Kayti Laam
Psychology 636
Dr. Neil Schwartz
CSU Chico
12/16/13
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
1.
Problem Identification
2.
Problem Statement
3.
Class Schedule
4.
Sequential Analysis
5.
Behaviors to be Increased & Decreased
6.
Behaviors Measured
7-8. Data Collection Sheet
9.
Problem Analysis
10-12. Baseline Data
13-14. Reinforcers
15.
Reinforcement Menu
16.
Plan Implementation: In-Seat
17.
In-Seat Intervention Flow Chart
18.
In-Seat Intervention Data Graphed
19.
Plan Evaluation: In-Seat Intervention
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
20-21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27-28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Intervention Effects on In-Seat Behavior
Analyzing & Interpreting In-Seat Data
Plan Implementation: Shaping Math Completed
Math Completed Intervention Flow Chart
Math Completed Intervention Data Graphed
Plan Evaluation: Math Completed Intervention
Intervention Effects on Math Completed Behavior
Analyzing/Interpreting Math Completed Behavior
Plan Evaluation
Analyzing & Interpreting Data
Maintenance
Generalization
Generalization Plan: In-Seat
Generalization Plan: Math Completed
Consultee & Client Reactions
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com

“Oliver is consistently off-task and distracts
himself and others by wandering around the
room. He often does not do his class work and
when he does the quality of his work is lower
than that of the other students.”
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
8:15 – 10:00
Language Arts:
Reading, Spelling, Workbook
10:00-10:15
Recess
10:15-11:15
Language Development (Grammar)
11:15-11:40
4/5 intervention (Accelerated Reading)
11:40-12:10
Lunch
12:10-1:20
Math
1:20-1:50
PE or Class Meetings
1:50-2:35
Language Development (History & Science)
8:15 - 9:00 DRI & Shaping In/Out of Seat Intervention
12:10 - 1:20 Shaping Class Work Intervention
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Sequential Analysis
Antecedent
Behavior
Consequence
Code
Out of Seat
Redirected to appropriate
behavior
Redirection
Direct Whole Class
Instruction
(prompt)
Doesn’t Complete Work
Individual Classwork
Completes Work
Student responds with
correct/wanted behavior
Redirected
Given Positive
Verbal/Tangible
Reinforcement (e.g. ‘Thank
you,’ tickets, or notes)
Student does not respond
with correct/wanted
behavior
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Positive Reinforcement
Required to stay in during
recess or SPARK (after
school)
Sent to office to do work
during class time
Response Cost


In-Seat
Percentage
of Class
Work
Completed
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com

Out-of-Seat

Wandering

In & Out of Seat
Behavior

© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Percentage of Math
Class Work
Completed Each Day
Data Collection Sheet (front)
*Look at him at each of the times listed & circle ‘I’ if he is in his seat or ‘O’ if he is out of his seat.
8:20
8:25
8:30
8:35
8:40
8:45
8:50
8:55
9:00
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:15
8:20
8:25
8:30
8:35
8:40
8:45
8:50
8:55
9:00
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:15
8:20
8:25
8:30
8:35
8:40
8:45
8:50
8:55
9:00
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:15
M
T
W
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Data Collection Sheet (back)
R
F
8:15
8:20
I
O
I
O
8:15
8:20
I
O
I
O
8:25
8:30
8:35
8:40
8:45
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:25
8:30
8:35
8:40
8:45
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:50
8:55
I
O
8:50
I
O
I
O
I
O
8:55
9:00
I
O
Percentage or Ratio of Math Completed Each Day:
Monday:
Wednesday:
Tuesday:
Thursday:
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
9:00
Friday:
I
O
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Percent of Minutes In & Out of Seat
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Out
40%
In
30%
20%
10%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Days of Baseline
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
8
9
10
Mean: 43% (In-Seat)
SD: 15%
Median: 40%
Work Completed:
Mean: 20%
SD: 11%
Median: 23%
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
100
% of Math Completed
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
% completed
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Days of Baseline
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
9
10
11
12
Mean: 20%
SD: 11%
Median: 23%
Oliver’s Token R+
For DRI & Shaping
In-Seat Behavior
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
This certificate is good for an
activity of choice from
Oliver’s list!!!
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com



Time on iPad playing educational games
Fun educational worksheets / drawing on the back
New worksheets and iPad games added
throughout the phases to guard against satiation
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Phase
% Required for
R+
Days
1
30%
3
2
40%
4
3
50%
5
DRI & Shaping Intervention for
In-Seat Behavior: Phases 1 - 6
Mrs. Cooper observes Oliver every 5
minutes from 8:15-9am
Given prompt “Please return to
your seat so that you’re able to
earn a ticket”
Out of his seat
In his seat
Phase
% Required for R+
Days
4
60%
5
5
70%
5
Given R+ in the form of verbal
praise & a ticket
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
At 9am, trades tickets in for
time on an iPad or fun
worksheet if he’s met the
% required; Continues
being seated
*1 ticket = 1 minute of activity
Percentage of time in & out of seat
INTERVENTION
BASELINE
Phase 1
100
90
Phase 3
Phase 4
In Seat
80
% of time in/out of seat
Phase 2
Criterion line
70
60
50
Aim line
40
30
20
Mean: 43%
SD: 15%
Median: 40%
10
Mean: 65%
SD: 12 %
Median: 65%
Mean: 74%
SD: 10%
Median: 70%
0
1
3
5
7
9
© 2013 Kayti Laam
CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
12
15 17 18 20 22
Mean: 60%
SD: 26% Days
Median: 70%
Mean: 62%
SD: 15%
Median: 65%
25 27 29 31
Baseline – Phase 1
Phase 1 – Phase 2
Phase 2 – Phase 3
Phase 3 – Phase 4
Means:
Means:
Means:
43% - 60%
60% - 65%
65% - 62%
Means:
62% - 74%
% Change =
% Change =
% Change =
% Change
39%
8.3%
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
- 4.6%
= 19%
Percentage of time In & Out of Seat
Baseline
Phase 4
100
Out of Seat
In Seat
80
60
74%
40
20
43%
% Mean Change
from Baseline to
Phase 4 =
72%
0
Mean Percentage
Baseline SD 15%  Phase 4 SD 10%:
Variability decreased by 33%
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com


Oliver’s in-seat behavior is steadily and gradually
increasing. When comparing baseline to phase 4
means you see a 72% increase, while the variability
of this behavior has decreased by 33% overall. This
shows that Oliver is in his seat more frequently
and consistently than he was before treatment
implementation.
As of phase 4, criterion has been met, while his inseat behavior is still gradually increasing.
Therefore, after two weeks of maintaining his inseat behavior at or above criterion, generalization
strategies will be implemented.
© 2013 Kayti Laam kaytilaam@yahoo.com
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Shaping Intervention for Completed
Class Work:
Phases 1 - 5
Assigned individual
seat work (math)
Completes % of work
required to receive R+
R+
Praised and given
certificate
Earns R+ of choice off his
menu by trading in the
certificate he earned
within 10 mins of
receiving it
© 2013 Kayti Laam kaytilaam@yahoo.com
% Work
Completed
Required for
R+
Minutes
allowed to
do activity
Days
1
15%
4
3
2
20 %
4
4
Phase
Does not complete % of
work required to earn R+
Given a verbal prompt
“If you complete
problems, you will get a
certificate to choose an
activity from your list.”
Phase
% Work Completed
Required for R+
Minutes allowed to
do activity
Days
3
30%
5
5
4
40 %
6
5
5
50 %
7
5
Percentage of Math Completed
Intervention
Baseline
Phase 1
100
Phase 2
Phase 3
% of Math Completed
90
80
Mean: Mean: 31%
SD: 9%
25%
Median:
33%
SD: 16%
Median:
15%
70
60
50
40
30
Mean: 56%
SD: 10%
Median: 60%
Phase 4
Mean: 58%
SD: 8%
Median: 60%
% completed
Mean: 20%
SD: 11%
Median: 23%
criterion
20
10
aim line
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
Days
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Baseline – Phase 1
Phase 1 – Phase 2
Phase 2 – Phase 3
Phase 3 – Phase 4
Means:
Means:
Means:
20% - 25%
25% - 31%
31% - 56%
Means:
56% - 58%
% Change =
25%
% Change =
% Change =
% Change
24%
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
80%
= 4%
% of Math Completed
70
Baseline
60
58%
50
40
% Change
from Baseline
to Phase 4 =
30
20
Phase 4
20%
10
0
Mean Percentage
190%
Baseline SD 11%  Phase 4 SD 8%:
Variability decreased by 27%
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com




Oliver’s percentage of math attempted has steadily
increased from baseline to phase 4.
Oliver met criteria a phase sooner than expected,
therefore after two weeks of maintaining this behavior
(i.e. staying above criteria with little variability)
generalization strategies should be implemented.
Since Oliver has met criteria, but is still only
attempting half of his work, Mrs. Cooper & I are going
to adapt our intervention to include more phases so
that he will continue to do more math problems.
Therefore, the criterion line will increase & more
phases will be added.
Once Oliver has met the new criterion & maintained
this behavior for two weeks with little variability,
generalization strategies will be implemented.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com
Analyzing & Interpreting Data
 Maintenance & Generalization

© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com


The two behaviors focused on in this intervention
are interconnected. Specifically, if Oliver is in his
seat more often, he is more likely to be attempting
class work than when he is out of his seat.
Similarly, increasing Oliver’s amount of class work
attempted will increase his in-seat behavior,
because in order to work he needs to be seated.
Therefore, increasing Oliver’s in-seat behavior will
likely increase the amount of work he is
attempting & increasing the amount of work he
attempts will also increase the amount of time he is
in his seat.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com

Once Oliver’s target behaviors have been at or
above criterion & stable for 2 weeks, generalization
strategies can be implemented.


Preferably, once the mean variability has decreased
by 50% at criterion for 2 weeks.
Oliver’s in-seat behavior variability has decreased by
33%, therefore as more data is collected we will see if
this variability continues to decrease.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com


Generalization is achieved through thinning of
the reinforcers & replacing tangible reinforcers
with natural reinforcers at a frequency that is
consistent with the average classroom
environment.
For Oliver, this means gradually thinning his
extra tangible reinforcers while replacing them
with positive verbal reinforcement & classroom
tickets that Mrs. Cooper hands out to all
students for good behavior.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com

Begin thinning reinforcers & replacing them with natural
reinforcers:

1st Week:
 2 tickets = 1 minute of activity; verbal positive reinforcement given at each
interval when he is seated.

2nd Week:
 Verbal positive reinforcement given for in-seat behavior at each interval; at the
end of the time period choice of activity is given.

3rd Week:
 Verbal positive reinforcement given for in-seat behavior at each interval; at the
end of the time period Mrs. Cooper gives him a positive note & a high five.

4th Week & On:
 Mrs. Cooper provides verbal reinforcement & tickets consistent with that of her
average classroom environment.
*Observation & monitoring during generalization is key; if desired behavior begins to
decline, these plans should be adjusted. Intervention plan should be reinstated if
necessary.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com

Begin thinning reinforcers & replacing them with natural
reinforcers:

1st Week:
 Certificate replaced with personal positive note written by Mrs. Cooper.
 Choice of activity for the last 4 minutes of the math period.

2nd Week:
 Verbal positive reinforcement & classroom tickets given for math work
completed throughout math period.
 Mrs. Cooper gives personal positive note & high five at end of math
period.

3rd Week & On:
 Mrs. Cooper provides verbal reinforcement & tickets consistent with
that of her average classroom environment.
*Observation & monitoring during generalization is key; if desired behavior begins to
decline, these plans should be adjusted. Intervention plan should be reinstated if
necessary.
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com



“These plans have worked well. Oliver’s
behavior has greatly improved.”
“Although time consuming, these interventions
are working and it was worth it!”
“I’m really good at math!”
© 2013 Kayti Laam. CSU Chico. kaytilaam@yahoo.com