Effective Use of Contingent Praise with Students Who Have Behavioral Issues

                I have never been ask to file a complaint on behalf of the special education needs of a child identified with behavioral issues whose teacher skillfully and consistently gives the child verbal praise contingently to increase the child’s appropriate behaviors.  In contrast, I am frequently contacted by parents of children who are concerned that the behavior procedures used by their child’s school/teacher have decreased the child’s behavioral performance, and/or resulted in a series of disciplinary actions.
  

                An examination of these situations usually indicates that the child’s school or teacher primarily relies upon control and reactive strategies to deal with problem behaviors, and delays incentives (“positive reinforcements”) until the student has “earned” them.  Under those circumstances, it is no surprise to find that the student has begun to manifest “counter-control” behaviors, and the teacher and student are engaged in ongoing and serial power struggles.  These cases demonstrate that despite more than fifty years of research, many educators have not learned that control and reactive strategies, and delayed reinforcement procedures, are vastly less successful in shaping, increasing, and maintaining appropriate social and academic behaviors in students who have behavioral problems at school.

                It is perplexing that, given the extensive base of empirical support for the use of contingent teacher praise in increasing appropriate student behaviors that so many educators have not learned how to competently use this highly effective means of assisting students whose behaviors interfere with learning.  A 2010 research article published in Preventing School Failure, titled Using Teacher Praise and Opportunities to Respond to Promote Appropriate Student Behavior (article is located at http://amywagner.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/teacher+praise.pdf/238204939/teacher+praise.pdf)  provided that teacher attention to students with behavioral issues comes in the form of high rates of teacher reprimands for inappropriate behaviors, and that students with the most aggressive behaviors have the highest rates of teacher reprimands and the lowest rates of positive teacher attention -  even when they appropriately comply with teacher commands.  

                The authors of the above-mentioned article point out that regardless of a student’s age or disability, teacher use of contingent praise has been shown to increase a variety of appropriate student behaviors and academic skills, including following directions, engagement in instruction, on-task behavior, correct academic responding, and work accuracy and completion.  They noted and cited supporting authorities who have found that the skilled use of contingent praise has been repeatedly shown to increase positive behavior while simultaneously decreasing and disruptive problem behavior, and that teacher praise combined with decreased attention to problem behavior lead to decreases in talking outs and arguing with teacher requests as well as other disruptive behavior.

                When considering the lack of a particular student’s progress on behavioral goals, as professionals, teachers should be aware of the amount of attention they are giving to desired behaviors and to inappropriate ones.  As a component a teaching improvement program, some schools might employ procedures like those set out in the above-cited article, as a self-monitoring exercise during which teachers review a series of 15 minute recordings of their classes, and record data on their use of commands, reprimands, and contingent reinforcement with all students or with a particular student.  

Autism Spectrum Disorder, Inclusion, and Special Education Issues

On the basis of the relatively high proportion of mediations and due process hearings brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) filed by parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), it's reasonable to conclude that school districts are having only a limited amount of success in addressing the needs of students with this complex disability.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) states that ASD is the second most common serious developmental disability after mental retardation. ASD is currently described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fourth edition (DSM-4 TR) as a group of developmental disabilities that cause significant social, communication and behavioral challenges, and encompass five subtypes: including autism, Asperger syndrome, Rett syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder. According to the CDC approximately 1 in 110 children in the United States have ASD. Data compiled by the U.S. Department of Education indicate that in 2007 around 250,000 children with ASD, ages 6 through 21, were served under the IDEA.

Under the IDEA students with disabilities should have the opportunity to be educated with non-disabled peers, to the greatest extent appropriate ("least restrictive environment"). They should have access to the general education curriculum, or any other program that non-disabled peers would be able to access. The student should be provided with supplementary aids and services necessary to achieve educational goals if placed in a setting with non-disabled peers. Among reasons for educating students with ASD in inclusive educational settings is to provide them with opportunities to interact with nondisabled peers so they may learn and practice social and communication skills. However, many of these children manifest disability-related behaviors that cause them to be rejected by the same nondisabled peers with whom they need to interact.

Inclusion is unlikely to be successful for many children with ASD unless their school districts provide them with a sufficient amount of appropriate and individualized specially designed instruction so they can learn and practice appropriate behavioral responses to the situations that challenge them. Even when this is provided, inclusion still may not be successful unless and their school districts also provide education for their nondisabled peers that encourages them to interact with their classmates who have ASD and discourages them from engaging in behavior that constitutes bullying and harassment. When schools fail to adequately meet the needs of students with ASD, and fail to engage nondisabled peers in supporting them, research demonstrates that they can expect the aberrant and undesirable behaviors on the part of both groups to increase.

Before nondisabled peers can be trained to understand and interact with their classmates who have ASD, the school personnel working with both groups must have the knowledge and skills needed to understand and appropriately explain the altered manner in which students with ASD experience school environments and interactions, the ASD-related differences in communication and social skills, and the kinds of matters that contribute to discrepant behaviors. Unfortunately for all students, a number of educators and school administrators don’t know enough about ASD and how to write IEPs setting out methods and techniques that are likely to assist individual students with ASD -- and/or they may not be very good at implementing them.

Parents filing actions under the IDEA appear to be telling school district administrators and teachers that rather than blaming their children for being "poorly behaved," educators need to do a much better job of providing effective evidence-based interventions and programs that meet individual needs. Given the apparent gap between educator preparation and the level of preparation needed to provide children with ASD with a free and appropriate education (FAPE), this further indicates that public education agencies need to step up the amount and quality of education programs for educators and school professionals in order to provide them with sufficient information and training in the use of the specific methodologies and techniques that are most effective in providing appropriate services and modifying curriculum based upon the unique needs of individual children with ASD.