Introduction (Should Be Double Space After This Heading)

Positive Reinforcement

1

Good work, J. See my comments and the grading rubric at the end of your paper; on the rubric I have placed a √ by items I found, and Not found, or No by items I did not find. I enjoyed reading about your project.

Introduction (should be double space after this heading)

C.L. was a four-year-old boy in a self-contained special education preschool classroom. He was a child with developmental delays who also had a hard time following directions from adults. His hardest part of the day was during large group activities, such as circle time where he made animal noises frequently and disrupted the learning of others. C.L received one day of cognitive therapy from a therapist that visited the classroom, and he saw the speech therapist two days a week for 20 minutes each session. C.L. demonstrated the disruptive behaviors with the therapists as well as his classroom teachers. Good opening paragraph

The goal of intervention was for C.L. to increase his social skills to at least 30 months developmental age, and the learning objective was that C.L. would comply with adult requests during circle time at least one time per day for a week. good The objective was embedded into the time that C.L. spent in circle time activities. He spent 15 minutes in circle time in the morning and 30 minutes in circle time in the afternoon for whole group instruction. Circle time provided many opportunities for C. L. to respond successfully to adult requests. Good

C.L. reached this objective through the intervention of positive reinforcement. The corresponding Foundation Blocks included with the objective stated above was found in the following: Physical and Motor Development Foundation Block #4: Responsible Behaviors: demonstrating good listening skills and cooperative behaviors; and Personal and Social Development Foundation Block #2: Self-Control: showing self-direction and responsibility. Good

Baseline datae for responding to adult requests was taken during circle time for three days. C.L. showed dependence on verbal and physical prompts. The baseline data that follows shows the data for each day. After observation of the child it became apparent that he had trouble complying with adult requests the majority of the time. He was distracting his classmates, and his failure to comply often made his classmates angry and frustrated with him.

Baseline Data good

Key:I = independent behaviorV= verbal promptH= hand over hand

Dates

Task Steps  

/ M / T / W / T / F / Comments:
1. Ask to be excused from breakfast table. / V / V / I / Needs a reminder of what to say.
2. Wash hands. / I / V / I / Needs to be reminded not to play in sink.
3. Choose a center. / V / V / V / Must be prompted to choose a center to play.
4. Stay in center. / V / V / V / Reminded to stay in chosen center.
5. Listen for Miss Dillard to say “time for circle.” / I / I / I
6. Walk to circle. / H / H / H / Led to circle holding hand.
7. Sit down with hands in lap in chair. / H / H / H / Put hands in lap.
8. Stay in chair. / H / H / V / Had to lead back to chair, then give prompts.
9. Stand up while the class sings. / I / I / I
10. Sit back down when turn is over. / H / H / H / Led back to chair.
11. Stay seated while the teaching is reading and doing activities. / H / H / V / Prompted and helped keep seated.
12. Stand upon request. / I / I / I
13. Listen for center to go to. / V / V / V / Prompted to listen.
14. Walk to Center. / V / V / V / Prompted to go to right center. Reminded not to run.
Totals

A discrepancy analysis was performed to discover the specific difficulties that C.L. had during circle time activities. C. L. was able to complete some of the tasks independently by watching the other students and understanding the classroom routine. However, on 11 out of the 14 steps, C.L. needed additional help. One of the steps related to language difficulties, and the rest related to behavior issues that C.L. had in the classroom. C.L. needed continuous reinforcement to encourage him to complete the tasks needed in order to attain the goal. Good discussion of EA and DA

Don’t need all of this space

C.L. was chosen as the focus for this research based on classroom observations completed by the teacher. When a child fails to comply or respond when given directions, learning is hindered for the child. If inappropriate behaviors can be decreased, more learning can occur. If a child is disruptive and fails to listen, he or she won't succeed, and other children in the class can become distracted as well. C.L. needs assistance in complying with adult requests during circle time. The positive reinforcement strategy was chosen in order to increase compliance in the child. C.L.'s teacher developed an embedding schedule to guide her during the intervention. C.L. had many opportunities for practice.

throughout the school day.
Something going on with the formatting of this document. And watch verb tense—some verbs in this paragraph in present, some in past—all verbs in a paragraph should be in the same tense.

Previous Research on Positive Reinforcement

C.L.'s objective was to comply with adult requests during circle time at least one time per day for one week. This objective was taught through the intervention of positive reinforcement. There have been various studies completed that show the effectiveness of positive reinforcement.

When I made comments, the matrix moved here, in your original it was before the lit review

The following study (Wilder, Harris, Reagan, & Rasey, 2007) demonstrated that this strategy was effective in increasing compliance in preschool aged children. The purpose of the study was to figure out discover or determine why two preschoolers chose to not listen in everyday tasks, and to develop an intervention to improve the exhibited behavior. The targeted children in the study weare similar to C.L. because they displayed are non-compliant behavior and were of preschool age.

Two three-year-old boys, Fred and Sam, with no developmental delays or language impairments were studied. All sessions were conducted by a therapist in a small tutoring room at the children's school. Two to six sessions were conducted per day, two to three days per week. The intervention study taught the children that compliance could earn the children coupons that could be exchanged for a preferred activity. Good

The therapist used pen and paper to collect data, recording whether the child was compliant or non-compliant within 10 seconds. The students were given a preference assessment to determine their preferred activities (Wilder et al., 2007).

According to the article, “Fred was non-compliant with the majority of instructions delivered in the preferred activity condition and rarely non-compliant with the instructions delivered in the control and non-preferred activity conditions” (Wilder et al. p. 175). “Sam was also non-compliant with most instructions delivered in the preferred activity condition, but he was never non-compliant during the control and non-preferred activities” (Wilder 175). Same as above for citation, and what were the numbers they reported for baseline?

The therapist used a coupon system for intervention:. Tthe therapist would give and instruction, and if the child complied, he would earn a coupon. After the session, the child exchanged his coupon for time watching a video (Wilder, 2007). Both Fred and Sam showed a low percentage of compliance during baseline, but the percentage of compliance after intervention increased dramatically (Wilder, 2007). Don’t need to keep citing the authors since you are discussing this study for this whole section (until you introduce another study)—and need to report the percentages they reported, or say that none were reported, but just the narrative you included.

One limitation of the assessment was that it is possible that other tasks could have created non-compliance in the children as well (Wilder, 2007). This study only looked at two tasks. There are many tasks that a child may be asked to do that can create noncompliance. Ok, but need rest of comparison to your study, and mixed verb tenses

Another study conducted by Ingvarsson, Hanley and Welter (2009), demonstrated that non contingent reinforcement of a preferred item can increase compliance in children. The purpose of the study was to find out why three preschoolers chose to not listen in everyday tasks and to develop an intervention to improve the exhibited behavior. The targeted children in the study are similar to C.L. because they are non-compliant and preschool age. These are exactly the same sentences you wrote for the previous study (?)

Three children named Erika, Mark and Jason were studied. All were three-year olds in a preschool program. Two were typically developing children and one received special education services. All sessions were conducted by a therapist in the preschool classroom each day that the children were in attendance. The study taught the children that compliant behavior earned rewards such as edibles or preferred toys.

In order to collect data, the observers used hand-held computers. Aggression, motor disruptions and vocal interruptions were the behaviors being observed. When the observer saw one of these behaviors, they logged it in the hand-held computer (Ingvarsson, 2009). Same error as in abo ve—in the second draft lit review I gave you direction to check APA for how to make citations in text, you should have followed this advice

According to the article, “The therapists presented instructions continuously using a three-step, least-to-most prompting sequence” (Ingvarrson 381 same error as in above). During baseline, all three children demonstrated disruptive behavior in order to escape the demands from the therapist (Ingvarrson, 2009).

The therapist used food as reinforcement during the study. The therapist would give an instruction, and if the child complied, he would receive praise or a food of choice (Ingvarsson, 2009). Erika, Mark and Jason showed low compliance during baseline, but when given positive reinforcement the children showed compliance instead of escape-maintained behaviors (Ingvarrson, 2009). Same as above, should have reported numbers.

One limitation of the study is that “maturation may have affected the results because the preschoolers’ participation lasted two months or more” (Ingvarrson 394). It is possible that some of the escape behaviors disappeared during that time period. what about comparison to your study?

A third study completed by Ingvarsson, Kahng and Hausman (2009), demonstrated that non contingent positive reinforcement reduced problem behavior. The purpose of the study was to find out why the child was escaping demands and to get the child to comply. The targeted child in the study is similar to C.L. because like C.L, she exhibits non-compliant behavior. This is the only comparison you did, not sufficient, see instructions and sample paper.

An 8-year-old girl named Manuela was the participant in the study. Manuela demonstrated severe problem behavior and had limited communication. All sessions lasted for ten minutes in a small bedroom at the inpatient unit…. The team consisted of a therapist and two observers.

The therapist used pen and paper to collect data, recording each event using responses per minute, and data wereas recorded as the percentage of compliance that Manuela demonstrated. What was that percentage? During a functional analysis, it was determined that Manuela’s item of preference was an edible (Ingvarrson, 2008).

The therapist used an edible as reinforcement to get Manuela to comply with the demands. The therapist gave continuous demands and used most to least prompting. If the child complied, she would earn her preferred item (Ingvarsson, 2008). Manuela showed a low percentage what was it? of compliance during baseline, but the percentage of compliance after intervention increased dramatically to 80% good (Ingvarsson, 2008).

One limitation of the assessment was the duration of the testing. A longer evaluation of Manuela could yield different results (Ingvarsson, 2008). There is a possibility that her behavior could change within a longer time period.

The three studies showed that an intervention of positive reinforcement was effective in increasing compliance in children, and the intervention was used with the targeted child, C.L. because of its effectiveness in the studiesy. good All three discussed studies showed that positive reinforcement helped promote compliance. No comparison to your AR except for age and behavior of children, needed more.

Method

Participants—this heading implies you will be describing CL again—don’t use this heading if you don’t do what it says you will do

Positive reinforcement was the intervention strategy used to help C.L. reach his IEP social goal. C.L. was observed during circle time for 10 days for a period of 15 minutes. During this time, the teacher watched C.L. and collected data as she completed the circle time activities. C.L. was seated among his peers in a chair closest to the teacher for proximity control. C.L. did not interact socially at his developmentally appropriately age. However, he was creative and enthusiastic as a learner. Good, you did give some description, but not the full description implied in the subheading.

Intervention

The intervention took place in the preschool special education classroom. C.L. was observed during circle time for 15 minutes. C.L.'s four classmates were present at circle time as well. C.L.'s teacher gave the instructional cues to the class and observed the targeted child's response to the cues. The teacher watched for compliance and reliance on prompts and asked the child questions that required responses. When the child complied, he received praise and a sticker to put on his chart. Good

The intervention was implemented for ten days during circle time. The 15 minutes consisted of the following steps: listening for the cue “circle time”, walking to circle, sitting down in a chair, putting hands in lap, staying in the seat, standing up when being told, sitting down when being told, responding to one question, and walking to center after choosing from choice board. C.L. was expected to comply with all of these teacher requests with as few prompts as possible. The children listened for the teacher cue “Circle Time”. This was the cue to clean up and walk over to circle. Each child had their own chair in their own square that was taped on the floor. They knew to keep their hands in their lap to refrain from touching others. During the 15 minute time span, the children remained in their seats unless told differently by the teacher. The teacher requested that the children stand for the morning songs, and the class leader stood when directed to complete calendar and weather activities. The students remained seated when the teacher read the story of the day, which. The story of the day related to the theme of Friends for the duration of this study. When asked questions about the story, the students raised their hands and the teacher chose a student to respond. If there were no volunteers, the teacher chose a student to respond. After the story, the teacher explained and demonstrated the classroom centers that the students would participate in and then proceeded to show the centers on the daily chart. The students pointed to the center of their choice when asked and were allowed to walk to that center. The ten days of intervention followed a consistent circle time routine. This is fine, but how did you do intervention with CL during this time?

These are results, how did you teach him? During day one of intervention, C.L. missed the environmental cues and relied solely on verbal prompting from the teacher. He struggled with following directions that required him to stay seated. He received three stickers during day 1 of intervention, and it made him very eager to do better the following day. Days two, three, four and five were similar in that C.L. complied more with independence. He still required verbal prompting for many of the steps of the task analysis. On day six, he regressed back to only being able to comply with three steps independently but was able to keep his body in his own space, as opposed to putting his hands in the faces of his peers. C.L.'s compliance increased during days nine and ten. On both days, he needed prompting at the beginning and end of circle time, but he complied well between the beginning and end. Good reporting of results, but no description of how intervention was done.

Baseline data were taken during circle time in C.L.'s classroom for three days. The teacher recorded the activities during circle time and the behaviors that C.L. demonstrated. She noted the behaviors the child needed to be successful during that time. The teacher used a pencil and paper to record C.L.'s behaviors and verbal responses to all teacher demands. Post intervention data were taken during circle time for three days. The following graph displays the percentage of time C.L. complied with adult requests during circle time before
positive reinforcement began (baseline), during intervention, and after intervention ended.