You are on page 1of 43

Behavior

Consultation: Case
Presentation

Presented by: Sarah Lipman


Psychology 636
Fall 2015
California State University, Chico

Sarah Lipman

Behavioral Consultation Case


Client:
Amy
Consultee:
Ms. Smith
Consultant:
Sarah
Lipman
Sarah Lipman

5thth grade girl


Lowest grade is a C
Latest Star Reading Score: 346 (Basic)
Latest Star Math Score: 383 (Proficient)
No record of previous intervention
Lives with her mother and aunt
Doesnt get much attention at home
Ms. Smith

3rd year as a general education teacher


1st time consultee
Expressed that developing relationships with
students was important to her

2nd year school psychology graduate student

Problem Description from the Consultee

She just doesnt seem to understand how to


behave in the classroom. She does what she
wants, walking around the room, hanging on me,
and never finishing her work. Its not that she
doesnt know how to do the work, I know she
does, I have seen her, but a lot of times she
doesnt get to finishing it because she is busy
doing these other things.
- Ms. Smith
Sarah Lipman

Operational Definitions
and Dimensions of
Behavior
Sarah Lipman

Behavior

Operational Definition

Dimension

On-Task

Sitting at a desk
Having appropriate work on
desk
No more than two
redirections

Increase duration

Off-Task

Walking around the


classroom
Frequent talking
Hugging or holding the
teacher

Decrease duration

Disruptions

Sarah Lipman

Banging on desk
Humming
Laughing loudly
Opening and closing desk
repetitively
Clicking or tapping pen
Screaming sounds such as
baa!

Decrease frequency

Sequence Analysis:
Sequence analysis

Sarah Lipman

Client Schedule
Time:

Activity:

8:10am - 8:40am

Morning Madness

8:40am - 9:15am

Grammar

9:15am - 9:45am

Reading

9:45am - 10:20am

Math

10:20am - 10:40am

Recess

10:40am - 11:20am

Math

11:20am - 12:00pm

Social Studies

12:00pm - 12:20pm

Teacher Read Aloud

12:20pm - 1:05pm

Lunch

1:05pm - 1:45pm

Writing

1:45pm- 2:05pm

Recess

2:05pm - 2:25pm

P.E

2:25pm - 2:35pm

Compliments/Clean Up

Sarah Lipman

Disruptions
intervention

On-Task intervention

Baseline

Sarah Lipman

Data Collection Sheet:

Sarah Lipman

Disruptions
Baseline
2.5
2
1.5

Mea
n= 5
SD=
3

Disruptions
Aimline
Class Mean

# of Disruptions
1
0.5
Mean= 2

0
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

The Baseline
Data
Showed:

On average, Amy made five disruptions


during English instruction.
On average, the disruptions varied by a
standard deviation of three per day.

Consultees
Opinion:

This was too high considering the class


mean, which is two disruptions during
English instruction.
She wanted Amys average to match the
class average.

Sarah Lipman

On-Task
100.00%

Baseline

Mean
=
89%

98.00%
96.00%
94.00%

On-Task

92.00%
% Time Spent On-Task
90.00%

Aim Line
Class
Mean

88.00%
86.00%
84.00%

Mean= 38%
SD= 16%

82.00%
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

The Baseline
Data
Showed:

On average, Amy was on-task 38% of


the time.
The time she was on-task varied with a
standard deviation of 16%.

Consultees
Opinion:

This was too low considering the class


mean, the class exhibits on-task
behavior 89% of the time.
She wanted Amys average to match the
class average.

Sarah Lipman

Intervention
Implementation

Sarah Lipman

Intervention Plan
DRI: Increasing time on-task
The student was rewarded for staying on-task for a
pre-set percentage of the total intervention time. As
Amy experienced success, the pre-set percentage
was increased, thus requiring more time on-task
before a reward was achieved. Amy was selfmonitoring with a visual aid/tracker. The visuals were
connect-the-dot puzzles. Amy tracked her progress
by connecting the dots and revealing a whole
picture. This was thought to increase motivation to
reach the next dot.

Sarah Lipman

Intervention Plan
DRL: Decreasing rate of disruptions
Amy was rewarded for making a pre-set number of
disruptions. As she experienced success, the pre-set
number was lowered, and thus only those instances of
lower rates of disruptions were rewarded. Amy was selfmonitoring the number of times she made a disruption,
using a visual aid/tracker sheet. The visual was a meter
with a stop sign at the top. This was thought to remind
her to decrease her disruptions as she got closer to the
top.

Sarah Lipman

Visual Tracker Examples


Puzzle Visual for DRI

Sarah Lipman

Thermometer Visual for DRL

DRL: Intervention Procedure


Independent Work, Direct Instruction,
and/or Transition

For each disruption,


consultee tells
student to put an X
in another box of
thermometer visual

Student makes
<X disruptions by
the end of 30 min
interval

Student can pick a


tangible
Sarah Lipman
reward

Student makes
>X disruptions by
the end of 30 min
interval
Student does not
have opportunity to
pick a tangible
reward

Phase

Interval

Days

4/30

3/30

2/30

1/30

DRI: Intervention Procedure


Direct Instruction and/or Independent
Work Time

Student is on-task

For every 5 minutes


student is on-task,
consultee tells
student to connect
another dot of the
puzzle
When the
puzzle/picture is
complete, the student
Sarah
can
pickLipman
a tangible
reward

Student is off-task

Consultee redirects
student to get on-task,
and reminds her how
much of the puzzle is
left before earning a
tangible reward

Phase

# of Dots to
Connect

Min

% of
Time

Days

15

33%

20

44%

25

56%

30

67%

35

77%

40

89%

Reinforcements for the Student


As Described by
Student
Class money
Helping teacher
Tether ball
Being with her best
friend
Drawing/art activities
Being bare foot

Sarah Lipman

As Observed by
Consultant and
Consultee
Seeks adult and peer
attention
Seeks physical
proximity

Reward Menu for Plan:


Class Money
Last 5 Minutes of P.E: Tether Ball With a Friend
Work next to Best Friend for 5 Minutes
Take Shoes Off for 5 Minutes
Opportunity to Help Teacher
Opportunity to Eat Lunch With Teacher
5 Minutes
to Work on Drawing/Collage Story; When Finished
Sarah Lipman
Can Read/Tell Story to Teacher

Intervention Data

Sarah Lipman

Disruptions
Baseline
2.5
2

Mea
n= 5
SD=
3

Pha
Mean=
se2
SD= 1
1

Phase 3

Phase 2

Mea
n= 5
SD=
2

Mean= 3
SD= 1

1.5
# of Disruptions
1
0.5
0
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

Phase 4
Mean= 2
SD= 1

Disruptions
Mean
Criterion Line
Class Mean

On-Task
Phase 1

100.00%

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Phase 5

Phase 6

Baseline

98.00%
96.00%
94.00%

On-Task
Mean

92.00%
% Time Spent On-Task
90.00%

Criterion
Line
Class
Mean

88.00%
86.00%
84.00%

Mean= 38%
SD= 16%

82.00%
Sarah Lipman

Mean= 81%
SD= 19%

Mean= 63%
SD= 23%

Mean=
72%
SD=
05%

Days of Data Collection

Mean=
78%
SD=
08%

Mean=
84%
SD= 12%

Mean=
96%
SD= 05%

Intervention Evaluation

Sarah Lipman

Disruptions Trendline

8
7
6
5
Disruptions

# of Disruptions
4
3
2
1
0
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

Disruptions Evaluation
Phase

Mean

Standard
Deviation

% Change in
Mean from
Baseline

% Change in
Standard
Deviation
from Baseline

Baseline

N/A

N/A

Phase 1

60% Decrease

67% Decrease

Phase 2

0 % Decrease

34% Decrease

Phase 3

40% Decrease

67% Decrease

Phase 4

60% Decrease

67% Decrease

Sarah Lipman

Disruptions Efficacy
Baseline
6.00 Compared to Last Phase Completed:

5.00

4.00

# of Disruptions

3.00

2.00

1.00
Sarah Lipman

0.00

60%
Decrease
Phase
Phase 4

On-Task Trendline
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
% Time Spent
0.5
On-Task
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection Per Phase

On-Task

On-Task Evaluation
Phase

Mean

Standard
Deviation

% Change in
Mean from
Baseline

% Change in
Standard
Deviation from
Baseline

Baseline

38%

16%

N/A

N/A

Phase 1

81%

19%

113% increase

19% increase

Phase 2

63%

23%

66% increase

44% increase

Phase 3

72%

5%

89% increase

69% decrease

Phase 4

78%

8%

105% increase

50% decrease

Phase 5

84%

12%

121% increase

25% decrease

Phase 6

96%

5%

152% increase

69% decrease

Sarah Lipman

On-Task Efficacy
Baseline
Compared to Last Phase Completed:
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%

152%
70.00%
Increase
60.00%
% Time On Task

50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%

Sarah Lipman

0.00%

Phase
Phase 6

Program Efficacy
Goal Was
Met for OnTask
Intervention

From baseline to Phase 6,


Amys time on-task increased
from 38% to 96%.
Her mean time on-task
surpassed the classroom mean.

Goal Was
Met for
Disruptions
Intervention

From baseline to Phase 4,


Amys disruptions decreased by
60%.
Her mean disruptions matches
the classroom mean.

Sarah Lipman

Thoughts About the Program


Consultees
Opinion

Sarah Lipman

I am really excited to see the change and how


much she enjoys this! I started using some of
these ideas and techniques with my other
students and I have noticed change for them
too!

Friends
Opinion

Kim told Ms. Smith, I am glad Amy is doing


this. I want to help Amy do her goal, that way
she can sit next to me!

Familys
Opinion

Her aunt has been coming into the classroom


to help Amy meet her goal, and has told the
teacher that Amy also gets an increased
allowance at home if she meets her goal.
She thinks the graphs are neat and have
helped her to see the changes at home too.

Maintenance and
Generalization

Sarah Lipman

Maintenance
On-Task
Amy has reached criterion
levels for staying on-task
89% of the time.
Amy will be expected to
meet criterion levels for 10
consecutive school days.
During the maintenance
phase Amy will still be
asked to complete her 8
connect puzzles, and will
continue to earn a reward
for each puzzle.
Sarah Lipman

Disruptions
Amy has reached the
criterion of two disruptions
per hour.
Amy will be expected to
meet criterion levels for 10
consecutive school days.
During the maintenance
phase, Amy will still be
asked to mark no more
than two boxes in her
thermometer visual and
will receive a reward at
the end of English
instruction.

Maintenance: Disruptions
Maintenance Phase (In Progress)
10
9
8
7
6
# of Disruptions
5
4

Mean= 1.2
SD= .42

3
2
1
0
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

Disruptions
Mean
Class Mean

Maintenance: On-Task
100.00%

Maintenance Phase (In Progress)

98.00%
96.00%
94.00%

On-Task
Mean
Class mean

92.00%
% Time Spent On- Task
90.00%
88.00%

Mean= 89%
SD= 0%

86.00%
84.00%
82.00%
Sarah Lipman

Days of Data Collection

Generalizing Plan
After maintenance
criterion has been met:
Switch to variable interval
schedule
Student will be reinforced at the
same rate as her peers
Fade antecedent
Condition the tangible reinforcers
to natural classroom reinforcers
Sarah Lipman

Generalizing Plan For Disruptions


Conditioning:
All tangible reinforcers will be paired with praise.
Visual Tracker
The thermometer visual is a salient and unnatural cue for
being reinforced. In order to help Amy wait for the natural
reinforcement in the classroom, we have to completely fade
away the visual cue. This will be done by gradually
decreasing the days of the week she uses the visual tracker.
Moving From Fixed to Variable Schedule
Ms. Smith is allowing Amy to pick a reinforcer every 30
minutes. In order to adjust this so that it is consistent with
the rest of the class, Amy will be told she can earn a
reinforcer on an increasingly variable interval (VI) schedule,
contingent upon how many Xs she has received. This will
mean that she will have increased chances to earn
reinforcers at first, to ease the transition into the variable
Sarah Lipman
schedule.

Generalizing for the Disruptive Behavior


Plan

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Phase 5

Individual praise
with nontangible
reinforcer
Use visual
trackers 4 out of
5 school days
VI 25

Remove the
non-social
reinforcer
options
Use visual
tracker 3 of the
5 school days
VI 26

Use visual
tracker 2 of the
5 school days
VI 27

Use visual
tracker 1 of the
5 school days
VI 29

No visual tracker
VI 30

Sarah Lipman

Generalizing Plan For On-Task


Conditioning:
All tangible reinforcers will be paired with praise.
Visual Tracker
The puzzle visual is a salient and unnatural cue for being
reinforced. In order to help Amy wait for the natural
reinforcement in the classroom, we have to completely fade
away the visual cue. This will be done by gradually
decreasing the days of the week she uses the visual tracker.
Moving from Fixed to Variable Schedule
Ms. Smith is allowing Amy to choose a reinforcer every 40
minutes. In order to adjust this so that it is consistent with
the rest of the class, Amy will be told after she completes a
puzzle, she can earn a reinforcer on an increasingly variable
interval (VI) schedule. This will mean that she will have
increased chances to earn reinforcers at first, to ease the
transition into the variable schedule.
Sarah Lipman

Generalizing for the on-task plan

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Phase 5

Individual praise
with non-social
reinforcer
Use visual
tracker 4 of the
5 school days
VI 32

Remove the
non-social
reinforcer option
Use visual
tracker 3 of the
5 school days
VI 34

Use visual
tracker 2 of the
5 school days
VI 36

Use visual
tracker 1 of the
5 school days
VI 38

No visual tracker
VI 40

Sarah Lipman

Comments or Questions?
Email Sarah Lipman at:
selipman000@aol.com

Sarah Lipman