Providing opportunities to make choices has received increasing support as an antecedent intervention to improve the performance of students with disabilities. Additional research in this area is needed to determine under what circumstances the application of choice making as a curricular intervention is appropriate and produces meaningful outcomes. The present study extended this line of research and investigated how providing choice opportunities to children with autism impacted their performance during teacher-assigned homework activities. An ABAB design was utilized to evaluate the effects of choice making (student vs. tutor) on the academic performance of four children with autism. Results showed that providing students with opportunities to make choices regarding the order of task completion and use of stimulus materials improved participants' accuracy, productivity, affect, and reduced their disruptive behaviors. These findings support the use of child choice as a teaching strategy to improve the academic performance of children with autism during curricular activities. The functional properties of choice making and considerations for its use as a curricular-based antecedent intervention are discussed.
BambaraL. M.AgerC.KogerF. (1994). The effects of choice and task preference on the work performance of adults with severe disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 555–556.
2.
ColeC. L.DavenportT. A.BambaraL. M.AgerC. L. (1997). Effects of choice and task preference on the work performance of students with behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 65–74.
3.
CosdenM.GannonC.HaringT. G. (1995). Teacher-control versus student-control over choice of task and reinforcement for students with severe behavior problems. Journal of Behavioral Education, 5, 11–27.
4.
DunlapG. (1984). The influence of task variation and maintenance tasks on the learning and affect of autistic children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37, 41–64.
5.
DunlapG.DePerczelM.ClarkeS.WilsonD.WrightS.WhiteR.GomezA. (1994). Choice making to promote adaptive behavior for students with emotional and behavioral challenges. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 505–518.
6.
DunlapG.Foster-JohnsonL.ClarkeS.KernL.ChildsK. E. (1995). Modifying activities to produce functional outcomes: Effects on the disruptive behaviors of students with disabilities. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 248–258.
7.
DunlapG.KernL. (1993). Assessment and intervention for children within the instructional curriculum. In ReichleJ.WackerD. (Eds.), Communicative approaches to the management of challenging behavior (pp. 177–203). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
8.
DunlapG.Kern-DunlapL.ClarkeS.RobbinsF. R., (1991). Functional assessment, curricular revision, and severe behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 387–397.
9.
DunlapG.KoegelR. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 619–628.
10.
DyerK.DunlapG.WinterlingV. (1990). Effects of choice making on the serious problem behaviors of students with severe handicaps. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 515–524.
11.
FisherW.PiazzaC. C.BowmanL. G.HagopianL. P.OwensJ. C.SlevinI. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 491–498.
12.
FisherW.ThompsonR. H.PiazzaC. C.CroslandK.GotjenD. (1997). On the relative reinforcing effects of choice and differential consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 423–438.
13.
Foster-JohnsonL.FerroJ.DunlapG. (1994). Preferred curricular activities and reduced problem behaviors in students with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 493–504.
14.
HarchikA. E.ShermanJ. A.SheldonJ. B.BannermanD. J. (1993). Choice and control: New opportunities for people with developmental disabilities. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 5, 151–162.
15.
HardingJ.WackerD. P.CooperL. J.MillardT.Jensen-KovolanP. (1994). Brief hierarchical assessment of potential treatment components with children in an outpatient clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 291–300.
16.
HornerR. H.DunlapG.KoegelR. L.CarrE. G.SailorW.AndersonJ.AlbinR. W.O'NeillR. E. (1990). Toward a technology of “nonaversive” behavioral support. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 125–132.
17.
HornerR. H.VaughnB. J.DayH. M.ArdW. R. (1996). The relationship between setting events and problem behavior. In Kern-KoegelKoegelDunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 381–402). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
18.
KennedyC. H.HaringT. G. (1993). Teaching choice making during social interactions to students with profound multiple disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 63–76.
19.
KernL.VorndranC. M.HiltA.RingdahlJ. E.AdelmanB. E.DunlapG. (in press). Choice as an intervention to improve behavior: A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Education.
20.
KoegelR.DyerK.BellL., (1987). The influence of child-preference activities on autistic children's social behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 20, 243–252.
21.
KoegelR.KoegelL. K. (Eds.) (1995). Teaching children with autism: Strategies for initiating positive interactions and improving learning opportunities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
22.
KoegelR. L.EgelA. L. (1979). Motivating autistic children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, 418–426.
23.
MaceF. C.RobertsM. L. (1993). Factors affecting selection of behavioral interventions. In ReichleJ.WackerD. (Eds.), Communication and language intervention: Vol. 3. Communicative alternatives to challenging behavior: Integrating functional assessment and intervention strategies (pp. 113–133). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
24.
MasonS. A.McGeeG. G.Farmer-DouganV.RisleyT. R. (1989). A practical strategy for ongoing reinforcer assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 171–179.
25.
MichaelJ. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.
26.
MichaelJ. (1993). Establishing operation. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.
27.
MithaugD. E.MarD. K. (1980). The relation between choosing and working prevocational tasks in two severely retarded young adults. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 177–182.
28.
MunkD. D.ReppA. C. (1994). The relationship between instructional variables and problem behavior: A review. Exceptional Children, 60, 390–401.
29.
PaceG. M.IvancicM. T.EdwardsG. L.IwataB. A.PageT. J. (1985). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 249–255.
30.
PeckC. A. (1985). Increasing opportunities for social control by children with autism and severe handicaps: Effects on student behavior and perceived classroom climate. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10, 183–193.
31.
PiazzaC. C.FisherW. W.HagopianL. P.BowmanL. G.TooleL. (1996). Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 1–9.
32.
SeybertS.DunlapG.FerroJ. (1996). The effects of choice-making on the problem behaviors of high school students with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 49–65.
33.
VaughnB. J.HornerR. H. (1997). Identifying instructional tasks that occasion problem behaviors and assessing the effects of student versus teacher choice among these tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 299–312.
34.
WackerD. P.PeckS.DerbyK. M.BergW.HardingJ. (1996). Developing long-term reciprocal interactions between parents and their young children with problematic behavior. In Kern-KoegelKoegelDunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 51–80). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
35.
WackerD. P.WigginsB.FowlerM.BergW. K. (1988). Training students with profound or multiple handicaps to make requests via microswitches. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 331–343.
