Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Practical Behavior Management: Classroom & Parent-Based Procedures
Practical Behavior Management: Classroom & Parent-Based Procedures
Practical Behavior Management: Classroom & Parent-Based Procedures
Management:
Classroom & Parent-
based Procedures
Sheridan
Ed Psy 896
February 17-24, 1999
Characteristics of Behavioral
Disorders (“Tough Kids”)
Argumentative
Defiant
Aggressive
Tantrum behaviors
Rule breaking behaviors
The problem with these behaviors
is one of degree; they are behavioral excesses
Characteristics of Behavioral
Disorders (“Tough Kids”)
King pin behaviors (see Rhode, Jenson, &
Reavis):
something that is central to the behavioral
constellation
“the axle around which the other behavioral
excesses revolve”
For children with BD, what is the “kingpin?”
King Pin Behavior:
Noncompliance
Defined as:
Not following a direction within a reasonable time
frame
According to Rhode et al., arguing, tantrums, etc. are
secondary to avoiding requests or required tasks
Arguing or tantrums get the adult to rescind or
withdraw the request >>> arguing, tantrum stops
Coercive cycle: An aversive behavior forces/controls the
adult to withdraw a request
Coercive Hypothesis
(Patterson)
Postulates that children learn to “get their own way” and escape
or avoid parental criticism by escalating their negative
behaviors, which in turn leads to increasingly aversive parent
interactions
As this continues over time, the rate and intensity of parent and
child aggressive behaviors are increased
Coercive patterns are thought to promote children’s antisocial
behavioral development because they provide
reinforcement for oppositional, noncompliant behaviors, and
models of hostile and punitive interpersonal styles
Contrast this to...
Noncompliance
Most students comply to approximately 80% of adult requests
Tough kids comply to 40% or less
By-product of coercive cycle/noncompliance:
deficits in academic achievement, social skills, and self-
management
Discussion Questions:
How does this relate to your work as consultants?
What does this suggest regarding target behaviors?
How can noncompliance be defined & measured?
Positive Parenting
Parenting styles that are responsive, affectionate, and
proactive (“positive involvement”)
associated with lower levels of externalizing behavior
problems (see Pettit, Bates, & Dodge, 1993)
Includes
proactive teaching (noncontrolling parent-initiated
instructional exchanges and anticipatory guidance via these
exchanges)
affectionate positivity (emotional warmth)
inductive control (reasoning and respecting the child’s point of
view in disciplinary encounters)
responsiveness (sensitivity and appropriateness of parental
actions)
Positive Parenting
Provides a context
in which children’s social-emotional needs are met in emotionally
supportive ways
whereby opportunities for misbehavior are minimized (via
environmental engineering) and opportunities for compliance are
maximized (via well-timed, situation-specific control)
that facilitates the learning of social skills that can be employed during
peer interactions to prevent conflicts; and
that facilitates the development of harmonious, affectively positive
bond between parent and child, such that when control (discipline) is
used by a parent, it is more effective
Negative-Coercive vs.
Positive-Proactive Styles
Findings of Pettit et al. suggest that
the parenting constellation of high negative control and low parent
involvement may provide a socializing context for the development of
externalizing problems
absence of positive parenting may contribute to the onset of externalizing
problems, but it does not forecast subsequent increases in these behaviors
negative-coercive control, on the other hand, predicted initially high levels
of externalizing problems, and continued increases in problems over time
teachers’ and peers’ reactions help maintain or exacerbate externalizing
problems such that children reared in coercive homes may become tracked
into a pattern of increasingly aggressive interpersonal encounters at school
Negative-Coercive vs.
Positive-Proactive Styles
Implications suggested by Pettit et al:
Control episodes make up only a minority of all parent-
child interactions
It may be insufficient simply to help parents learn how
to better control their children’s behavior
Parents must acquire more proactive skills and learn to
anticipate their childrens’ social needs, to understand
their frustrations, and to engage them in more enjoyable
joint play
Practical Strategies for
Dealing with
Noncompliance
Maximize the chance that children
will be successful:
Be positive and proactive
Prevent noncompliance whenever
possible
Be very clear about expectations
Proactive (Antecedent) Strategies
Classroom & Home Rules
Characteristics of Good Rules:
Keep them to a minimum
Keep the wording simple
Represent basic expectations
Keep the wording positive
Make rules specific
Make them observable & measurable
Post the rules in a public place
Tie rules to consequences
Always include a compliance rule
What are Some Examples of
Good
Classroom Rules??
What are Some Examples of
Good
Household/Home Rules??
Proactive (Antecedent)
Strategies
Increase Academic Engaged (Learning) Time
Three basic components:
the percentage of the day scheduled for academics (should be
at least 70%)
on-task time of the student (should be at least 85%)
success of the student once (s)he is academically engaged
(should be at least 80%)
Why is ALT important, especially for “Tough Kids”?
How can ALT be identified and incorporated into CBC?
Proactive (Antecedent) Strategies
Structure the Physical Space
Seating arrangements
Examples?
* see p. 62 of
Rhode et al. (1992)
What to Do If (When) They
Don’t Comply
Other procedures:
response cost
time out
Considerations when using aversive techniques:
learn them well; ensure consultees know how to use them
appropriately
use secondarily to positive procedures
make efforts to keep student engaged in classroom or academic
activities whenever possible (e.g., “Bumpy Bunny Time Out;”
“Sit and Watch Time Out;” “Interclass Time Out”)