Selecting Behavior Reduction Strategies Matching Behaviors to Interventions
Throughout the course of a day, teachers are constantly involved in decision making. When students display inappropriate behaviors, those decisions become increasingly important, and may even be made with little advance notice or planning. The challenge involves assessing multifaceted aspects of a situation to determine whether to intervene, what strategy to use, and how to evaluate its effects. One issue expressed by the co-teachers is that of matching the behavior reduction strategy with the target behavior. The severity of the behavior should be considered when making this decision. This cannot be done without determining how intrusive, or imposing, a strategy will be for an individual. The aim is to employ interventions that are least intrusive (Simpson, 1988). The Council for Children with Behavior Disorders (1990) defined intrusive ness as «any stimulus event deployed to stop or interrupt ongoing behavior (p. 245). That is, any strategy used to intervene in student behavior is intrusive. According to Braaten (1987), behavioral interventions range hierarchically its levels of intrusiveness.
Interventions vary regarding the amount of contact teac***s must have with students to inhibit inappropriate behaviors. For example, suppose a student disrupted the class routine by singing during a spelling test. If the teac*** gave the student a nonverbal cue to discontinue the behavior (the teac*** places a finger to *** lips and says „Sh-h-h“), the teac***s behavior, albeit mild, is intrusive. The strategy used in this scenario is less intrusive than one in which the teac*** engages the student in a conversation about how many times the student has being warned and then takes privileges away. An intervention that might be even more intrusive would involve the teac*** delivering a verbal reprimand, removing the child from the instructional setting, and placing *** in time-out.
Interventions for reducing inappropriate behaviors should not be chosen ii a serendipitous manner, but should be logical. Dietz and Hummel (1978) pointed out that when selecting logical behavioral interventions, ethical, effective, am efficient concerns must be addressed. The ethical considerations involve ensuring the match between the behavior's severity and the intervening strategy. Effective interventions are those that prove successful, while efficient interventions require minimal time for planning and implementing. Behaviors must also be selected in light of children's disabilities or know behavioral difficulties. Gallag*** (1988) maintained that teac***s must be knowledgeable about student characteristics, especially when learning or behavioral difficulties are experienced. That is, Yolanda, a child with behavior disorder; may display impulsive behaviors frequently. When a teac*** is trying to reduce those impulsive behaviors, Yolanda must be taught alternative behaviors. It is unlikely that Yolanda will be taught to engage in more appropriate behavior immediately, as interventions require time for sufficient modeling, practicing, an reinforcing. The interventions for *** may consist of several techniques-nonverbal prompting, reinforcing alternative behaviors, and teaching the child to self-monitor. On the ot*** hand, Olga, who rarely engages in impulsive behavior may simply be given a verbal reminder or reprimand when she displays impulsive behavior.Ответить: Ольга ЛюблюМиньонов
А что сложного? Общий вопрос подразумевает ответ да или нет. Специальный имеет конкретику. Альтернативный подразумевает выбор ответа. Разделительный это вопрос обычный + утверждение не так ли?!
When will you go to the cinema?
Will you go to the cinema tonight or tomorrow?
Will you go to the cinema, isn't it?
Добавьте текст, без него никак
Matching Behaviors to Interventions
Throughout the course of a day, teachers are constantly involved in decision making. When students display inappropriate behaviors, those decisions become increasingly important, and may even be made with little advance notice or planning. The challenge involves assessing multifaceted aspects of a situation to determine whether to intervene, what strategy to use, and how to evaluate its effects. One issue expressed by the co-teachers is that of matching the behavior reduction strategy with the target behavior. The severity of the behavior should be considered when making this decision. This cannot be done without determining how intrusive, or imposing, a strategy will be for an individual. The aim is to employ interventions that are least intrusive (Simpson, 1988). The Council for Children with Behavior Disorders (1990) defined intrusive ness as «any stimulus event deployed to stop or interrupt ongoing behavior (p. 245). That is, any strategy used to intervene in student behavior is intrusive. According to Braaten (1987), behavioral interventions range hierarchically its levels of intrusiveness.
Interventions vary regarding the amount of contact teac***s must have with students to inhibit inappropriate behaviors. For example, suppose a student disrupted the class routine by singing during a spelling test. If the teac*** gave the student a nonverbal cue to discontinue the behavior (the teac*** places a finger to *** lips and says „Sh-h-h“), the teac***s behavior, albeit mild, is intrusive. The strategy used in this scenario is less intrusive than one in which the teac*** engages the student in a conversation about how many times the student has being warned and then takes privileges away. An intervention that might be even more intrusive would involve the teac*** delivering a verbal reprimand, removing the child from the instructional setting, and placing *** in time-out.
Interventions for reducing inappropriate behaviors should not be chosen ii a serendipitous manner, but should be logical. Dietz and Hummel (1978) pointed out that when selecting logical behavioral interventions, ethical, effective, am efficient concerns must be addressed. The ethical considerations involve ensuring the match between the behavior's severity and the intervening strategy. Effective interventions are those that prove successful, while efficient interventions require minimal time for planning and implementing.
Behaviors must also be selected in light of children's disabilities or know behavioral difficulties. Gallag*** (1988) maintained that teac***s must be knowledgeable about student characteristics, especially when learning or behavioral difficulties are experienced. That is, Yolanda, a child with behavior disorder; may display impulsive behaviors frequently. When a teac*** is trying to reduce those impulsive behaviors, Yolanda must be taught alternative behaviors. It is unlikely that Yolanda will be taught to engage in more appropriate behavior immediately, as interventions require time for sufficient modeling, practicing, an reinforcing. The interventions for *** may consist of several techniques-nonverbal prompting, reinforcing alternative behaviors, and teaching the child to self-monitor. On the ot*** hand, Olga, who rarely engages in impulsive behavior may simply be given a verbal reminder or reprimand when she displays impulsive behavior.Ответить: Ольга ЛюблюМиньонов
Ответить: Анастасиянада к тесту составить 4 вопроса, альтернативній, общий, специальній, разделительній
я, малеха