| Basic Measures of Student Performance |
 |
 |
 |
|
Individual Student Data Each student’s program is tailored to meet his/her needs. There are usually 15-20 "active" instructional programs, or skill areas, at any given time targeting skills such as vocal verbal imitation, handwriting, reading, 1:1 correspondence, pointing & matching skills, following directions, counting, grammar, exchanging greetings, etc. The number of active programs is determined by the objectives outlined on the student’s IEP, ongoing criterion referenced teacher assessment, and parent/family goals. In addition, when initiating programs, staff are sensitive to the learning history of the student, the presence/absence of prerequisite skills needed for the student to be successful at each step in the instructional sequence, and the general "rate" at which the student acquires new skills. A basic goal of the instructional staff is to teach each student, each day, in each skill area (i.e., active program). Units of Measurement: Instructional Trials The basic unit of measurement is described most simply as an interaction, within a given learning context ("setting" or "environment"), between a) a student and a teacher, b) two students or groups of students, or, c) a student and instructional materials. The learning context describes specific events functionally related to the occurrence of the behavior we seek to increase. With few exceptions, the most influential aspect of the learning context is the behavior of the teacher. This is why direct, frequent, and systematic supervision of teachers working in and designing the learning context, by Board Certified Behavior Analysts, is a critical component of the HCDS program. In ABA, events that occur before the behavior are termed antecedents, events that occur after the behavior are termed consequences, and events that occur at the same time as the behavior (and quite often the same time as the antecedents and consequences) are termed concurrent or setting events. The aim of the teacher is to increase student behavior, as outlined in the program objectives, within a context that controls for, or specifies, the antecedents, consequences, and setting events. Of course, in a classroom environment this is difficult to do. Nonetheless, we believe it is important to consider all of these variables closely, and analyze them frequently in order to adequately address the learning needs of our students. In sum, the vehicle used to increase student behavior is direct, systematic reinforcement within a specified learning context, which is determined by, and includes, the teacher, who is supervised closely by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. Various terms have been used to describe the basic interaction outlined above: "trials", "learning trials", "instructional trials", "3-term contingency trials", "A-B-C", "learn units", "frames", "learning frames". There are some subtle differences between these terms and some terms are used more in certain settings than others. However, describing these differences is beyond our current purposes. At HCDS we use the term "instructional trials"" to describe our basic unit of measurement. Units of Measurement: Instructional Trials to Criteria First, let’s define what we mean by "Criteria". How do we know when to advance a student to the next step in the instructional program sequence? How do we know when the skill is robust enough to add new elements to the program thereby making it more complex and potentially more demanding for the student? By what criteria will we measure whether or not a student has met an instructional goal? This is sometimes referred to as criteria (or criterion) "for success". Of course, different students frequently require different "amounts" of instruction in any given instructional program to demonstrate the skill proficiency that warrants advancement in the instructional sequence. However, some basic rules apply. Consider the number of instructional trials per "session"- a session is a block of instructional trials presented in relatively close temporal proximity. Several factors will determine the time between instructional trials in a given session, such as schedule of reinforcement, quantity of reinforcement, learning history of the student, topography and effort of the behavior, and skill of the teacher. Ideally, only a brief pause (less than a second), will occur between instructional trials. If long pauses occur between instructional trials, this will influence the decision regarding skill proficiency. A typical session might contain 10 to 20 instructional trials. Instructional programs are not often "massed", which is to say they don’t usually target the increase of one particular behavior. Rather, sessions usually target the acquisition of behaviors related arbitrarily by way of a particular concept (e.g., "colors"), or natural sequence (e.g., tying shoes). As a result, the number of learning opportunities for a given behavior within a session must be considered.
Student Graphs Most often, instructional trials are tallied as "+" , "-" , or "NR" to indicate whether the student emitted the behavior targeted for increase accurately (+), inaccurately (-), or not at all (NR for "no response"). Other codes are used to further enumerate procedures designed to help the student learn more quickly, such as various prompting (e.g., VP "vocal prompt") and time-delay procedures (W- "correct wait"). Tally marks are totaled and reported as the number of correct instructional trials (total +) and the total number of instructional trials presented during the instructional session. These data are graphed each day. Sometimes, when the speed at which a student can emit the behavior targeted for increase is an important variable, instructional sessions are timed and data are reported as “rate”, usually converted to a number per minute correct/total instructional trials. Graphs provide a "learning picture" and are critical to the analysis of student progress. For example, by analyzing graphs, we can quickly determine when a student is and is not making progress toward instructional goals. When changes are made to the way in which we teach a particular skill (e.g., we add/subtract a procedural variable), the graph allows teachers to t rack the effect this change has on the behavior in question. This helps our teachers to improve their instructional decision making skills and avoids the unnecessary waste of valuable instructional time. Classroom Data Summary Each classroom teacher is responsible for summarizing measured data and reporting it to their supervisor on a weekly basis. The basic measures reported are correct/total instructional trials, percentage correct instructional trials, the total number of criteria met for the week by the students in the class, and the average number of instructional trials to criteria for the class. At the classroom level, teachers frequently target particular classes or "repertoires" of behavior for increase and they set performance goals in conjunction with their direct supervisor to increase instruction in a target area. These performance goals are linked to teacher remuneration via the school's PSI Module system. For example, in classes with severe communication disorders, teachers and supervisors will often look at the number of instructional trials and number or criteria met in the "Verbal Behavior Skill Repertoire", which targets communication skills for increases. A goal may be for the teacher to increase the proportion of instructional trials targeting verbal behavior (and associated criteria) relative to the overall "instructional output" for the class. When the teacher meets this goal in conjunction with other goals, he/she earns a raise. Supervision Data Summary Each classroom supervisor is responsible for summarizing the student data reported to him/her by the classroom teachers they supervise and reporting it to the Director of Education on a weekly basis. The basic measures reported are correct/total instructional trials, percentage correct instructional trials, the total number of criteria met for the week, and the average number of instructional trials to criteria. The Director of Education reviews these data and sets supervisor performance goals relative to the needs of the teachers and students under his/her supervision. As with the teacher, these performance goals are directly linked to remuneration. School-Wide Summary Data The Director of Education is responsible for summarizing the student data reported from the classroom supervisors. This summary is the School-Wide Summary Data for Students. The basic measures reported are correct/total instructional trials, percentage correct instructional trials, the total number of criteria met for the week, and the average number of instructional trials to criteria. The Director reviews the summary data and sets performance goals for the school. Performance Goal I: Increase the average number of instructional trials for each student to >1600 per student per week. Performance Goal II: Decrease the average number of instructional trials to criteria to <150 for each student. The Director of Education is accountable to the Hawthorne Foundation Board of Directors, the parents and families of the students in the school, the students in the school, the instructional staff, and the community at large. |