Staff TrainingJulia Mandelbaum

Megan Duffy

& Diana Zitelli

Outline Didactic Training Hands-on Training Overview of Best Practices

Alpine Learning Group (ALG) Princeton Child Development Institute (PCDI) The Douglas Developmental Disabilities Center (DDDC)

Components of a Comprehensive Training Package

Didactic Training

Instructional training provided to staff concerning the principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA) and effective procedures to teach students with autism

Provided through workshops or coursework Conducted by qualified professionals in the field of

ABA

Example of didactic lesson http://www.behavior.org/autism/

(Lovaas, 1996; McClannan & Krantz, 2006; Stein, 1975)

Didactic Training

Didactic Training in School Programs

Preservice Training- conducted by staff trainers or directors

- occurs once a year, typically in August- usually 2 days to a week in duration- provides overview and history of applied behavior analysis (ABA) and principles of learning- teaches behavior analytic terminology- builds relationships between trainers and trainees- prerequisite to hands-on training

(Bondy, 1996; McClannahan & Krantz, 2001;Meyer, Taylor, Cerino, Fisher, Moran, & Richard, 2006; Romanczyk, Lockshin, & Matey, 2001; Romanczyk, Lockshin, Matey, & Gillis, 2006; Quilitch, 1975; Stein, 1978)

Didactic Training in School Programs Training Materials - consists of lectures and possible written examination of

content in workshop format - may include manual of organization’s policies, readings of

current research, slide presentations, role-plays, and videos (e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT2-lHyn980 )

- hand-outs may be provided - tests on materials may be administered and a passing grade

required

(Lovaas, 1996; McClannahan & Krantz, 2006; Quilitch, 1975; Romanczyk et al., 2006; Wallace,M.D., Doney, J.K., Mintz-Resudek, C.M., & Tarbox, R.S.F., 2004)

Didactic Training in School Programs Topics in Preservice Workshops

- may include reinforcement, punishment, shaping, generalization, errorless teaching, incidental teaching, stimulus control, chaining, behavior contingencies, prompt and prompt fading- managing problem behavior- teaching procedures- overview of autism and developmental disabilities- arrangement of teaching environment- data collection

(Lovass, 1996; Luiselli & St. Amand, 2005; McGee, Morrier, & Daly, 2001; Meyer et al., 2006; Sepler & Myers, 1978)

Didactic Training in School Programs In-service Training/ Staff Meetings

- review current research

- expand behavior analytic terminology

- follow-up to preservice training

- discuss goals, program evaluation, analyze problems

(Lovass, 1996; MClannahan & Krantz, 2001; Meyer et al., 2006)

Didactic Training in School Programs Conferences

- professional conferences in the areas of autism and ABA- cover recent developments in the field- may be required or encouraged by organization- Suggested Conferences:

Center for Outreach & Services for the Autism Community (COSAC), Association for Behavior Analysis (ABA) International

state chapter of ABA

(Bondy, 1996; Handleman, Harris, Arnold, Cohen, & Gordon, 2006; Romanczyk et al., 2006)

Didactic Trainingin School Programs Approved Courses in ABA

- class in ABA and autism may be required by organization- courses should be approved by Behavior Analysis Certification Board (BACB)- passing grade in courses on principles of learning or ABA- Schools offering approved courses in ABA and autism

Rutgers University – New Brunswick, NJCaldwell College – Caldwell, NJQueens College – New York, NYUniversity of South Florida – Tampa, FL

(Bondy, 1996; Handelman et al., 2006; Smith, Donahoe, & Davis, 2001)

Didactic Training in Home Programs Workshops/ In-services/ Staff Meetings

- parents are responsible for providing training by qualified professionals to staff- provide general information about ABA and autism- teach technical language and principles of ABA

(e.g., shaping, reinforcement, punishment, extinction)

- how to educate community about ABA- require readings of textbooks, research literature

(e.g., Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968; Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007)

- may provide manual of services

(Neef, Parrish, Egel, & Sloan, 1986; Scott, 1996)

Effectiveness of Didactic Training Procedures Staff has increased knowledge of behavior

principles and autism - Improved verbal and written skills- Increased test scores after training

Staff become better trainers May be helpful for later feedback and training

(although research has refuted this) Staff have evaluated workshops as beneficial

(Dowey, Toogood, Hastings, & Nash, 2007; Gardner, 1972; McClannahan & Krantz, 1993; McGee et al., 2001; Neef et al., 1986; Quilitch, 1975; Sepler & Myers, 1978)

Effectiveness of Didactic Training Procedures Can be conducted in short amount of time

- this is a benefit if time is limited, but a disadvantage in terms of material that can be covered

Better staff-student relationships- Staff more likely to reinforce desirable behavior and not

undesirable behavior after didactic training

(Sepler & Meyers, 1978; Stein, 1975)

Problems with Didactic Training Procedures Increases in staff performance occur without

didactic training Hands on training with feedback alone successful (Quilitch, 1978)

Problems with Didactic Training Procedures

(Quilitch, 1978)

Problems with Didactic Training Procedures Unless tests on materials are required,

workshop material knowledge is not consequated- exams improve correct written responses on workshop material, but do not correlate with improvements in practical applications of material- skills learned in didactic training do not generalize to and are not maintained in applied settings

Workshop training is costly-hands-on training is more cost-effective

(Neef et al., 1986; Quilitch, 1978; Sepler & Myers, 1978; Smith, 1995)

Problems with Didactic Training Procedures Ethical Considerations

- observations of inappropriate use of behavior techniques in applied settings may mean lack of understanding of principles by staff

- short (week-long) workshops do not teach all relevant issues- research shows no relationship between didactic training and practical application of teaching procedures

(McClannahan & Krantz, 1993; Quilitch, 1978; Stein, 1975)

Considerations with Didactic Training Follow-up services and consultations on weekly or

monthly basis Train families Collect data on appropriate application of behavioral

techniques Arrange for consequences for participation in workshops Ongoing hands-on training is essential

(Lovaas, 1996; McClannahan & Krantz, 1993; Meyers et al., 2006; Quilitch, 1978; Stein, 1975)

Hands-on Training

Hands-on Training Modeling

The trainer will model the teaching procedure, the trainee will then attempt to match the trainer’s model

Repeated practice: modeling, rehearsal, and feedback Demonstrated to be effective in training teaching skills:

Discrete trial teaching Incidental teaching Behavior reduction Implementation of functional analyses Implementation of preference assessments

(Sarakoff & Sturmey 2004; Schepis et al., 2001; Moore et al., 2002; Lavie & Sturmey 2002; Roscoe et al, 2006)

Demonstrated to be effective in generalization of teaching skills across settings and students (Schepis et al., 2001, Ducharme & Feldman 1992)

Hands-on Training Other techniques in modeling:

Rehearsal / role-playing – without the student present After didactic training, but before hands-on training

Video Modeling Demonstrated to be effective in training instructional staff to

implement functional analyses, and preference assessments (Wallace et al., 2004; Lavie & Sturmey 2002)

Hands-on Training Immediate Feedback

Behavior specific feedback

Include BOTH positive statement AND corrective feedback (Roscoe et al., 2006)

Example: “I like the way you used an natural tone when presenting the instruction to Johnny. Remember to also gain his eye contact and be sure he is attending before presenting the instruction.”

Hands-on Training Shaping

Use most to least prompting Behavior specific praise Reinforcement of successive improvement in skills(Shepis et al., 2001; Sarakoff & Sturmey 2004)

Fading Based on measurable, observable assessment of skills

Hands-on Training Ongoing performance feedback

On an ongoing basis, trainers and direct supervisors provide feedback as necessary (and modeling and rehearsal, if appropriate)

Feedback among peers On an ongoing basis, instructional staff can provide feedback to

each other as needed

Demonstrated to be an effective method for maintaining improvements in staff teaching skills (Fleming & Sulzer-Azaroff, 1992)

Feedback reciprocity: multilateral feedback system (McClannahan & Krantz, 1993)

Training the Trainers to Train Trainees

Trainers must demonstrate mastery of the teaching skills before training instructional staff (McClannahan & Krantz, 1993)

In addition, trainers should be trained specifically in how to train new staff (i.e., training in provision of feedback, and evaluation of staff performance) (Parsons & Reid, 1995)

Follow the same model to train trainers! Modeling Rehearsal / Role-playing Immediate feedback Performance-based evaluation (Parsons & Reid, 1995)

Hands-on Trainingin Home Programs Use the same model to train home based

instructors, parents, siblings, and other caretakers (Krantz & McClannahan, 1993) Modeling Rehearsal / Role-playing Immediate feedback Performance-based evaluation*

Hands-on Training Measuring Outcomes (McClannahan & Krantz, 1993)

Performance-based evaluation A trainer can measure trainees’ performance (using a task

analysis of teaching components) while conducting a training session or to periodically evaluate maintenance of teaching skills (Procedural Integrity data sheet)

Performance data are used to determine a trainee’s mastery of teaching skills

Evaluate trainer performance based on trainee progress Learner-based evaluation

Evaluate trainer and trainee performance based on student progress

Overview of Best Practices

Alpine Learning Group

On going training and supervision Forty hour staff training Continued training and supervision In-services and research meetings

Alpine Learning Group Annual employee performance evaluation

Data collected

Serves as way to assess Formal training week

PCDI Pre-service In-service Hands on training Trainer/Trainee relationship

PCDI Evaluation of staff

Identical to training protocol Conducted by senior professional

DDDC Annual staff training Ongoing training Service of Division of Research

Conclusions

Components of a Comprehensive Training Package

Conclusions: Components of a Comprehensive Training Package

Didactic training alone does not result in mastery of teaching skills

Hands-on training is essential in improving teaching skills

Ongoing training and feedback are necessary to maintain teaching skills

Performance-based evaluations & learner-based evaluations allow assessment of efficacy of training procedures

ReferencesBondy, A. (1996). What parents can expect from public school programs. In C. Maurice, G. Green, and S. C. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral

interventions for young children with autism (pp. 323-330). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Bondy, A. & Battaglini, K. (2006). Application of the Pyramid Approach to Education model in a public school setting. In J.S.

Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age education programs for children with autism (pp 163-194). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Codding, R. S., Feinberg, A.B., Dunn, E.K., & Pace, G. M. (2005). Effects of immediate performance feedback on implementation of

behavior support plans. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 205-219. Dowey, A., Toogood, S., Hastings, R.P., & Nash, S. (2007). Can brief workshop interventions change care staff understanding of

challenging behaviors? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 20, 52-57.Ducharme, J.M., & Feldman, M.A. (1992). Comparison of staff training strategies to promote generalized teaching skills. Journal of

Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 165-179. Fleming, R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1992). Reciprocal peer management: Improving staff instruction in a vocational training program.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 611-620. Gardner, J.M. (1972). Teaching behavior modification to nonprofessionals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 517-21.Handleman, J.S., Harris, S.L., Arnold, M.S., Cohen, M., & Gordon, R. (2006). The Douglass Development Disabilities Center. In J.S.

Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age education programs for children with autism (pp 89-114). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Lavie, T. & Sturmey, P. (2002). Training staff to conduct a paired-stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior

Analysis, 35, 209-211. Lovaas, O.I. (1996). The UCLA Young Autism Model of Service Delivery. In C. Maurice, G. Green, and S. C. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral

interventions for young children with autism (pp. 241-250). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Luiselli, J.K. & St. Amand, C. (2005). Staff training in applied behavior analysis: Improving knowledge competencies of service

providers for people with developmental disabilities. Mental Health Aspects of Developmental Disabilities, 8, 120-125.Maurice, C., Green, G., & Luce, S. C. (Eds.). (1996). Behavioral intervention for young children with autism. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. McClannahan, L.E. & Krantz, P.J. (1993). On systems analysis in autism intervention programs. Journal of Applied Behavior

Analysis, 26, 589-596.

ReferencesMcClannahan, L.E. & Krantz, P.J. (2001) Behavior analysis and intervention for preschoolers at the Princeton Child

Development Institute. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp 191-214). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

McClannahan, L.E. & Krantz, P.J. (2006) Behavior analysis and intervention for school-age children at the Princeton Child Development Institute. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age education programs for children with autism (pp 143-162). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

McGee, G.G., Morrier, M.J., & Daly, T. (2001). The Walden Early Childhood Programs.. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp 157-190). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Meyer, L.S., Taylor, B.A., Cerino, K.E., Fisher, J.R., Moran, L. & Richard, E. (2006). Alpine Learning Group. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age education programs for children with autism (pp 19-48). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Moore, J.W., Edwards, R.P., Sterling-Turner, H.E., Riley, J., DuBard, M, & McGeorge, A. (2002). Teacher acquisition of functional analysis methodology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 73-77.

Neef, N.A. (1995). Research on training trainers in program implementation: an introduction and future directions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 297 – 299.

Neef, N.A., Parrish, J.M., Egel, A.L., & Sloan, M.E. (1986). Training respite care providers for families with handicapped children: Experimental analysis and validation of an instructional package. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 109-124.

Parsons, M.B., Reid, D.H. (1995). Training residential supervisors to provide feedback for maintaining staff teaching skills with people who have severe disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 317 – 322.

Quilitch, H.R. (1975). A comparison of three staff-management procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 59-66

Romanczyk, R.G., Lockshin, S.B., & Matey, L. (2001). The Children’s Unit for Treatment and Evaluation. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp 49-94). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

ReferencesRomanczyk, R.G., Lockshin, S.B., Matey, L., & Gillis, J.M. (2006). The Children’s Unit for Treatment and Evaluation. In J.S.

Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age education programs for children with autism (pp 49-88). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Roscoe, E.M., Fisher, W.W., Glover, A.C., & Volkert, V.M. (2006). Evaluating the relative effects of feedback and contingent money for staff training of stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 63-77.

Sarokoff, R. & Sturmey, P. (2004). The effects of behavioral skills training on staff implementation of discrete trial teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 535-538.

Schepis, M.M., Reid, D.H., Ownbey, J., Parsons, M.B. (2001). Training support staff to embed teaching within natural routines of young children with disabilities in an inclusive preschool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 313-327.

Scott, J. (1996). Recruiting, selecting, and training teaching assistants. In C. Maurice, G. Green, and S. C. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral interventions for young children with autism (pp. 231-240). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Sepler, H.J. & Myers, S.L. (1978). The effectiveness of verbal instruction on teaching behavior-modification skills to nonprofessionals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 198.

Smith, D.M. (1995). A system of program evaluation and the use of feedback as a means of improving service delivery. Behavioral Interventions, 10, 225-236.

Smith, T., Donahoe, P.A., & Davis, B.J. (2001). The UCLA Young Autism Project. In J.S. Handleman & S.L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp. 29-48). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Stein, T.J. (1975). Some ethical considerations of short-term workshops in the principles and methods of behavior modification. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 113-115.

Wallace, M.D., Doney, J.K., Mintz-Resudek, C.M., & Tarbox, R.S.F. (2004). Training educators to implement functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 89-92.