The author reviews 3 topics featured in his first Behavior Modification column: pupil management, social validation, and nondiscriminatory testing. Two new topics are also discussed: data and decisions, and program evaluation. As for the first, a few studies are reviewed which suggest that pupils' performance is aided when teachers use graphs to make instructional decisions. As for the second topic, a study is summarized to illustrate how direct and daily measurement may be arranged to evaluate and compare instructional programs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bailey, D.A comparison of non-biased screening procedures to identify high-risk kindergarten children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, 1980.
2.
Bohannon, R.Direct and daily measurement procedures in the identification and treatment of reading behaviors of children in special education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, 1975.
3.
Budoff, M., & Corman L.Effectiveness of a learning potential procedure in improving problem-solving skills of retarded and non-retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 81, 260-264.
4.
Dixon, R., & Engelmann, S.Corrective reading through morphographs. Toronto : Science Research Associates, 1979.
5.
Epstein, M.H., & Cullinan, D.Social validation: Use of normative peer data to evaluate LD interventions . Learning Disability Quarterly, 1979, 2, 93-98.
6.
Greenwood, C.R., Hops, H., Walker, H.M., Guild, J.J., Stokes, J., Young, K.R., Keleman, K.S., & Willardson, M.Standardized classroom management program: Social validation and replication studies in Utah and Oregon. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 235-253.
7.
Gruber, B., Reeser, R., & Reid, D.H.Providing a less restrictive environment for profoundly retarded persons by teaching independent walking skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 285-297.
8.
Kunzelmann, H., & Koenig, C.Learning screening. Kansas City, Mo.: International Management Systems, 1977.
9.
Merkin, P.K.A comparison of the effects of three formative evaluation strategies and contingent consequences on reading performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1978 .
10.
O'Leary, S.G., & Dubney, D.R.Application of self-control procedures by children: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 449-465.
11.
Pace, C.An evaluation of learning screening as a child find procedure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, 1979 .
12.
Rosenbaum, M.S., & Drabman, R.S.Self-control training in the classroom: A review and critique. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 467-485.
13.
White, O.R., & Liberty, K.A.Behavioral assessment and precise educational measurement. In R. L. Schiefelbusch & N. G. Haring (Eds.), Teaching Exceptional Children. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1976.
14.
Wolf, M.M.Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1978, 11, 203-214.
15.
Leverson, M. , Fantasia, K., & Lovitt, T.A comparison of the morphographic and add-a-word spelling programs. Unpublished manuscript, Experimental Education Unit, University of Washington, 1979.
