Training Public School Teachers to Use Data-Based Decision Analysis with Discrete Trial Training

Background:  

Behavior analysts and consultants working in schools most often train teachers to implement procedures and, on occasion, to record data regarding procedural fidelity and the client's response to the interventions. But, often, the consultants fall short in training skills in data analysis and the use of data when making treatment decisions.  This often inhibits student progress and also perpetuates the school systems' reliance on the use of outside consultants.

Objectives:  

This study examined the training efficacy when public school teachers were trained to follow a protocol for implementing discrete trial teaching (DTT) methods and to conduct data- based decisions analysis (DBDA) regarding the teaching strategies within the classroom setting. Specifically, DBDA was to determine when to fade level of prompts used and to determine when the students demonstrated mastery of skills and were in need of new targeted acquisition skills.

 Methods:  

Six classroom teachers teaching in self-contained special education classrooms for children with moderate intellectual disabilities and autism in public elementary schools (grades K-5th) were trained by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst in methods of implementation and data collection associated with DTT. The teachers were also trained to make data based decisions according to specified rules for making changes in program targets (i.e., determining mastery) and for adding or fading prompts used during teaching. Data for the current objective were obtained after review monthly data tracking forms completed by each teacher throughout the school year. Percent correct and incorrect decisions per month were calculated. An error analysis was also conducted to determine specific errors made. Error analysis focused on the following:

 Prompt Fading

• Changed indicated but no change                                (% I  + PC)
• Made change without change being indicated             (% I   - PC)
• Change to incorrect prompt level                                 (WP: Wrong Prompt)
• Target Introduction
• New target needed, no change made                           (% I  +TC)
• Not mastered, but target was changed                         (% I  - TC)
• Introduced an incorrect target                                      (WT: Wrong Target)

Results:  

The majority of teachers made significantly more errors using DBDA immediately following didactic training. Most consistent errors were either failing to fade or increase the prompting level when change was indicated or not moving to the correct prompt level as indicated in the protocol. Errors significantly decreased for all teachers following brief in-vivo consultation and feedback. High procedural fidelity was maintained as the intensity and frequency of consultation was faded across the three training years.  

Conclusions:  

Overall, results show that the teachers were able to proficiently follow protocols to make data based decisions for DTT programming. However, proficiency was not consistent following only didactic training. Brief, in-vivo performance feedback was necessary for most teachers to demonstrate these skills with minimized decision errors. Continued training in these skills for public school teachers will further the impact of behavior analysis on public school education of children with autism and will reduce the reliance of the school systems on expensive consultation.