____________________________________ Date Teacher1s Comments Total 152 STUDENT SUBJECT DATE DAILY ASSIGNMENT SHEET PHASE 2 TEACHER1S COMMENT MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY NAME WEEK 153 DAILY WORK RECORD - PHASE 2 DATE 1 2 3 4 10 TOTAL Eli7ALUATION Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Good 154 NAME ____________________ WEEK________________ DAILY WORK RECORD - PHASE 3 DATE 1 2 3 • • • • 10 TOTAL EVALUATION Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort and Ind. Tasks Evaluation EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort and Ind. Tasks Evaluation E'j/ALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort and Ind. Tasks Evaluation EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort and Ind. Tasks Evaluation EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort and Ind. Tasks Evaluation EVALUATION Poor Fair Good 155 NAME WEEK DAILY WORK RECORD - PHASE 4 DATE 1 2 3 4 TOTAL EVALUATION Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort & Ind. Tasks Evaluation Self- Reinforcement EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort & Ind. Tasks Evaluation Self- Reinforcement EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort & Ind. Tasks Evaluation Self- Reinforcement EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort & Ind. Tasks Evaluation Self- Reinforcement EVALUATION Poor Fair Good Accuracy Neatness Completed Effort & Ind. Tasks Evaluation Self- Reinforcement EVALUATION Poor Fair Good 156 DAILY ASSIGNMENT SHEET PHASE 6 Student Date Assignment EVALUATION Monday Poor Fair Good Tuesday Poor Fair Good Wednesday Poor Fair Good Thursday Poor Fair Good Friday Poor Fair Good APPENDIX G SEMANTIC AUDITORY SELF-CONCEPT MEASURING INDEX 157 158 SEMANTIC AUDITORY SELF-CONCEPT MEASURING INDEX INSTRUCTION TO THE TEACHER Use the Language Master to avoid student's reading difficulties. INSTRUCTION TO THE STUDENT Sometimes people find they can do a good job of describing how they feel when they are given a list of words from which to choose. Here are words that describe how a person may feel. I want you to pick out the words that best describe how you feel and put them where it says "me" (on the "me" pile). If the word does not describe how you feel, put it on the "not me" pile. When you see the word, think: "Is it me or not me?" Be sure to place all your cards on either one of the piles; do not leave any out. There are no right or wrong answers. The best answer is the one that best describes how you feel. Let's try these samples together: (a) excited (b) angry (1) Soft (12) Heavy (23) Fast (2) Large (13) Fair (24) Dull (3) Happy (14) Active (25) Cruel (4) Sharp (15) Awful (26) Sour (5) Sad (16) Wise (27) Sweet (6) Clean (17) Hot (28) Strong (7) Light (18) Bad (29) Dirty (8) Nice (19) Slow (30) Passive (9) Unfair (20) Kind (31) Small (10) Good (21) Cold (32) Hard (11) Weak (22) Foolish ASCMI EVALUATION FORM Evaluative Scale Dynamism Scale E E D D M N M N M N M N good bad hard soft kind cruel strong weak fair unfair heavy light wise foolish large small nice awful fast slow sweet sour active passive clean dirty sharp dull happy sad hot cold Evaluation total = E - E +10 Dynamism total = D - D +10 159 APPENDIX H BURK'S PUPIL BEHAVIOR RATING SCALE 160 161 BURK'S PUPIL BEHAVIOR RATING SCALE Name of Child__________School_____Grade____Birthdate Please rate each statement by putting an X in the appropriate square after the statement. The squares are numbered from 1 to 5 and represent the degree to which you have noticed the described behavior. The basis for making a judgment are given below: (1) You have not noticed this behavior at all. (2) You have noticed the behavior to a slight degree. (3) You have noticed the behavior to a considerable degree. (4) You have noticed the behavior to an uncomfort able degree. (5) You have noticed the behavior to a very large degree. 1 2 3 4 5 1. Seemingly not affected by extremes of hot or cold. ___________ 2. Poor coordination in large muscle activities (games, etc.). ___________ 3. Confusion in spelling and writing (jumbled) . 4. Inclined to become confused in number processes; gives illogical responses. ___________ 5. Reading is poor._____________________________________ 6. Hyperactive and restless.____________________________ 7. Behavior goes in cycles._____________________________ 8. Quality of work may vary from day to day. ___________ 9. Daydreaming alternating with hyper activity._________________________________ ___________ 10. Excessively meticulous, exacting, formalistic or pedantic. ___________ 11. Erratic, flighty or scattered behavior. ___________ 12. Lacks a variety of responses, repeats himself in many situations. ___________ 13. Easily distracted, lacks continuity of effort and perseverance. __________ 14. Cries often and easily.______________________________ 15. Explosive and unpredictable behavior. ___________ 16. Often more confused by punishment.__________________ 17. Upset by changes in routine._____________ ___________ 18. Confused in following directions.___________________ 162 1 2 3 4 5 19. Tends to be destructive; especially of the work of others. 20. Demands much attention.__________________ _________ 21. Many evidences of stubborn uncoopera tive behavior. _________ 22. Often withdraws quickly from group activities; prefers to work by self. _________ 23. Cannot seem to control self (will speak out or jump out of seat, etc.)______________ 24. Constant difficulty with other children and/or adults (apparently purposeless). _________ 25. Shallow feeling for others. _________ 26. Seems generally unhappy. _________ 27. Confused and apprehensive about rightness of response; indecisive. _________ 28. Often tells bizarre stories. _________ 29. Classroom comments are often (off the track) or peculiar. _________ 30. Difficulty reasoning things out logically with others. _________ APPENDIX I OFF TASK BEHAVIOR CHECK LIST 163 164 OFF TASK BEHAVIOR CHECK LIST Name: DATE Running Late to class Not in seat Shoving seat around Talking out loud Yelling Talking back Swearing Gum, candy, food Hands on others Throwing things Messing up others' work Hitting, kicking Taking others 1 things Destroying property Not starting assignment Leaving mess Making mess Doesn't do as told Disturbing class Exploding under stress (temper tantrums) APPENDIX J INDIVIDUAL DAILY BEHAVIOR CHARTS 165 166 >'o= CALENDAR WEEKS e<* v-q^v IOOO S C O A _ _ I _ _ _ ! ■•! -i-H aann "nrr -Ba- trl#1 ; - i Set' Ic L lI J — I cz LU £L •Si z LLf 2 lu =fgr2 M i l ! Mil;: I i' • I ' > ; i Id ! I ; i i i 1 P I I I 005 I; j 11; jjM; .OOi O IO 20 Ariel Teacher :o 40 50 ,0O TO • 80 SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY 07 166 WEEKS ~.-.ILY SEHAvOR CHART IDC.-BI - L ' l - i a c p a y s ?0 n v . s . i CO. KANS. C-E.II3 / T \ O C V C A ' I - I O C P A Y S ? 0 r~~ ‘ ^ e * " A \ . c n k c c f - A p*cm c o V C .X -• » 331:1 - K A N S A S C I T Y . c c 3erl l ^ ! Ai jfjitjhmp a n a I i - H i i H i ! ! : I! * i liili 4 0 5 0 3 0 7C- S O 9 0 !QO H O 2 .. SUCCESS EVE CALEKDA3 DAYS Dona 14.4 Ar iT:hmet ic A Off-Task Behavior • 8EHAVER AGE LABEL . MOVEMENT CHARTER 167 CALENDAR WEEKS V h'1 C - Vi 500 T Y n H n . j T t a r J z t l ; ; M ! 1 1 11 1 i i i'!!! ill)! ! 1111 ! H 1 H M : j i ) • ■ ! 1 : I ! L L lL J-U i _____ i - _____ _ 11' i i1 • |' i!'' i i ■ : 1 1 j) i h 11: '1 i !!:: i j j I i ' ! 1 I i i I I i ! i 1 ! : 1 i ; 1 I i I ' i ! i ! i ! ! ! ' 1 .005 \Q 20 30 4-0 50 eo T O Ariel Teacher SUCCESSIVE C A LEM CAR DAYS SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER DEPOSITOR AGENCY 167 ! WEEKS DAILY BEHAVIOR CHART {DC-31 c- e v c u £ - u o p a y s 3 ‘ H E 3 C A R f ! l C O KANSAS C I T Y . KAN’S. CG123 velmetttj—Rat Oi xiri — i 'I - I ! j ! 1 1 1 1 1 j ! 1 [ | i ! ; ; j i! ! i j1 j *1!: L11 H;11 *!:I: jyj! ' ; ; i i ! ' ! i l ; : ! : | ! I ! i | i ! | ! | | | i H H ? I i I p : * i b l i i i l i ; SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS Dona 14.4 Correct Arithmetic B£HAVER AGE U B E L . MOVEMENT CHARTER tf) M O V E M E N T S P E R M I N U T E to to C O *\ ► to tf) -o to Arithmetic Off-Task Behavior 169 >•> CALENDAR WEEKS . /' r'o“ M > 0 >'■ l O Q O ^ X 4 ,' o1 - 8 f O \2 Ui h- => z : c: LJ a . C r t t- z Ul 2 UJ > O 500 IOO 50 lO 5 I .5 , . 1 ^ — 1 . 1 . . « i i . L L - 1 . . . L . . . i — t r r r — : - i . ■ ; i — i-~- ■ . . . P h a r j > e i < 2 ■ i , P h a s l e T 3 — ! « r f : 5 . ‘ I I I ! : 1 , I I I ! i i ! 1 ! ! ! I P l l i l l i : 1 I i i 1 ' I I I ; ’ 1 ' ' I i 1 i j : : : ! • i i 1 ' : i ' » ! M I ' i : 1 1 1 i ■ ■ ! H i ! i * i ; lli 1 I I I l ! III! lillH illli- h l i i : li lli iillil i n i: i : ! ; i 1 ' : M • i 1 • I l f l i i i|. i :1 DAl-ly-TC TTTTT I I I ' III. ! * \ :ihiil 11111 T T T T ! ' I M ' ! ■M-i.a^.t.1 ill | • - — H I ’ : : : : : 1 1 * 1 ' ■■ : 1 1 m 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - 1 — - — . 1 : i 1 ' - 4 - i t • i i . 1 1 1 1 1 ! M • I ' . f : 1 I . , : M i * i i i > , • : ' * i T m i • t i ! : i 1 ; I I I i * ! 1 h ; i ' l l ' ; ' ! ] : • i ' • ' : 1 • : 1 1 ■ I i ' i [ M i ! = 1 i ! i ! • 1 ' ^ ‘ A i • T ! * 1 * \ i | ! I * ! I , 1 i 1 • : ‘ M r H u m : H : ; i i ! 1 1 1 ! ! ! m ! " : i i ! ! 1 i ' i ■ ' 1 ' :: i i' I ! p . r - \ i . ! , T ~ f — — j ; : ; j . . . i . ! : . * i m ■ ' • • : i • ’ , | r — 1 1 ■ 1 1 ■ i ‘ • ■ ; ■ • : 1 ‘ I i ' I f i | 1 i l i t ! 1 ■ i | l | i : i 1 1 1 1 ' i ' : I - ; ‘ 1 M 1 ! ' • ' i ' • ! M M j . M ; • 1 H i ! : b ; : ! ! 1 | • ! ' ' ! ; ! i 1 ! i • i ] ; i i l l ! ; ♦ i I i i 3 D | ; i i ; : i M i i ! '■ ‘ : 1 .ooi i ! ! i i i ! l l i i i: i.i! : i ■ - U J - r r r r i l r r | ! ! 11 i til; li ; ' 1111 i ! iIi 11 i m ! ! !1 jllTT HI > • 1 o Ariel \G 20 30 40 5 m i i ' j P :j ■ f ■ " ‘ M ? ' • r^ ' - i ■MW. SO TO • S *zz<r\ SUPERVISOR ADVISER T e a c h e r MANAGER SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS D EPOSITOR AGENCY 169 t'EEKS CAkLY SEHAV':;? CHART JDC-3S / • T X C V C L ‘ Z - 1 4 ^ PAYS tZ) ftKS.) c n r c c ?./’- c o . ^ e*CX 3 3 U - KANSAS CJTY. KANS. 06103 ifaOT'enrefnl' ;}RktEHti.:.3&a pe PhH^ e t i M 11 r i i I i i i|. I-: U 11! I O 50 60 70- SO SO !Q 3 tiQ JS C JS C IA SUCCESSIVE CA'LEf-OAR DAYS Don 14 Correct Arithmetic BEHAVER AGE LABEL . MOVEMENT ! i CHARTER 3 BIBLIOGRAPHY 170 BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, L.E., ed. Helping the Adolescent with the Hidden Handicap. Academic Therapy Publications, 1970. Bandura, A., and Keepers, C.J. "The Transmission of Patterns of Self-Reinforcement Through Modeling." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 1964, 1-9. Berkowitz, P., and Rothman, E. The Disturbed Child. New York: New York University, 1960. Bijou, S.W.; Peterson, R.F.; and Marion, H.A. "A Method to Integrate Descriptive and Experimental Field Studies at the Level of Data and Empirical Concepts." Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 1968, 175-191. Birnbauer, J.S.; Bijou, S.W.? Wolf, M.M.; Kidder, J.D.; and Tague, Cecilia. "Programmed Instruction in the Classroom." In L.P. Ullman and L. Kramer, Case Studies in Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965. Birnbauer, J.S.; Wolf, M.M.; Kidder, J.D.; and Tague, C.A. "Classroom Behavior of Retarded Pupils with Token Reinforcement." Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2, 1965, 219-235. Bloom, B.S.; Engelhart, M.D.; Furst, E.J.; Hill, W.H.; and Krathwohl, D.R. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Cognitive Domain. Handbook I. New York: Longmans, 1956. Boring, E.G. A History of Experimental Psychology. New York: Appleton, 1929. Bradfield, Robert H., ed. Behavior Modification: The Human Effort. San Rafael, Calif.: Dimension Publishing Co., 1970. 171 172 Broden, M.; Hall, V.R.; Dunlap, A.; and Clark, R. "Effect of Teacher Attention and a Token Rein forcement System in a Junior High School Special Education Class." Exceptional Children, 36, 5, 1970, 341-349. Bruner, J.S. "The Cognitive Consequences of Early Sensory Deprivation." In P. Solomon, et al., eds. Sensory Deprivation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1961. ________ . The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966. Bugelski, B.R. The Psychology of Learning Applied to Teaching. New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1964. Burnham, W.H. The Normal Mind. New York: Appleton, 1924. California Legislature. Education Code of the State of California, 1965. 2 Vols. Sacramento: Depart ment of General Services, Documents Section. ________ . California Administrative Code, Title 5; Education, 1965. Sacramento: Office of Administrative Procedure, Documents Section. California State College. Proceedings, First Annual Southern California Conference on Behavior Modification, 1969. Cruickshank, William, ed. The Teacher of Brain-Injured Children. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1958. Dunn, L.M. "Special Education for the Mildly Retarded— Is Much of It Justifiable?" Exceptional Children, 35, 1, 1969, 5-24. Elkind, D. Children and Adolescents. London: Oxford University Press, 1970. English, H.B., and English, A.C. A Comprehensive Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms. New York: David McKay, 1964. 173 Eysenck, H.J. "Learning Theory and Behavior Therapy." Journal of Mental Science, 105, 1959, 61-75. ________ , ed. Experiments in Behavior Therapy. New York: McMillan, 1964. ________ . "The Effects of Psychotherapy." Inter national Journal of Psychiatry, 1, 1965, 99-142. Perster, C.B. "The Use of the Free Operant in the Analysis of Behavior." Psychological Bulletin, 50, 1953, 263-274. Ferster, C.B.; Nurnberger, J.I.; and Levitt, E.B. "The Control of Eating." Journal of Mathe matics , 1, 1962, 87-110. Ferster, C.B., and Perrott, Mary Carol. Behavior Principle. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968. Franks, C.M., ed. Behavior Therapy Appraisal and Status. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1969. Frostig, Marianne. "Education for Children with Learning Disabilities." Progress in Learning. Greene and Stratton, 1967. Gagne, R.M. The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, Inc., 1965. Goldiamond, I. "Self Control Procedures in Personal Behavior Problems." Psychological Reports, 17, 1965, 851-868. Goodlad, John I. Planning and Organizing for Teaching. Washington, D.C.: National Educational Association, 1963. Guilford, J.P. The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967. Haring, N.G.,and Scheinfelbusch, R.L. Methods in Special Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Co., 1967. 174 Harris, Florence R.; Wolf, M.M.; and Baer, D.M. "Effects of Adult Social Reinforcement on Child Behavior." Young Child, 20, 1964, 8-17. Harris, M.B. "A Self-Directed Program for Weight Control: A Pilot Study." Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 74, 1969, 263-270. Haughton, Eric. "Counting Together: Precision Teaching Rational— 69." Monograph. Eugene, Oregon: Instructional Materials Center, University of Oregon, 1969. Havighurst, R.J., and Neugarten, B.L. Society and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1962. Heing, W.K. Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966. Hewett, Frank M. "Educational Engineering with Emotionally Disturbed Children." Exceptional Children, 33, 7, 1967, 459-471 ________ . "Behavior Shaping." Proceedings, Special Study Institute for Administrators of Special Education, 1967. Edited by R.B. McIntyre. Sacramento, California: 1968. ________ . The Emotionally Disturbed Child in the Classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1968. Hilgard, E.R. Theories of Learning. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1956. Hilgard, E.R., Bower, G.H. Theories of Learning. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966. Homme, L.E. "Perspectives in Psychology: XXIV Control of Coverants, the Operants of the Mind." Psychological Record, 15, 1965, 501-511. ________ . "Contiguity Theory and Contingency Manage ment." Psychological Record, 16, 1966, 233-241. 175 Homme, L.E. "Human Motivation and the Environment." The Learning Environment: Relationship to Behavior Modification and Implications for Special Education. Edited by N. Haring and R. Whelan. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 1966. Homme, Lloyd, and Becker, W.C. How to Use Contingency Contracting in the Classroom. Research Press, 1970. Homme, L.; Debuca, P.; Devine, J.? Steinhorst, R.; and Rickert, E. "Use of the Premack Principle in Controlling the Behavior of Nursery School Children." Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 1963, 544. Howes, Virgil M. Individualization of Instruction. London: Collier-MacMillan, Ltd., 1970. Hull, C.L. Essentials of Behavior. New Haven: Yale University, 1951. Hurlock, Elizabeth B. "An Evaluation of Certain Incentives Used in School Work." Journal of Educational Psychology, 16, 1925, 145-159. Jones, M.C. "A Laboratory Study of Fear: The Case of Perter." Pediatrics Seminar, 31, 1924a, 308-315. ________ . "The Elimination of Children's Fears." Journal of Experimental Psychology, 7, 1924b, 382-390. Kanfer, F.H. "Self-reinforcement as a Function of Degree of Learning." Psychological Reports, 10, 1962, 885-886. ________ . "Issues and Ethics in Behavior Manipulation." Psychological Reports, 16, 1965a, 187-196. ________ . "Vicarious Human Reinforcement: A Glimpse Into the Black Box." Research in Behavior Modification. Edited by L. Krasner and L.P. Ullmann. New York: Holt, 1965b, pp. 244-267. 176 Kanfer, F.H. "The Influence of Age and Incentive Conditions on Children's Rewards." Psychological Reports. 19, 1966, 263-274. Kanfer, F.H., and Phillips, J.S. Learning Foundations of Behavior Therapy. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1970. Kanfer, F.H., and Marston, A.R. "Conditioning of Self reinforcing Responses: An Analogue to Self- confidence Training." Psychological Reports, 13, 1963a, 63-70. Kanfer, F.H., and Marston, A.R. "Determinants of Self reinforcement in Human Learning." Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963b, pp. 245-254. Kanfer, F.H. and Goldfoot, D.A. "Self-control and Tolerance of Noxious Stimulation." Psychological Reports, 18, 1965, 79-85. Keller, F.S., and Schoenfeld, W.N. Principles of Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1950. Krasner, L. "Behavior Control and Social Responsi bility." American Psychologist. 17, 1962a, 199-204. Krasner, L., and Ullmann, L.P., eds. Research in Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, 1965. Krasner, L. "Behavior Modification: Values and Training." Assessment and Status of the Behavior Therapies. Edited by C.M. Franks. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968b. Krathwohl, D.R.; Bloom, B.S.; and Maia, B.B. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Affective Domain. Handbook II. New York: McKay, 1964. Krech, D.; Srutchfield, R.S.; and Ballachey, A.L. Individual in Society. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962. 177 Kunzelmann, H., and Haring, N. "Introductory Procedures for Children into the Pre-school Classroom." Unpublished manuscript of talk delivered at Summer Workshop, University of Southern California, 1966. Kuzelman, H. "Viewing the Learning Process." CDRMC- University of Washington. Paper presented at AABT, May 3, 1969. Kunzelman, H.D.; Cohen, M.A.; Hulten, W.J.; Martin, G.L.; and Mingo, A.R. Precision Teaching. Special Publications, Inc., 1970. Lazarus, A.A. "New Methods in Psychotherapy: A Case Study." South African Medical Journal, 33, 1958, 660. Lindsley, O.R. "Experimental Analysis of Social Reinforcement: Terms and Method." American Journal Orthopsychiatric, 33, 1963, 624-633. Lindsley, O.R. "Direct Measurement and Prosthesis of Retarded Behavior." Journal of Education, 147, 1964 (revised), 62-81. University of Oregon Curriculum Bulletin, 1969. Locke, J. Some Thoughts Concerning Education. London: Cambridge University Press, 1913. Lovitt, T.C.; Kunzelman, H.P.; Nolen, P.A.; Hulten, W.J. "The Dimensions of Classroom Data." Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1, 12, 1968, 710-721. Marston, Albert R., and Kanfer, Frederick H. "Human Reinforcement: Experiments and Subject Con trolled." Journal of the Experimental Psychology, 66, 1, 1963, 91-94. Marston, A.R. "Self-Reinforcement: The Relevance of a Concept in Analougue Research in Psycho therapy." Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 2, 1965, 1-5. McIntyre, R.B. "Shaping Desirable Classroom Behavior." Unpublished manuscript, 1966. ________ . Learning Theory. Lecture notes, 1967. 178 McKenzie, H.S.; Clark, M.; Wolf, M.M.; Kethera, R.; and Bensen, C. "Behavior Modification of Children with Learning Disabilities using Grades as Tokens and Allowances as Back-up Reinforcers." Exceptional Children. 34, 1968, 745-752. Mead, G.H. Mind. Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1937. Meeker, Mary Nacol. The Structure of Intellect; its Interpretation and Uses. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1969. "Mental Hygiene in the Classroom." Report of the Joint Committee on Health Problems in Education of the National Education Association and the American Medical Association (NEA and the AMA with the cooperation of NCMH and ADA), 1939. Mowrer, O.H. Learning Theory and Behavior. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1960. Nolen, P.A.? Kunzelmann, H.P.; and Haring, N.G. "Behavioral Modification in a Junior High Learning Disabilities Classroom." Exceptional Children, 34, 3, November 1967, 163-168. O'Leary, D.R.,and Becker, W.C. "Behavior Modification of an Adjustment Class: A Token Reinforcement Program." Exceptional Children, 33, 1967, 637- 642. Orlando, R., and Bijou, S.W. "Single and Multiple Schedules of Reinforcement in Developmentally Retarded Children." Journal of the Experi mental Analysis of Behavior, 3, 1960, 339-348. Osgood, C.E.; Suci, G.J.; and Tennenbaum, P.H. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957. Patterson, G.R., and Ebner, M.J. "Applications of Learning Principles to the Treatment of Deviant Children." Paper presented to the APA Con vention, Chicago, 1965. Pavlov, I.P. Conditional Reflexes. Londons Oxford University Press, 1927. Peter, L.J. "Therapeutic Teaching." Unpublished manuscript, 1968. ________ . Prescriptive Teaching. New York: McGraw- Hill Co., 1965. Piaget, J. The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1926. ________ . The Child's Conception of the Word. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1929. ________ . Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1932. ________ . The Origins of Intelligence in Children. Translated by Margaret Cook. New York: Inter national University Press, 1936. ________ . The Construction of Reality in the Child. Translated by Margaret Cook. New York: Basic Books, 1937, 1954. ________ . "Principal Factors Determining Intellectual Evolution from Childhood to Adult Life." Organization and Pathology of Thought. Edited by M.D. Rapaport. New York: Columbia University Press, 1951. ________ . Judgment and Reasoning in the Child. New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams Co., 1966. ________ . Origins of Intelligence. New York: Inter national Universities Press, 1969. Premack, D. "Reinforcement Theory." Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Edited by D. Levine. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1965, pp. 123-189. Quay, H.C.; Werry, J.S.; McQueen, M.; Sprague, R.L. "Remediation of the Conduct Problem Child in the Special Class Setting." Exceptional Children. 32, 1966, 509-515. Randall, J.H., and Buchler, J. Philosophy: An Intro- duct ion. New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1942. 180 Reese, E.P. The Analysis of Human Operant Behavior. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Co., 1966. Rogers, C.R. Client-Centered Therapy. New York: Houghton-Mifflin Co., 1951. Schaefer, H.H., and Martin, P.L., eds. Behavioral Therapy. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1969. Sears, R.R. Discovery of Objectives. Studies of Psychoanalytic Concepts. New York: Social Science Research Council, 1943. Skinner, B.F. The Behavior of Organisms. New York: D. Appleton Century, 1938. ________ . Science and Human Behavior. New York: MacMillan, 1953. ________ . "Are Theories of Learning Necessary?" Cummulative Record. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1961, pp. 45 ff. ________ . "Operant Behavior." Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application. Edited by Werner K. Honig. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts, 1966. ________ . "What is the Experimental‘Analysis of Behavior?" Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 3, 1968, 213-218. ________ . "Some Contributions of an Experimental Analysis of Behavior to Psychology as a Whole." American Psychologist, 8, 1953, 69-78. Spencer, H. The Principles of Psychology. Authorized edition; New York: Appleton-Century, 1897. Staats, A.W., and Staats, C.K. Complex Human Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1963. Staats, A.W. Human Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1964. Sullivan, H.S. Conception of Modern Psychiatry. Washington, D.C.: William Allanson, White Psychiatric Foundation, 1947. 181 Thorndike, E.L. Animal Intelligence. New York: Macmillan, 1911. ________ . The Psychology of Learning. New York: Teachers College, 1913. Tolman, E.C. Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1933. Ullman, L.P., and Krasner, L. Case Studies in Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965. ________ . A Psychological Approach to Abnormal Behavior. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Ulrich, R.j Stachnik, T.; and Mabry, J. Control of Human Behavior. Glenview, 111.: Scott, Fores- man, 1966. Valett, Robert E. Programming Learning Disabilities. Palo Alto, California: Fearon Publishers, 1969. Verhave, T. The Experimental Analysis of Behavior: Suggested Readings. New York: Appleton- Century-Croft s, 1966. Watson, J.B. "Psychology as a Behaviorist Views It." Psychological Review, 20, 1913, 158-177. ________ . Psychology from the Standpoint of a Behaviorist. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1919. Watson, J.B., and Rayner, R. "Conditioned Emotional Reactions." Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 1920, 1-4. Watson, J.B. The Ways of Behaviorism. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1928. Watson, R.I. "The Experimental Tradition and Clinical Psychology." Experimental Foundation of Clinical Psychology. New York: Basic Books, 1962. ________ . The Great Psychologists. New York: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1963. 182 Weiss, P. Principles of Development. New York: Holt, 1939. Werner, H. Comparative Psychology of Mental Develop ment . Revised edition; New York: Inter national Universities Press, 1957. Wilson, J.A.R.; Robeck, M.C.; and Michael, W.B. Psychological Foundation of Learning and Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 1969. Wolf, M.M.; Giles, D.R.; and Hall, V.R:. "Experiments with Token Reinforcement in a Remedial Class room." Behavior Research and Therapy, 6, 1968, 55-64. Wolpe, J. Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958. Zilboorg, G., and Henry, G.W. A History of Medical Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton, 1941. Zimmerman, E.R., and Zimmerman, J. "The Alteration of Behavior in a Special Classroom Situation." Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 5, 1962, 59-60.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Placement Characteristics Of Educable Mentally Retarded And Educationallyhandicapped Children: A Multi-Statistical Approach
PDF
Development And Evaluation Of An Auto-Instructional Media Package For Teacher Education
PDF
Comparison Of Methods Of Using Film Loops In Job Training Of Educable Mentally Retarded High School Students
PDF
Automatic Patterning Of Grammatical Structures And Auditory And Visual Stimuli As Related To Reading In Disadvantaged Mexican-American Children
PDF
The Affective/Cognitive Attitude Dimension Of Teachers Of Educable Mentally Retarded Minors
PDF
Confirmation Of Expectancy And Changes In Teachers' Evaluations Of Student Behaviors
PDF
The Effects Of Two Types Of Experimenter Intervention And Schedules Of Reinforcement On Verbal Operant Conditioning Of Affective Self-References
PDF
Prescriptive Teaching As A Supplement To Behavior Modification In The Remediation Of Learning Disorders
PDF
Effects Of Success And Failure On Impulsivity And Distractibility Of Three Types Of Educationally Handicapped Children
PDF
Selected Characteristics Of A Children'S Individual Test Of Creativity
PDF
The Relative Efficiency Of Prompting And Confirmation Learning Paradigms
PDF
Reading Achievement And In-Grade Retention Rate Differentials For Mexican-American And Black Students In Selected States Of The Southwest
PDF
Maternal Child-Rearing Attitudes And Developmental Growth Of Rubella Deaf-Blind Children
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Two Moral Responses Of Two Socioeconomic Groups Based On Four Paradigms
PDF
Ethnicity And Measures Of Educability: Differences Among Navajo, Pueblo And Rural Spanish-American First Graders On Measures Of Learning Style, Hearing Vocabulary, Entry Skills, Motivation And H...
PDF
Auditory Perceptual Si Factors As Non-Predictors Of Reading Achievement In An Upper-Class And Upper-Middle-Class Population
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Degree Of Affective Response Elicited By Several Mediated And Nonmediated Instructional Methods
PDF
Effects Of Preschool Enrollment And Parent Participation On Academic Growth
PDF
Effects Of Associative And Category Cuing On Recall Of Items From Exhaustive And Nonexhaustive Lists
PDF
The Conditioning Of A Discriminative Stimulus Measured As An Orienting Reaction In Profoundly Retarded Blind Children
Asset Metadata
Creator
Ariel, Abraham
(author)
Core Title
Behavior Therapy For Self-Direction
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Education
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
McIntrye, Robert B. (
committee chair
), Buscaglia, Leo F. (
committee member
), Wursten, Helmut (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-547021
Unique identifier
UC11362445
Identifier
7206037.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-547021 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
7206037
Dmrecord
547021
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Ariel, Abraham
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
education, educational psychology