10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
Record: 1
Title: Strategies for improving maintenance and generalization of academic
skills--so students `don't...
Authors: Gable, Robert A.
Hendrickson, Jo M.
Source: Preventing School Failure. Fall92, Vol. 37 Issue 1, p35. 6p. 1 Chart, 1
Graph.
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: *Education
Abstract: Discusses a paradigm that can guide teachers in identifying strategies to
promote generalization of academic skills. Application of skills learned in
the classroom to solve problems, adapt to new demands and cope
successfully; Concepts of maintenance and generalization; Antecedent
events.
Full Text Word Count: 3620
ISSN: 1045-988X
Accession Number: 9604140492
Database: Education Research Complete
STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING MAINTENANCE AND GENERALIZATION OF ACADEMIC
SKILLS--SO STUDENTS "DON'T LEAVE CLASS WITHOUT IT"
By most accounts, the goal of instruction is for students to apply the skills they have learned in the classroom to
solve problems, adapt to new demands, and cope successfully in mainstream and natural settings (e.g., home
or community) (Haring & Liberty, 1990). Accordingly, if students do not apply knowledge or are unable to
perform skills learned in the classroom when they are in noninstructional situations, then the functional worth of
instruction is in doubt. Furthermore, regardless of how relevant instruction may appear to the teacher, student,
or parents, there is ample reason to question whether students with special needs automatically will retain or
generalize, in different settings, the knowledge and skills they have learned in the classroom. Absence of a
systematic plan to facilitate the maintenance and transfer of learning (i.e., generalization) is one reason that
many students with learning problems do not retain skills that have been taught previously or do not apply them
in different circumstances.
Research suggests that not all teachers routinely plan for instruction beyond the "advanced acquisition stage of
learning" (defined as 65-80870 accuracy) (Haring, Lovitt, Eaton, & Hansen, 1978; Smith, 1981), in spite of
strong evidence that mastery learning is a necessary prerequisite for retention. For learning to transfer to new
situations--a process known as generalization--mastery learning appears to be a necessary but not a sufficient
condition. For learning to be relevant to the daily life and future of a student, it must endure and be accessible
to that student under conditions that differ from those in which learning initially occurred.
The concepts of maintenance and generalization are not new. However, we wish to stress that instruction
cannot be considered relevant if learning is neither retained nor applied to meet the daily challenges students
face. Relevant instruction must ensure that knowlede and skills are maintained and generalized. In many
instances, maintenance and generalization will need to be taught systematically as skills in and of themselves
(Vaughn, Bos, & Lund, 1986).
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 1/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
Basic Steps of Planning, Teaching, and Evaluating Student Performance
Maintenance and generalization of academic skills are facilitated when teachers employ an instructional
decisionmaking process described by Haring and Liberty (1990). First, the skills to be maintained or
generalized must be identified and operationally defined. Haring and Liberty advise that teachers select skills
that are naturally reinforced, are reinforcing to the student, and are useful in many settings. Second, it is critical
that the student's present level of performance be assessed in different instructional and generalization settings
before teaching strategies are introduced. Third, generalization objectives should be written in the student's
individualized education program (IEP) and should include the same components as any well-written
behavioral objective--that is, a specific description of observable behavior, the conditions under which the skill
will be performed, and objective performance criteria. Every IEP objective, of course, must include an
evaluation procedure (e.g., direct observation) and an anticipated schedule for achieving each objective.
Fourth, it is important for teachers to select instructional strategies that facilitate skill retention and the transfer
of learning (see Instructional Strategies to Promote Generalization). Fifth, the maintenance and generalization
of knowledge and skills must be assessed systematically. For these reasons, it is recommended that student
performance be assessed in all settings.
Assessing maintenance and generalization in every applicable situation is unrealistic; therefore, teachers often
rely on probe data. A probe is a measure of the target skill(s) made in a representative number of situations in
which the skill will be used. One-minute probes, such as those used in precision-teaching assessments (Howell
& Lorson-Howell, 1990), provide an adequate sample of some skills (e.g., retention of division facts), whereas
direct observation of student performance in more naturally occurring situations is more appropriate for other
skills (e.g., generalization of adding the values of different coins! Probes should be planned so naturally
occurring cues will set the occasion for the given responses (e.g., when a student must decide if the sum of his
or her coins will pay for a desired item). Probes also should be conducted in situations in which all
supplemental prompts and artificial cues have been removed (e.g., in a grocery store).
Instructional Strategies to Promote Generalization
To assist the teacher in devising a means for systematically planning instruction for generalization, we propose
the ABCD'S Generalization Intervention Model. This model is an extension of the ABC assessment paradigm
employed by Bijou, Peterson, and Ault (1968) to examine the influence of naturally occurring antecedent (A)
and consequent events (C) on behavior (B). Sasso and his colleagues (in press) have demonstrated the
usability of an ABC assessment approach for classroom teachers and have documented its acceptability to
teachers. Each component of the ABCD'S Generalization Intervention Model--antecedent events (A), behavior
(B), consequent events (C), data (D), and setting events (S)--is defined below. The setting events component is
presented first, because it constitutes the milieu for all other components of the model.
Setting Events (S)
General conditions that surround the behavior are referred to as setting events. Setting events influence
behavior; they provide the context in which a response will be deemed appropriate or inappropriate, correct or
incorrect. Setting events include the time of day, the physical layout of the room, temperature and lighting, the
number of people present, and so on. Setting events also may include the emotional and/or physical status of
each individual as well as the "classroom climate."
Antecedent Events (A)
Antecedent events are the specific stimuli that immediately precede and set the occasion for a given response.
In the case of an academic skill, a specific antecedent may include such events as a teacher's verbal direction-
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 2/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
-"Begin"; the visual display of a math problem on a computer monitor; and a self-instruction such as, "i before e
except after after c or . . ."
Behavior (B)
The knowledge to be demonstrated or specific skill to be performed is considered to be the target behavior in
an ABCD'S paradigm. Behavior--skills or knowledge--must be observable and measurable. Target behaviors
may include any academic skill in any response modality. Examples of academic responses include a verbal
explanation of a natural phenomenon, printing a word, writing an essay, marking an item on a multiple choice
test, identifying cities on a state map, or drawing a geometric figure.
Consequent Events (C)
Consequent events are those environmental events that immediately follow the behavior and serve to maintain,
increase, or decrease the frequency of the behavior. Consequent events may be artificial (e.g., tokens) or
naturally occurring events (e.g., the letters of a row and column of words in a jigsaw puzzle fit together). The
actual consequent events that function to maintain, increase, or decrease the occurrence of an academic
response may differ from student to student. Consequent events can be arranged to follow target behaviors,
instances of generalized responding only, or both target and generalized responses. Consequent events may
be arranged to occur on different schedules (e.g., a token for every correct or for every five correct spelling
words), or they may occur naturally on different schedules (e.g., the amount of pay depending on the number of
sales or the number of hours worked).
Data (D)
To determine whether a behavior (i.e., academic response) has been maintained or generalized, teachers must
collect objective measures of the occurrence of that behavior. Data can be collected on the frequency of a
behavior, response duration and/or intensity, the number of trials to criterion, and the number and type of
errors. Data can be gathered on the topography of a response. For example, if a vocational teacher asks a
student how many times he or she put in overtime last month, the student might answer, "twice." However,
other responses also would be accurate and appropriate (e.g., holding up two fingers, saying "two times" or
"two days"). Thus, data on the number of correct but topographically different responses can be collected.
Permanent products that represent actual student work can be used to assess performance (e.g., handwriting
on a homework assignment, on a note to a friend, and on a telephone message). Finally, students can selfrecord, serve as data collectors on the performance of other students, and use computer software that
automatically generates records of rate correct and rate incorrect.
By systematically examining each component of the ABCD'S Generalization Intervention Model, the teacher
can develop generalization training strategies and assess the effects of those strategies. By way of example,
an ABCD'S plan for a hypothetical student, Jason, is described below. In this illustration, the teacher employed
strategies to promote maintenance/generalization of correct capitalization by focusing on one component of the
ABCD'S model at a time.
Jason has been taught to use correct capitalization at an accuracy level of 90% correct in all written work in his
resource classroom. The setting component of the ABCD'S paradigm is modified to promote retention and
generalization through collaboration among all of his teachers (i.e., the special education and general
education teachers), who one by one begin to require Jason to capitalize correctly in their assignments.
Originally, a specific antecedent event was used to set the occasion for correct capitalization in the resource
room. Before beginning to write the first word of any sentence on an assignment (i.e., after entering his name,
the date, etc.), the resource room teacher sat or stood within 1 to 3 feet of Jason, established eye contact, and
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 3/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
instructed, "Jason, I want you to review in your own mind three capitalization rules you are likely to use in
completing this assignment." This direction would be followed by a pause, and the overt response of Jason
printing the first letter of the first word with a capital letter. To promote generalization the teacher altered the
antecedent event in several ways. Sometimes she gave the direction, "Remember to use COPS (i.e.,
capitalization, overall neatness, punctuation, and spelling) when you do this assignment;" asked the rhetorical
question, "What do students need to do when they are writing to earn free time?"; or simply handed the
assignment to Jason and said, "Here's your assignment. I expect you to do a good job!" At times, she
addressed Jason while standing in close proximity to him; at other times, she announced her instruction from
the front of the classroom.
The academic behavior of interest in this example is correct capitalization in written assignments. To promote
response adaptation, the teacher arranged for Jason to complete some of his assignments on a computer. She
also required other response adaptations--she asked him to write some of his assignments in cursive, and she
had him identify capitalization corrects and errors on other students' essays.
Originally, the consequent event that followed the writing of each capital letter was that Jason simply continued
writing until his assignment was completed. When he finished, he raised his hand and the teacher (or teacher
assistant) scanned his work for correct capitalization. She used her pencil to point to each correctly capitalized
word and then stated the rule that applied. For each error in capitalization, the teacher pointed at the incorrect
letter, wrote the correct case (i.e., upper or lower) of the letter in green ink, and stated, "The letter, -----, is (is
not) capitalized because -----." After checking the entire assignment for capitalization, she gave Jason a sticker
and praise if he reached the criterion of 90910 correct or better. The teacher modified the consequent events
by checking only randomly selected assignments, by asking another student to correct Jason's work, by not
requiring homework when randomly checked assignments in the general education class room included correct
capitalization, and by giving Jason additional computer time after 5 or more consecutive days of correctly
capitalized assignments. The data collected by Jason's teacher was percentage. Jason was required to
complete all written assignments with at least 90% correct capitalization, or 9 of 10 responses. The teacher
could modify the type of data she collected if she wished to get a more sensitive measure of Jason's
performance. For example, she might record rate correct and rate incorrect per minute. In such a circumstance,
the beginning and ending time of each assignment would need to be recorded, or the length of time allowed to
complete the assignments held constant (e.g., 15 minutes per assignment). If the teacher recorded rate, she
would make sure that Jason had more work than he could finish in 15 minutes--to avoid establishing a false
ceiling effect. That is, Jason's response rate would not accurately reflect his true rate if he had actually finished
the assignment in 13 minutes. The teacher also might collect data on the type of capitalization errors Jason
made. These data could guide the teacher in several ways. For example, she might want to select assignments
that provided more opportunity for Jason to use capitalization in instances in which he had been making
mistakes; she might decide to reteach the capitalization rules Jason appeared to be breaking and/or to provide
guided practice on difficult capitalization rules.
In Table 1, we provide a list of potential modifications that teachers may make in each component of the
ABCD'S Generalization Intervention Model. Table 1 is divided into strategies related to setting events,
antecedent events, behaviors, consequent events, and data. Table I does not contain an exhaustive list of
generalization strategies, but an array of possible modifications that teachers may wish to consider in planning
for maintenance and generalization.
Stages of Learning
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 4/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
In planning maintenance and generalization of student knowledge and skills, teachers will find it helpful to
identify the student's stage of learning for a particular academic response. Although stages of learning are not
necessarily discrete and sequential steps, they do have relevance for planning instruction for maintenance and
generalization. In Figure 1, we present a model of the stages of learning as developed by Tom Lovitt and his
colleagues at the University of Washington (Haring et al., 1978; Smith, 1981). In their model, student learning
progresses from acquisition to proficiency, maintenance, generalization, and adaptation. During the acquisition
stage, teaching focuses on accuracy. As accuracy improves, accuracy plus speed become central to
instruction. Once a high rate of proficiency is established, the teacher assesses skill maintenance (and
intervenes as necessary). Transfer of learning is considered the next learning stage and includes the
application of the skill in new settings and/or the adaptation of the response to setting demands. In this model,
adaptation of knowledge by the student can be viewed as the ultimate measure of instructional relevance.
Identification of a student's learning stage with regard to a specific academic skill is important because some
teaching techniques appear to be more efficacious at different stages of learning than others (see Gable &
Hendrickson, 1990). For example, if a student is in the acquisition stage of learning, immediate corrective and
reinforcing consequent events promote initial learning. A decision to delay feedback or make contingencies
indiscriminatable (consequent-event generalization interventions), or to introduce distractors in the curriculum
material or changes in the wording of the instructions (antecedent-event generalization interventions), may lead
to confusion, slower learning, and frustration. On the other hand, if a student has mastered a given skill and is
not introduced to strategies for attaining proficiency, the likelihood of long-term retention is decreased,
especially if the skill is not used in typical daily routines.
Conclusion
As we suggested, the issue of maintenance and generalization in the education of high-risk students and
students with disabilities is not new. Though most teachers and practitioners recognize the limitations of a
"teach and hope" (Stokes & Baer, 1977) approach, the development of a precise technology of generalization
with regard to academic skills has not been achieved. The ABCD'S paradigm is one way that teachers can
conceptualize intervention for generalization. Together with the stages of learning concept, the ABCD'S
paradigm can guide teachers in identifying strategies so we can be sure students do not leave class without
being able to apply their knowledge and skills.
TABLE 1
ABCD'S Generalization Intervention Model
Strategies
Examples
S--Setting Events: Generalization Strategies
Use advance organizers
Provide semantic maps,
traditional outlines; explain
timelines; give a rationale
for the lesson/activity
Incorporate distractors
Add irrelevant information;
increase classroom activity/
interruptions; mix problem types
Include different faculty
and human resources
Involve general education
teachers; use peers, volunteers,
and people from the community
Vary instructional groupings
Include independent seatwork,
cooperative learning groups,
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 5/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
small and large group
activities, teacher-directed
and student-directed lessons
Extend to various
instructional settings
Practice/apply in general
education classroom, the
community, extracurricular
activities, at home
Use different materials
Incorporate generate education
curriculum, library resources,
audio-visual presentations,
different authors and
publishers, computer
environments
Introduce new settings
sequentially
Teach to mastery in resource
classroom first, next--Mrs.
Yen's science class, industrial
arts, and finally on-the-job
Adapt or introduce different
intra-student conditions
Provide a snack or brief rest
period for hungry/tired
students; have students identify
their own emotional states;
reduce or increase specific
affective states with advance
organizers, competition or
cooperation
Modify general classroom
rules and/or schedule
Increase or decrease
classroom structure;
resequences daily activities
A--Antecedent Events: Generalization Strategies
Use different instructions
Vary the wording of direction,
the presentation mode (e.g.,
oral, written on blackboard or
assignment sheets), and the
complexity (e.g., use complex
sentence structure)
Use response cues
Employ hand signals, signals
to cue beginning and ending
times
Match direction/expectations
to those of the general
education classroom
Use more group directives
(versus individual); role
play Mrs.-----, the general
education teacher
Vary instructional approaches
Use errorless learning
strategies (e.g., time delay
and shaping), direct
instruction, discovery
learning, full-to-partial
prompts, diagnostic
questioning sequences
Vary curricular materials
Use programmed texts and
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 6/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
controlled readers, computer
tutorials and problem-solving
software, media presentations,
role play, community resources,
and student-identified materials
Teach strategies to facilitate
generalization
Teach self-monitoring,
self-correcting, learning,
problem-solving, and memory
strategies
B--Behavior (Academic Responses):
Generalization Strategies
Vary response formats
Use multiple choice and
opendended questions, essays,
game formats, Cloze procedures,
student projects (e.g., a
science experiment, a story
board)
Vary response modalities
Require oral explanations,
written responses,
demonstrations and role play,
verbal recall
Vary response time
Provide untimed and timed
assignments and tests; shortened
and/or lengthened wait
time after calling on a student
Vary performance criteria
Increase standards for response
accuracy and proficiency;
have students help set
criteria
Vary response topograhies
Embed the use of academic
skills in larger projects
(e.g., a term paper, a
science project, a play, a
video production); accept
alternative problem-solving
and reasoning
C--Consequent Events: Generalization Strategies
Provide positive reinforcement
Identify natural reinforcers
(i.e., those common to
general education classrooms
and the home); use group
reinforcement; coordinate
use of reinforcers with other
teachers; establish a menu of
reinforcers; identify events
that are reinforcing to the
individual student
Vary the schedule of
reinforcement
Delay delivery of
reinforcement; match work effort
to amount of reinforcement;
provide noncontingent rewards
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 7/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
intermittently; use
indiscriminable contingencies;
only reinforce instances
of generalized responding (i.e.,
nontrained responses)
Use corrective feedback
Focus on correct processes
and products; employ
self-correcting materials and
software; use peer tutors;
teach self-assessment; provide
answer keys; chart correct and
incorrect responses; share
performance data with all
involved persons; correct
errors
Use consequences that are
Give negative consequences
similar to those in the natural for incomplete work (e.g., loss
environment
of recess); use peer influence
to maintain good study habits;
involve parents and/or
significant others; grade
assignments
D--Data
Identify goals/objectives
Involve the student, parent,
general education teachers,
peers, and relevant others; set
priorities, timelines, and
evaluations procedures; review
progress frequently; base
instruction on IEP goals and
objectives
Alter probe/assessment
techniques
Use permanent products,
direct observation,
tape-recorded (audio or video)
responses, computer
assessments; conduct interviews;
use self-correction and
self-assessment; include peer
and group evaluation
Select appropriate metric
Consider percentage of
corrects and incorrects, rate
per minute, duration, intensity,
trials to criterion, frequency
of generalized responding
Select appropriate criteria
Set criteria in relation to peer
performance, expectancies in
future environments, local
and/or national norms, expert
opinion, average adult
performance; consider a shifting
criterion approach; assess
"tool skills" (i.e., the
student's ability to execute a
prerequisite behavior--writing)
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 8/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
before establishing a criteria
Choose communication vehicle
Chart performance on
frequency graph, semilog or
standard behavior charts; use
computer-generated graphs; have
student chart their own data
or the data of other students;
use homemade or purchased graph
paper; chart individual and
group performance; use
age-appropriate materials;
share with parents; post in
classroom, hallways, and
school; report in newsletters
and local news media
FIGURE 1. Model of stages of learning.
Adaption
Generalization
Maintenance
Proficiency
of
Acquistion
to
Goal is
accuracy
Goal is the
Goal is
extension
Goal is
Goal is
accuracy
transfer of
skills to
skills
according
accuracy
and fluency
and fluency
over time
new situations
norms of
commmunity
and society
REFERENCES
Bijou, S., Peterson, R., & Ault, M. (1968). A method to integrate descriptive and experimental field studies at
the level of data and empirical concepts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 175-191.
Gable, R. A., & Hendrickson, J. M. (Eds.). (1990). Assessing students with special needs. New York: Longman.
Haring, N. G., & Liberty, K. A. (1990). Matching strategies with performance in facilitating generalization. Focus
on Exceptional Children, 22, 1-16.
Haring, N. G., Lovitt, T., Eaton, M., & Hansen, C. L. (1978). The fourth r: Research in the classroom. Columbus,
OH: Charles Merrill.
Howell, K., & Lorson-Howell, K. (1990). "What's the hurry? Fluency in the classroom. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 22, 20-23.
Smith, D. D. (1981). Teaching the learning disabled. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 10, 349-367.
Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., & Lund, K. A. (1986). . . . But they can do it in my room: Strategies for promoting
generalization. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 18, 176-180.
~~~~~~~~
By ROBERT A. GABLE , JO M. HENDRICKSON and SUZANNE SHELLADY
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost.c… 9/10
10/29/2018
EBSCOhost
Robert A. Gable is professor of child study/special education at the College of Education, Old Dominion
University, Norfolk, Virginia, Jo M. Hendrickson is associate professor of special education at the University of
Iowa, Iowa City, and Suzanne Shellady is a doctoral student in special education at the University of Iowa.
Copyright of Preventing School Failure is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=67c94d77-67c8-4da1-9502-35490844ed28%40sessionmgr120&vid=14&ReturnUrl=http%3a%2f%2feds.b.ebscohost…
10/10