PROACTIVE STRATEGIES FOR MANAGING SOCIAL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS: AN

INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH
Author(s): Geoffrey Colvin and George Sugai
Source: Education and Treatment of Children , NOVEMBER 1988, Vol. 11, No. 4, SPECIAL
ISSUE: Direct Instruction: A General Case for Teaching the General Case (NOVEMBER
1988), pp. 341-348
Published by: West Virginia University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42899082

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

West Virginia University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Education and Treatment of Children

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EDUCATION AND TREATMENT OF CHILDREN Vol. 11, No. 4, November, 1988

PROACTIVE STRATEGIES FOR MANAGING

SOCIAL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS:
AN INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH

Geoffrey Colvin
Lane County Educational Service District

George Sugai
University of Oregon

ABSTRACT

Educators often approach instructional problems differently from social problems. Typically, p
tive strategies are used to remediate instructional problems. On the other hand, reactive strate
are often used as the primary intervention for social problems. There are, however, clear paral
between instructional problems and social problems in both the way the respective behavi
are established and in the design of possible remedies. These parallels are identified and a
instructional plan is presented for remedying social problems.

★ ★ ★

When a student makes an error in academ

procedure is to intervene by implementing
model-lead-test) and providing the student
nine & Silbert, 1979; Engelmann & Camine
come persistent or chronic, then additi
has to diagnose the problem (i.e., try to i
presentation so that the student has more
provide more practice and review (Enge
1982). Clearly, a proactive emphasis is p
academic content.
In contrast, the occurrence of social behavior problems frequently elicits
very different reactions. When a student breaks a classroom rule, infringes
upon the rights of others, or violates setting or social norms, we intervene
by providing negative consequences. The assumption is that the student will
be more likely to choose the appropriate behavior the next time this partic-
ular situation arises. If the student fails to terminate this troublesome social
behavior, the typical approach is to escalate the level of negative consequences,
usually in the form of detention, suspension, and expulsion (Center & McKit-
trick, 1987). The assumption is that by removing the student from the normal
environment, the student will behave appropriately in the future in order to
stay in that environment. In effect, the teaching response is reactive when
schools are confronted with social behavior problems.
It is evident that common practice among educators is to approach aca-
demic problems differently from social problems. Essentially, instructional prin-

Pages 341-348

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 342 COLVIN AND SUGAI

Ikble 1
A Comparison of Approaches to Academic and Social Problems

Procedures for Procedures for

Kind of Error Academic Problem Social Problem

Infrequent Assume student is trying Assume student is not

to make correct response. trying to make correct response.
Assume error was accidental. Assume error was deliberate.
Provide assistance (model- Provide negative consequence,
lead-test).
Provide practice. Practice not required.
Assume student has learned Assume student will make right
skill and will perform choice and behave in future,
correctly in future.
Frequent Assume student has learned Assume student refuses to
(Chronic) the wrong way. cooperate.
Assume student has been Assume student knows what is right
taught (inadvertently) and has been told often,
the wrong way.
Diagnose the problem. Provide more negative
consequences.
Identify misrule. Withdraw student from normal
context.

Adjust presentation, Focus on Maintain student removal from

rule. Provide feedback. normal context.
Provide practice and review.
Assume student has been Assume student has "learned"
taught skill and will per- lesson and will behave in future,
form correctly in future.

ciples are used to remediate academic problems while negative consequences

typically are used to manage social problems. The differences in the two ap-
proaches are summarized in Täble 1.
In this paper we illustrate how instructional principles can be employed to
remediate chronic social behavior problems. The similarities between strate-
gies for effective remediation of academic and social behavior difficulties will
be described. Finally, the critical steps of this approach will be summarized.
Our presentation is premised on the application of effective and efficient
teaching practices. These practices focus on skill development through a careful
analysis of instructional content and an equally careful analysis of strategies
for efficient delivery of instruction (Dixon, 1984; Engelmann & Camine, 1982).
Efforts are made to maximize achievement gains by increasing academic en-
gaged time (Brophy & Good, 1986; Stevens & Rosenshine, 1981). Second, it
is assumed that effective social behavior change strategies are used. These strate-
gies come primarily from the applied behavior analysis literature (Paine,
Radicchi, Rosellini, Deutchman, & Darch, 1983; Wolery, Bailey, & Sugai, 1988).
The last assumption is that the behavioral approach is the most appropriate
for classroom settings. While other approaches have their proponents, the med-
ical and developmental models have little application in educational settings
because they rely on the direct treatment of physical problems or the indirect

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MANAGING SOCIAL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS 343

resolution of problems that are inherent to th

teachers. In contrast, the behavioral model fo
tween what students do (i.e., their behaviors) a
contexts (i.e., contingencies), and the manipu
strengthen or weaken behaviors.

The Instructional Model For Remediating Ac

When a student consistently produces academic

teachers typically attempt to remediate the prob
student's error patterns are assessed. Teachers loo
types of performance errors (White & Haring

1. Acquisition error: Failure to learn the skill or

performance or the use of a misrule.
2. Fluency error: Failure to perform with suffi
even though the response might be accurate
3. Maintenance error: Failure of the response to
struction is removed.

4. Generalization error: Failure to emit the response or skill under non-

instructional conditions or to non-instructed examples.

An accurate identification of error type assists in the selection and/or

modification of a suitable intervention.
The second step is to teach an alternative and effective response by shaping
the instructional context and by providing differential feedback. In the former,
we focus our attention on the antecedent and setting variables to which the
students must respond. In the latter, the emphasis is placed on the positive
reinforcement of correct student responses (or approximations of correct re-
sponses) and the removal or withholding of attention for incorrect responses.

Illustration

Beginning readers often use guessing strategies for certain words like "a"
and "the" (Engelmann, 1988). Typically, they interchange "a" with "the", or
skip these words or they might substitute other words. Teachers may have rein-
forced the student for decoding key words in a passage, but may have ignored
errors related to decoding "the" and "a". It is possible, then, that a chain of
responses may have been reinforced (correct responses on the key words and
incorrect responses on "a" and "the"). In effect, the student may have been
reinforced for guessing.
The important feature of this illustration is that students have learned a
strategy for reading "a" and "the", albeit, an incorrect strategy. They have
learned to guess rather than decode. To remedy the problem, we need to re-
place the guessing strategy with decoding skills. However, if we restricted our
remedy to the use of reinforcement, we may not succeed in teaching a replace-

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 344 COLVIN AND SUGAI

ment strategy. If the stude

follow. If the student guess
not follow. The student wo
there is no guarantee that t
In other words the student
differential reinforcement
skills) we need to shape th
forcement.
To shape the context, we m
is easier to teach the replac
decrease the likelihood that
Three steps are involved i

1. Teach the replacement st

2. Teach the replacement st
ically adjusted from the m
3. Teach the replacement st

In our illustration where t

or "the" in a passage, the re
the target context would b
the words entirely removed
decode the words "a" and "the" in a vertical word list such as:

cat
the
if
then
a
me
the
dog
a

For the second step we would introduce contexts that begin to approximate
a passage such as a horizontal word list:
dog, the, cat, me, a, then, if, the, if, a.

Sentences could then be constructed that do not relate to each other such as:

The boy saw a dog. A girl hit the ball.

The final step would be to teach the decoding skills in a typical passage
such as:

The boy saw a dog. It was big and black. The boy was very scared and
ran into a shop. The shopkeeper said, "You look scared, what is wrong?"
The boy said, "There is a big black dog out there." The boy sat down
in the store for a few minutes.

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MANAGING SOCIAL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS 345

In effect there are two overall steps in remediating

in instruction. The first is to clearly identify the er
guesses). Second, we need to teach a replacement
by shaping the context (word lists, sentences, passag
reinforcement (feedback).

The Instructional Model for Remediating Socia

The same two steps can be used to remediate social

a student engages in an inappropriate social behavior
the error patterns. In this case, the analysis is directe
response. The observations are made within a functio
potheses as to why the response may or may not be
(Carr & Durrand, 1985).
The second step is to teach the student a replaceme
the context and by providing differential feedback.
allow the student more of a chance to exhibit the re
the typical unacceptable behavior. In effect, the stud
certain behaviors (more effective and more acceptab
ally is exhibited. Generally, the alternate response or
the typical or acceptable behavior displayed by other
ular context.

Illustration

Suppose that during small group instruction a student calls the teacher's
name without raising her hand, calls the teacher names, and rips her reading
materials when she is told to be quiet.
Step 1: Analyze the behavior pattern. When we assess the student's response
patterns, we observe that the student usually engages in these undesirable re-
sponses when the reading words are new or difficult. We also notice that the
student does not have an acceptable strategy for getting teacher attention. When
the tantrum is concluded, we observe that the student gets the teacher to work
with her, one-on-one, after the small group is over. In other observations we
notice that these behaviors are not present when she is in a one-to-one situa-
tion. This assessment information indicates the following:

• The inappropriate behaviors occur in group instruction and do not occur

in one-to-one instruction.
• Inappropriate behaviors begin in the context of difficult or new work in
group instruction.
• Other students put up their hand when they need help. This student was
never observed to put up her hand for help. Hand raising is the expected
behavior for asking help.
• The behaviors escalate until she has the undivided attention of the teacher.

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
346 COLViN AND SUGAI

Step 2: Teach a replaceme

that the student is not firm
consequently, these behavior
that need to be taught are

1. Raise hand to ask for h

2. Remain on task when t

These replacement strateg

differential reinforcement.
in the one-to-one context
haviors do not occur in the
teaching her to raise her ha
the student is more likely to
behaviors occurring in the g
the student can do almost a
when she needs help, and al
the teacher should ignore
should positively reinforce h
with additional enthusiasm
several practice sessions in t
she needs help. She should b
for on task behavior and
The next step is to teach
working with other student
she finds interesting and en
By choosing high interest w
task when the teacher is att
reinforced frequently, inte
Finally, when the student is
strated that she can stay on
with other students, we can
we might provide a precorr
session. During this session
difficult words. This preven
will be successful with the
also include a review of wha
to do when the teacher is r
second strategy would be to
would get more turns than
and more frequent than u
cessful and gets more pract
able in raising her hand for
modified systematically unt
students and the group instr

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MANAGING SOCIAL BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS 347

Ikble 2
Comparison of Procedures to Remediate Chronic Academic Problems and
Chronic Behavior Problems

Chronic Academic Problem Chronic Behavior Problem

STEP 1 Identify the error pattern Identify functional rela-

or misrule. tionships between behavior
and environment.
STEP 2 Identify rule. Identify expected or
acceptable behaviors.
STEP 3 Modify examples and Modify environment to allow
presentation to provide practice of expected
clearer focus on rule and behaviors and remove
provide less opportunity stimuli that are likely to
for practice of misrule. occasion the inappropriate
behavior.
STEP 4 Provide differential feedback Provide differential rein-
so that more accurate forcement so that
responses are more direction of correct
strongly reinforced. responding is reinforced.
STEP 5 Shape context towards target Move towards least restrictive
context, provide review and environment program for
integrate skill with other generalization and
skills. maintenance.

The procedures used to remed

be applied to remediating a c
summarized in Table 2.

Conclusion

At the beginning of this article, we made the assertion that educators typi-
cally use different procedures for managing chronic academic problems com-
pared to chronic social behavior problems. Proactive strategies generally are
used to remediate academic problems. However, in the management of se-
rious or chronic behavior problems, the approach is often reactive, where a
hierarchy of negative consequences are delivered leading to exclusion.
In our discussion we tried to demonstrate that instructional approaches io
remedying academic problems have direct application to solving social be-
havior problems. The approach involves two steps. First, we analyze the be-
havior pattern, and second, we teach replacement strategies by modifying the
context and using differential reinforcement. While the research literature sup-
ports this instructional model for social behavior problems, this approach is
not widely used by educators. It has considerable potential for reducing be-
havior problems in school systems.
To summarize, we suggest that there is little difference in how teachers should
respond to academic and social behavior problems. Both types of problems
require a proactive approach in which (a) the student's performance patterns

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 348 COLVIN AND SUGAI

(correct and incorrect res

nate and effective respon
structional context and pr
proactive approach could g
cluded from schools and i
success.

References

Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. S. Wittrock
(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 328-375). New York: MacMillan.
Camine, D., & Silbert, J. (1979). Direct instruction reading. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communi-
cation training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 18, 111-126.
Center, D. B., & McKittrick, S. (1987). Disciplinary removal of special education students. Focus
on Exceptional Children , 20(2), 1-9.
Colvin, G. (1987). Managing behavior problems in the classroom: A re-teaching model. Eugene,
OR: Behavior Associates.

Dixon, R. C. (1984). Sameness analysis - unique power of D.I.: What you get is far more than
what you see. Association for Direct Instruction News , 5(4), 1,15.
Engelmann, S. (1987). Chronic errors. Unpublished manuscript. Division of Teacher Education,
University of Oregon, Eugene.
Engelmann, S. (1988). Personal communication.
Engelmann, S., & Camine, D. (1982). Theory of instruction : Principles and applications. New
York: Irvington.
Paine, S., Radicchi, J., Rosellini, L. C., Deutchman, L., & Darch, C. B. (1983). Structuring your
classroom for academic success. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Stevens, R., & Rosenshine, B. V. (1981). Advances in research on teaching. Exceptional Education
Quarterly ' 2(1), 1-9.
White, O., & Haring, N. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
Wolery, M. R., Bailey, D. B., Jr., & Sugai, G. M. (1988). Effective teaching : Principles and proce-
dures of applied behavior analysis with exceptional children. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

This content downloaded from

151.236.166.179 on Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:09:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms