One antecedent-based intervention – choice-making opportunities – is an easy and effective way to motivate students with autism to stay on task, complete academic tasks, and engage in appropriate behavior during academic instruction. The purpose of this article is to discuss three main methods for incorporating choice-making opportunities and describe how educators of students with autism can incorporate choice-making opportunities during academic instruction. Seven steps for implementing choice-making opportunities and examples of how to implement choice-making opportunities during instruction are provided. We intend for readers to: (1) read and comprehend the three methods for implementing choice-making opportunities during instruction, (2) apply the seven steps when implementing choice-making, and (3) use the tables as guide when implementing choice-making during instruction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ackerlund BrandtJ. A.WeinkaufA.ZeugN.KlattK. P. (2016). An evaluation of constant time delay and simultaneous prompting procedures in skill acquisition for young children with autism. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 51(1). 55-66.
2.
CarlsonJ. I.LuiselliJ. K.SlymanA.MarkowskiA. (2008). Choice-making as an intervention for public disrobing in children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Intervention, 10(2), 86-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300707312544
3.
CarrJ. E.NicolsonA. C.HigbeeT. S. (2000). An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33(3), 353-357. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2000.33-353
4.
ColeC. L.LevinsonT. R. (2002). Effects of within activity choices on the challenging behavior of children with severe developmental disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4(1), 29-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070200400106
5.
ConineD. E.MorrisS. L.KronfliF. R.SlanziC. M.PetronelliA. K.KalickL.VollmerT. R. (2021). Comparing the results of one-session, two-session, and three-session MSWO preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54(2), 700-712. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.808
6.
Da FonteM. A.BoeschM. C.Edwards-BowyerM. E.BennettB. P.DiamondG. P. (2016). A three-step reinforcer identification framework: A step-by-step process. Education and Treatment of Children, 39(3), 389-410.
7.
DiCarloC. F.BaumgartnerJ. I.CaballeroJ. O.PowersC. (2017). Using least-to-most prompt hierarchy to increase child compliance with teacher directives in preschool classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, (45), 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-016-0825-7
8.
EnnisR. P.LaneK. L.FlemmingS. C. (2021). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies: Supporting students at-risk for EBD with instructional choice during reading. Exceptionality, 29(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2020.1729766
9.
EnnisR. P.LaneK. L.OakesW. P. (2018). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support instruction: Within-activity choices in third-grade math with null effects. Remedial and Special Education, 39(2), 77-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517734634
10.
FisherW. W.PiazzaC. C.BowmanL. G.AmariA. (1996). Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
11.
JolivetteK.EnnisP. R.SwoszowskiN. C. (2017). Educator “what-ifs”: The feasibility of choice making in the classroom. Beyond Behavior, 26(2), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295617713977
12.
JolivetteK.EnnisP. R.SwoszowskiN. C. (2020). Choice-making at tier 2: Linking and adapting choice by type and function. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 64(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2019.1653256
13.
KrugerA. M.StrongW.DalyE. J.IIIO’ConnorM.SommerhalderM.HoltzJ.KaneE. J.HoffN.HeifnerA. (2016). Setting the stage for academic success through antecedent intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 53(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21886
14.
LaneK. L.RoyerD. J.MessengerM. L.CommonE. A.EnnisR. P.SwoggerE. D. (2015). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support academic engagement: Implementation and effects of instructional choice for elementary students in inclusive settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(4), 473-504. https://doi.org/10.13533/etc.2015.0013
15.
MayM. E. (2019). Effects of differential consequences on choice making in students at risk for academic failure. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12, 154-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-0267-3
16.
Peck PetersonS. M.CanigliaC.RoysterA. J.MacfarlaneE.PlowmanK.BairdS. J.WuN. (2010). Blending functional communication training and choice making to improve task engagement and decrease problem behaviour. Educational Psychology, 25(2-3), 257-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144241042000301193
17.
PlavnickJ. B.BakM. Y. S.AvendañoS. M.DueñasA. D.BrodheadM. T.Sipila-ThomasE. S. (2020). Implementing early intensive behavioral intervention in community settings. Autism, 24, 1913-1916. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320919243
18.
RamseyM. L.JolivetteK.KennedyC.FredrickL. D.WilliamsC. D. (2017). Functionally-indicated choice-making interventions to address academic and social behaviors of adolescent students with emotional/behavioral disorders (E/BD) in a residential facility. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 52(2), 46-66.
19.
RamseyM. L.JolivetteK.PattersonD. P.KennedyC. (2010). Using choice to increase time on-task, task-completion, and accuracy for students with emotional/behavior disorders in a residential facility. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1353/ect.0.0085
20.
RispoliM.LangR.NeelyL.CamargoS.HutchinsN.DavenportK.GoodwynF. (2013). A comparison of within- and across-activity choices for reducing challenging behavior in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Behavior Education, 22, 66-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-012-9164-y
21.
RiveraG.GerowS.KirkpatrickM. (2019). A review of school-based interventions to reduce challenging behavior for adolescents with ASD. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 31(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.007/s10882-018-9626-9
22.
SamA. M.CoxA. W.SavageM. N.WatersV.OdomS. L. (2020). Disseminating information on evidence-based practices for children and youth with autism spectrum disorder: AFIRM. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 1931-1940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03945-x
23.
SmeltzerS. S.GraffR. B.AhearnW. H.LibbyM. E. (2009). Effect of choice of task sequence on responding. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 734-742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2009.02.002
24.
TigerJ. H.ToussaintK. A.RoathC. T. (2010). An evaluation of the value of choice-making opportunities in single-operant arrangements: Simple fixed- and progressive-ratio schedules. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(3), 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-519
25.
TrussellR. P.ChenH. J.LewisT. J.LunaN. E. (2018). Reducing escape-maintained behavior through the application of classroom-wide practices and individually designed interventions. Education and Treatment of Children, 41(4), 507-532. https://doi.org/10.1353/ect.2018.0027
26.
von MizenerB. H.WilliamsR. L. (2009). The effects of student choices on academic performance. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(2), 110-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/109800708323372
