This article describes a model for representing functional competencies in students with disabilities. Although strategies exist to identify skills and activities that are functional for students with severe handicaps, these strategies provide relatively little information on how to separate the functional skills into meaningful component parts that represent the range of behaviors needed in the natural environment. Data are presented to illustrate the narrow range of behaviors included in task analyses in current literature on skill acquisition. The Component Model of Functional Life Routines provides a systematic alternate approach to delineating the behaviors required in natural environments.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaumgartD.BrownL.PumpianI.NisbetJ.FordA.SweetM.MessinaR.SchroederJ. (1982). Principle of partial participation and individualized adaptations in educational programs for severely handicapped students. Journal of The Association for the Severely Handicapped7, 17–27.
2.
BrownA. L. (1978). Knowing when, where and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In GlasserR. (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Vol. 1 (pp. 77–165) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3.
BrownF. (1986). A survey of published task analyses: Implications for measurement of the components of routines (Tech. Rep. No. 19). Binghamton: State University of New York, Department of Psychology and Division of Professional Education, Project SPAN.
4.
BrownF.HelmstetterE.GuessD. (1986). Current best practices with students with profound disabilities: Are there any? Manuscript submitted for publication.
5.
BrownL.BranstonM. B.Hamre-NietupskiS.PumpianI.CertoN.GruenewaldL. (1979). A strategy for developing chronological age-appropriate and functional curricular content for severely handicapped adolescents and young adults. Journal of Special Education13, 81–90.
6.
BrownL.Branston-McCleanM.BaumgartD.VincentL.FalveyM.SchroederJ. (1979). Using the characteristics of current and subsequent least restrictive environments in the development of curricular content for severely handicapped students. AAESPH Review4, 407–424.
7.
BrownL.NietupskiJ.Hamre-NietupskiS. (1976). The criterion of ultimate functioning and public school services for severely handicapped students. In ThomasM. A. (Ed.), Hey, don't forget about me: Education's investment in the severely, profoundly and multiply handicapped (pp. 58–82) Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
8.
DonnellanA. S.NeelR. S. (1986). New directions in educating students with autism. In HornerR. H.MeyerL. H.FredericksH. D. B. (Eds.)., Education of learners with severe handicaps (pp. 99–126) Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
9.
FalveyM.BrownL.LyonS.BaumgartD.SchroederJ. (1980). Strategies for using cues and correction procedures. In SailorW.WilcoxB.BrownL. (Eds.), Methods of instruction for severely handicapped students (pp. 109–133) Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
10.
FlavellJ. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In DicksonW. P. (Ed.), Children's oral communication skills.New York: Academic Press.
11.
GreenspanS.ShoultzB. (1981). Why mentally retarded adults lose their jobs: Social competence as a factor in work adjustment. Applied Research in Mental Retardation2, 23–38.
12.
GuessD.BensonH. A.Siegel-CauseyE. (1985). Concepts and issues related to choice-making and autonomy among persons with severe handicaps. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps10, 79–86.
13.
GuessD.HelmstetterE. (1986). Skill cluster instruction and the individualized curriculum sequencing model. In HornerR. H.MeyerL. H.FredericksH. D. B. (Eds.), Education of learners with severe handicaps: Exemplary service strategies (pp. 221–250) Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
14.
GuessD.Siegel-CauseyE. (1985). Behavioral control and education of severely handicapped students: Who's doing what to whom? and why? In BrickerD.FillerJ. (Eds.), Severe mental retardation: From theory to practice (pp. 230–244) Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
15.
HolvoetJ.GuessD.MulliganM.BrownF. (1980). The individualized curriculum sequencing model (II): A teaching strategy for severely handicapped students. Journal of The Association for the Severely Handicapped5, 337–351.
16.
NeelR. S.BillingsleyF. F.McCartyF.SymondsD.LambertC.Lewis-SmithN.HanashiroR. (1983). Teaching autistic children: A functional curriculum approach: The IMPACT curriculum.Seattle: University of Washington.
17.
RuschF. R.SchutzR. P. (1981). Vocational and social work behavior: An evaluative review. In MatsonJ. L.McCartneyJ. R. (Eds.), Handbook of behavior modification with the mentally retarded (pp. 247–280) New York: Plenum Press.
ShevinM.KleinN. (1984). The importance of choice-making skills for students with severe disabilities. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps9, 159–166.
20.
SnellM. E. (1983). Developing the IEP: Selecting and assessing skills. In SnellM. E. (Ed.), Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (pp. 76–112) Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
21.
WeedK.BrownF.EvansI. M. (1985). Observations of component skills in functional life routines of handicapped and nonhandicapped students (Tech. Rep. No. 12). Binghamton: State University of New York, Department of Psychology and Division of Professional Education, Project SPAN.
22.
WhiteO. R. (1980). Adaptive performance objectives: Form versus function. In SailorW.WilcoxB.BrownL. (Eds.), Methods of instruction for severely handicapped students (pp. 47–70) Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
23.
WhiteO. R.HaringN. G. (1976). Exceptional teaching.Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
24.
WhiteO. R.LibertyK. A. (1976). Behavioral assessment and precise educational measurement. In HaringN. G.SchiefelbushR. L. (Eds.), Teaching special children (pp. 31–71) New York: McGraw-Hill.
25.
WilcoxB.BellamyG. T. (Eds.). (1982). Design of high school programs for severely handicapped students.Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
