The JowruxZ of Precision Teaching i s ded ica ted t o the d i r e c t and continuous measurement of behavior , t h e recording of frequency and the representa t ion of c e l e r a t i o n on t h e Standard Behavior Chart and Chart-based decision-making. The purpose of the Journal of Precision Teaching i s t o a c c e l e r a t e t h e sha r ing of s c i e n t i f i c and p r a c t i c a l information amonq i t s r e a d e r s . To this end, both formal nianuscripts and informal d a t a - s h a r i n g a r e encouraged.

Material submitted f o r publ i c a t i o n should meet the following c r i t e r i a : (1) be w r i t t e n i n p l a i n Eng l i sh , ( 2 ) be l imited t o 8 typed, double-spaced pages of n a r r a t i v e , ( 3 ) use the Journal Precision Teaching Standard GZossary and Charting Conventions, (4 ) conta in data d isp layed on t h e Standard Behavior Chart and (5)be submitted i n t r i p l i c a t e t o t h e e d i t o r . Each manuscript wil 1 be reviewed by the e d i t o r and one c o n s u l t i n g e d i t o r , both of whom must approve i t p r i o r t o p u b l i c a t i o n .

The Journal of Precision Teaching i s publ ished q u a r t e r l y i n Apri 1 , Ju ly , October and January. Each volume begins w i t h the April i ssue . The annual subsc r ip t ion r a t e i s $16.00 t o l i b r a r i e s and $12.00 t o ind iv idua l s , payable i n U.S. cu r rency . The s i n g l e copy pr ice i s $4.00. Advertising r a t e s a r e a v a i l a b l e upon reques t .

Submissions, s u b s c r i p t i o n s and o t h e r correspondence should be addrgssed t o the Journal o f Precis ion Teaching, Patr ick McGreevy, Edi tor , 4338 N.W. 82nd. S t r e e t , Kansas C i t y , Missouri, 64151.

Any a r t i c l e i s t h e personal express ion o f the author . Likewise, any advertisement i s t h e r e spons i bi 1i t y of the a d v e r t i s e r . Neither necessar i l y c a r r i e s Journal endorsement.

The s t a p l e s binding t h e J o u r m l o f Precis ion Teaching a r e e a s i l y removed. Readers a r e encouraged t o do t h i s , so t h a t photocopies and t ransparencies o f t h e Char t s can be made. The Journal can then be re-s tapled .

Second-class postage pendi ng a t Kansas C i ty , Missouri.

As p a r t of i t s goal t o d i s semina te r e s e a r c h , the Un i v e r s i t y Affi 1i a t e d Faci 1 i t y f o r Developmental Di sab i l i t i e s (UAF) a t the University of Missouri i n Kansas C i t y , under t h e d i r e c t i o n of Car 1 Calkins. a s s i s t e d with t h e production o f t h i s J o u r n a l .

Journal of Precision Teaching

Vol ume I Apri 1 , 1980 Number 1

Editor: Pat r ick Mciversity iversity

in

Ray BePrecision Teaching

Stephen Graf

Greevy

A f f i l i a t e F) of Missou

UnUn

Pro jec t a

d Facil i t y (UAri -Kansas City

aughton Educational ConsultanB e l l e v i l l e , Ontario

Consult

g Editors :

ck Er i c H

t

Great Fa l l s , Montan

Youngstown S t a t e University Youngstown, Ohio

Edward Framer North Texas S t a t e Uni vers i t y Den ton , Texas

Owen White University of Washington S e a t t l e , Washington

Henri Goettel Independence Public Schools Independence, Missouri

Steven Kran t z University A f f i l i a t e d Facil i t y (UAF) Uni versi t y of Missouri -Kansas City

H . S. Pennypacker Uni versi ty of Florida Gainesvi l le , Florida

Harol d Kunzelmann Internat ional Management Sys tems Baton Rouge, Louisiana

e

Wal t e r R . Berard University of Montana Missoula, Montana

Carl Koenig Internat ional Management Sys tems Kansas City , Missouri

Sarah Kyrkl und Hennepin Technical Centers Mi nneapol i s , Mi nnesota

Susan Re i t e r Spokane Public Schools Spokane, Washington

Kevi n 0 ' Keefe Psycho1 ogi s t Cambri dge , Massachusetts

Jim Johnson C . O . F . Training Services Ottawa, Kansas

Eugene "Skip" Berquam Prec is ion Teaching Project Or1 ando, Fl o r i da

Ann Star1 i n Kansas Universi ty Lawrence, Kansas

Jim Rudsit Federal Way Publ i c School s Federal Way, Washington

Deborah Wood Sherwood Center , Inc. Kansas C i ty , Missouri

Gene Stromberg Ottawa Publ i c Schools Ottawa, Kansas

Carl Binder Wal t e r E . Fernald School Belmont , Massachusetts

( a c h i l d y e t t o be named)

PRECISE PROGRAM EVALUATION USING LEARNING PICTURE REPORTS

o r

. -

"YOU OUGHTA BE I N PICTURES"

Deborah L. Wood and Dina F isher Shemood Center

Abstract: Learning Pictures and Learning Picture Reports provide a neu approach to program evaluation. The implementation of this approach at Shemood Center for a u t i s t i c children i n Kansas C i t y , Missouri was de- scribed.

The process of precise program evaluation was conducted i n tvo (2) steps.First , learning pictures formed by the most recent celerations of each child's charted academic assessments were recorded and categorized as GROWTH, M-UNTENANCE or REGRESSION on a Learning Picture Report form. Each teacher also recorded revisions she chose t o make i n instructional programs as well as criterions reached by the children. Second, the Pro-gram Director s m a r i z e d these Learning Picture Reports, chmting the frequency of GROWTH, MIIVTENANCE and REGRESSION pictures, as well as pro-gram revisions and criterions reached.

Periodic celerations of the s m a r i z e d data measured the overall effec- tiveness of the academic program for each term of the 1978-79 school yearThese celerations indicated that the instructional program was more effect i v e during the second term with respect t o both Learning Pictures and

criterions reached. fie authors suggest that th i s approach provides sensi t iv i ty t o chunges i n overall instructional effectiveness rmd a pre-

-

cise program evaluation. They further suggest that Learning Picture Re- port data have the potential t o ansuer detailed questions regarding in- structional effectiveness.

Check1 i s ts, peer panels , c o n t r o l 1 ed comparisons and standardized t es t s a1 1 have been used t o measure t he e f fec t i veness o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs(Stake, 1972). D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h these methods has l e d school administ r a t o r s . t o seek new a1 t e r n a t i v e s .

Sherwood Center, Inc . i s a p r i v a t e , n o t - f o r - p r o f i t school f o r a u t i s t i c c h i l d r e n loca ted i n Kansas City, M issou r i . Program evaluat ion i s con- ducted using the Standard Behavior Char t , Learn ing Pic tures and Learning P i c t u r e Reports. A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h i s new approach and the resu l t s o f t he f i r s t year o f implementat ion a re repor ted .

METHOD

Subjects. E i g h t (8 ) female teachers and 36 a u t i s t i c ch i ld ren pa r t i c i pa ted i n the study. The c h i 1 dren i nc l uded 9 g i r l s and 27 boys ranging i n age from 2-1 5. Each c h i 1 d had been diagnosed as a u t i s t i c/developmental l y

- -

Pm

-

disabled. The children had been placed a t Sherwood Center for speech, language, social and academic training. They were grouped i n t o 8 class- rooms according t o language and social s k i l l s .

rocedure. Prior t o the s t a r t of school , a Sherwood Center staff develop- ent workshop was conducted i n which data collection and reporting pro-

cedures were taught. The s ta f f learned how to pinpoint behaviors and chart data on the Standard Behavior Chart. Throughout the school year, these procedures were used to conduct weekly assessments of each child' s performance on his/her academic curricul um tasks. The teachers learned to sumnari ze these assessments by drawing cel e ra t i on 1 i nes through charted frequencies correct and incorrect, forming two-1 i ne learning pictures. Each chi ld 's learning pictures were described and categorized i n a Learn- ing Picture Report form (Wood, 1978) which was designed specifically for Sherwood Center af ter a similar model developed by Sokolove (1978). As recotiiinended by Sokolove (797%) ;the tearning Picture Report form was de- -

veloped inductively, that i s , from learning pictures exhibited by the chi1 dren. Model pictures were chosen to represent 50 dis t inct learning pictures exhibited by the children a t Sherwood Center. As shown i n Figure 1, the Sherwood Learning Picture Report (Wood, 1978) categorized learning pictures as GROWTH (OK), MAINTENANCE (WATCH) or REGRESSION ( C H A N G E ) . GROWTH pictures are those that show frequencies correct and/or frequencies incorrect changing i n the desi red di rections, that i s , frequencies correct accelerating and/or frequencies incorrect decelerating. MAINTENANCE pictures are general ly those i n which fre- quenci es correct and i ncorrect para1 1 el one another. Frequenci es correct and incorrect may be changing, b u t they are changing in the same direction a t the same rate. REGRESSION pictures are those i n which frequencies cor-rect are decelerating and/or frequencies incorrect accelerating. Every week teachers completed a Learning Picture Report on each child. As shown i n Figure 1, teachers recorded the specif ic curriculum tasks and their 1 earning channel teaching procedures. For each procedure, the learning picture formed by the most recent celerations was recorded i n the appropriate column. The number of weeks the child had spent on the

-curriculu~procedure and ~e-numbelc of weeks since the l a s t programre? vision were also recorded. If a child reached cr i ter ion on a curriculum/ procedure, the teacher recorded t h i s , as we1 1 as the task the child was to perform next. Finally , the teacher indicated what program revisions, i f any, she intended to make to transform MAINTENANCE and REGRESSION pic-tures into GROWTH pictures. One copy of this report was submitted t o the Program Director and another sent home to the parents. In order to measure the overall effectiveness of the academic program a t Sherwood Center, the Program Director summarized the weekly Learning Picture Reports for a l l children. She recorded and charted the fre- quency of GROWTH, MAINTENANCE and REGRESSION learning pictures, cri terions reached and program revisions on the Weekly Standard Behavior Chart.

CIJ a

i n g , ,

PICTURE REPORT F igu re 1

STUDENT M

MANAGER

F i g u r e 1,

Regression

DATE

SHERWOOD LEARNING

Sherwood L'earn P i c t u r e Repo r t

s

l y . t

rm.

s

RESULTS

Char t 1 i11 ust ra tes per iod ic ce le ra t i ons by term o f the t o t a l number o f 1 earn ing p ic tu res , as we1 1 as GROWTH, MAINTENANCE and REGRESSION p i c t u r ef o r a l l c h i l d r e n a t Sherwood Center. Dur ing the f i r s t term, MAINTENANCEp i c t u r e s accelerated f a s t e r than a l l o t he r p i c t u res . Dur ing t he second term, GROWTH pic tures accelerated, whi 1 e MAINTENANCE and REGRESSION p i c -t u r e s decelerated. These cel e ra t i ons i n d i c a t e t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n was moree f f e c t i v e dur ing the second term.

Char t 2 combines MAINTENANCE and REGRESSION p i c tu res and even more c l e a rillus t r a t e s increased i n s t r u c t i o n a l e f fec t i veness du r i ng t he second termChart 2 a l s o shows the ce le ra t i on o f program rev i s i ons and i n d i c a t e s t h ateachers made more rev is ions a t the beginn ing than a t the end o f each te

Chart 3 i l l u s t r a t e s the almost i d e n t i c a l ce le ra t ions o f t he t o t a l numberof l e a r n i n g p ic tu res and the t o t a l number o f c r i t e r i o n s reached d u r i n g bo th terms. The r a t i o between t o t a l l ea rn ing p i c tu res and c r i t e r i o n s reached was x5 during the f i r s t term and x4 dur ing the second term. Th ii n d i c a t e s increased i ns t ruc t i ona l e f f ec t i veness dur ing t h e second term.

DISCUSSION

The o v e r a l l e f fect iveness o f the academic program a t Sherwood Center i n -creased from the f i r s t t o the second term dur ing the 1978-79 school y e a ras demonstrated by charts o f Learn ing P ic tu res and c r i t e r i o n s reached. These cha r t s enabled the Program D i r e c t o r t o be s e n s i t i v e t o changes i n i n s t r u c t i o n a l ef fect iveness, wh i l e p r o v i d i n g a p rec ise program evalua- t i o n .

Many quest ions were ra ised dur ing the school year as a r e s u l t o f t h e Learn ing P i c t u r e Report data. How do c u r r i cu l um tasks, l e a r n i n g channelteaching procedures, i n s t r u c t i o n a l programs and f u n c t i o n i n g l e v e l o f t h es tudent a f f e c t lea rn ing p i c tu res? How o f t en do program r e v i s i o n s changeMAINTENANCE o r REGRESSION p i c t u res i n t o GROWTH p i c tu res? What types o f program rev i s i ons are most e f f e c t i v e ? Learning P i c t u r e Report da ta havethe p o t e n t i a l t o e f f e c t i v e l y answer these questions.

.

u-

REFERENCES

Pennypacker, H. S., Koenig, C. H., & L inds ley, 0. R. Handbook of t he Standard Behavior Chart. Kansas C i ty , Kansas : P rec i s i on Media, 1972

So k o l ove , Henri . ~Zueprint for productive classrooms. Shawnee M i s s i on, Kansas : Shawnee Mission School D i s t r i c t , 1978.

Stake, R . E. The countenance o f educat ional eva luat ion. I n Evaluating action pro rums: Readings i n social action and education, Carol H. Weiss (ed.7. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, Inc., 1972.

Wood, Deborah L. The Shemood Learning Picture Report. Unpubl i s hed docment. Kansas Ci ty , M i ssour i : Sherwood Center, Inc . , 1978.

Deborah L. Wood, Program Director, and Dim Fisher, Executive Director, are co-founders of Sherwood Center for the Exceptional Child, Inc., 1617 West 45th Street , Kansas C i t y , Missouri 64211.

JournuZ

Wood,

Deborah L.

and Fish

er,

Dina.

Pre

cise p

rog

ram

ev

alu

atio

n

usin

g le

arn

ing

pic

ture

rep

orts

. o

f P

recisio

n T

each

ing,

Volum

e I, N

umber 1,

Ap

ril, 1980.

Jo

ma

Z

Teaching,

1,

I 1

8 1

1,

Q)

E

U i-0

s L

IS, s

Q) cra

Wood,

Deborah L.

and Fish

er,

Dina.

Pre

cise program

eva

lua

tion

u

sing

lea

rnin

g p

ictu

re re

po

rts.

of

Precision

Volum

e I, N

umber

1, A

pril,

1980.

I I

.

a 0

L

Jo

ma

Z

Wood,

Deborah L.

Dina.

of

Volum

e I

, A

pril,

1980.N

umber

1,

and Fish

er,

Pre

cise program

ev

alu

atio

n

us

ing

lea

rnin

g p

ictu

re re

po

rts. P

rec

ision

Tea

chin

g,

CHARTING TO COMPARE CHILDREN'S LEARNING AT FOUR DIFFERENT READING PERFORMANCE LEVELS

Karen Neu , Ph.D. Tabor Co ZZ sity

of daily f

ch i ld ren a

feld, Ed.D. Ogden L inds leyege Kansas Univer

t study used the Standard ciples t o compare learning - e other widely spread perfo s

Abstract: fie presenrelated research printional level and thre

requencies coZZected from the reading

t t h i s performance l eve l promotes h ig

Behavior Chart and i t s a t the inventory instrucrmance ZeveZs. DJO week

behaviors of 49 f i f t h

graders provided ce Zerations for the four p e r f o m n e e Zeve Zs t r i e d minutes apart. The findings shmed no s ign i f i can t di f ferences i n the distributions of celerations a t the four perfomnance ZeveZs. The authors challenged reading teaching practices that place a premium on high per- formance levels and called for careful evaluation o f t he Standard Be- havior Chart as a research tool .

Many reading teachers p lace ch i l d ren i n read ing mater i a1 s a t t he i ns t ruc - t i o n a l l e v e l o f an informal reading inventory b e l i e v i n g t h a t p l a c i n g

hes t 1 earning. This study

used the Standard Behavior Chart and i t s r e l a t e d research p r i n c i p l e s t o val idate a performance l e v e l f o r h ighes t l ea rn ing . The quest ion was: I s the i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l o f the in formal read ing i nven to ry o r any o f three o ther performance l e v e l s a l e v e l t h a t promotes h i g h e s t speed o r accuracy 1 earni ng .

BACKGROUND

The Standard Behavior Chart

Natural s c i e n t i s t s and mathematicians have l ong recognized t h e advantages

o f the semi logar i thmic cha r t f o r showing p r o p o r t i o n a l and percentage re1 a- t ionships. Since Skinner 's p ioneer ing work i n operant c o n d i t i o n i n g ( l938) , sc ien t i s t s have recognized the p rec i s ion and un i ve rsa l appl i c a b i l it y o f frequency f o r measuring behavior. However, i t was n o t u n t i l t h e middle 1960's t h a t L indsl ey (1971) combi ned the semi1 o g a r i thmi c c h a r t w i t h f r e - quency t o form a char t , now cal l e d the Standard Behavior Chart, t h a t measured propor t iona l changes in behavior.

Early users o f t h i s Chart not iced t h a t behavior f requencies on the Chart o f ten accelerated o r decelerated as t ime passed. A1 so, these "ce le ra t ions" were general ly 1 inear . I f indeed, the changes i n behavior frequencies were 1 inear on a semilogari thmic scale, then behav ior changes by a con- s tant m u l t i p l e r a t h e r than by a constant addend, o r l i k e the compounding i n t e r e s t o f a savings account r a t h e r than l i k e un i fo rm depos i ts t o a cash box.

I n 1972, Koenig used over a thousand phases o f behavior f requencies w i t h over 10 percent change per week from research j ou rna l s and the Behavior Bank (1971 ) t o conf i rm t h a t l i n e a r ce le ra t i ons on t h e Standard Behavior

Chart appropriately represented changes in behavior. The straight 1ines drawn through a t least 10 frequencies bisected the frequencies and the variance on the Standard Behavior Chart. Since 1972, many research projects involving thousands of children have confirmed Koenig's findings and challenged traditional analysis of research data by add gains.

The Standard Behavior Chart i s not new to the worl d of reading research. Of special significance to th i s study was Johnson's (1971) research that showed frequencies on the Standard Behavior Chart measured reading per- formance and learning in several curricul a t r ied minutes apart. Another study (St i les & Martin, 1973) showed reading frequencies and changes in reading frequencies were normally dis tr ibuted on the semilogarithmic

scale, that i s , were spread across people by the same mu1 t iple up as down. Findings from b o t h of these studies became part of the research design for the present study, which compared distributions of changes in frequencies from different grade levels of curricula tried only minutes apart.

!l'he Informal Reading Inventory

The informal reading inventory (IRI) i s a widely used technique for plac- ing students in materials. The IRI uses a se r i e s of passages from materials representi ng di fferent grade level s . The student reads the passages oral ly and answers comprehension questions w h i 1 e the teacher records incorrects . The teacher places the student for instruction in materials in which the student reads passages a t some defined performance level. Did highest learning data val idate any of the currently used instructional performance levels of the IRI? Cooper (1952) tested 1000 elementary chil- dren and found that, as a group, children who made the fewest word recog- nition errors made the greatest grade equivalent score gains in reading achievement. Cooper concl uded tha t instructional level cr i ter ia of the

I

I

IRI should be 96-98 percent accuracy for word recognition and 60-70 per- cent accuracy for comprehensi on. No val i dation studies were found using a more immediate measure of highest learning, namely, the change in daily reading frequencies plotted on the Standard Behavior Chart.

METHOD

The present study included 49 f i f t h graders i n a rural Kansas school dis- t r i c t . Each child received an informal reading inventory using rate builders from Scientific Research Associates (SRA) reading laboratory IIb. Each chi ld 's instructional level was the highest grade level in which the child had a t leas t 95-99 percent word recognition accuracy and 75-90 per- cent comprehension accuracy. Substitutions, mispronunciations, assisted words, punctuation skips, insertions, hesitations and omissions as de- fined by McCracken (1967) counted as incorrects. Of eleven authors re­viewed by Powell ( l97l ) , these percentsge levels and cr i te r ia for in- corrects were recomnended by more authors than any others. For a t least 10 school days the children read and charted their progress

a t four performance levels : t he i r instructional 1 eve1 , one grade level below, and two and six grade levels above that instructional level. A t l eas t 10 days were required to measure learning a t each level for each

child (Koenig, 1971). The steps between grade levels increased by doubling ( + I , +2, +4) and represented performance levels from nearly perfect t o high incorrect.

The daily procedure was as follows: (1) untimed s i l e n t reading of a story from one of four randomly ordered SRA ra te builders, with oppor- tunity for help with new words or content; ( 2 ) one minute see-mark tim­ing on SRA mu1 t ip l e choice comprehension questions; (3) checking of comprehension answers; charting frequency correct and incorrect on the Standard Behavior Chart; ( 4 ) one minute see-say word recognition timing; (5) checking words read; charting frequency correct and incorrect on the Chart; and ( 6 ) repeating steps 1-5 for the remaining three performance levels.

RESULTS

The daily procedure generated a t l eas t 10 frequencies for each of the 16 reading behaviors--corrects and incorrects i n both word recognition and

comprehension a t each of the vels--for each child. Charts 1 and 2 show an exam frequencies for word recog­

four placement leple of one chi ld ' s

nition and comprehension recorded on Daily Standard Behavior Charts. Each Chart contai ns the reading frequenci es and celerations for 4 pl acement levels.

For an index of speed learning, the study used freehand celeration lines drawn through each set of a t least 10 frequencies. The celeration was measured with a celeration finder. The Pearson product-moment correl a­tion coefficient between the celeration of these 1ines and the celeration of lines drawn by the 1 inear regression formula was r = .88. This corre­lation between freehand lines and formula-drawn 1 ines from /2.0 t o x2.0 was comparable to the correlation of r = .99 shown by Hnetish (1977) for celerations from x1.05 to x13.00.

For an index of accuracy learning, the study used the accuracy improve- ment mu1 t ipl ie r . The accuracy improvement mu1 t i p l i e r t e l l s how much the accuracy mu1 t i pl ie r mu1 t i pl ied or di vi ded each week. The accuracy mu1 t i ­plier i s the number a median frequency incorrect i s m u 1 t ip l ied by to get i t s related median frequency correct. I t t e l l s the number of correct responses there were for each incorrect response. For example, a child has an accuracy mu1 tipl i e r go from x2.0 to x3.0 in one week, yielding an accuracy improvement mu1 t i pl i e r of x1 .5.

The speed and accuracy learning indices were analyzed in order to answer the central research question of the study: was the instructional level of the IRI or any of three other performance levels a level of highest speed or accuracy learning?

Visual comparisons of distributions of celerations-corrects , celerations­incorrects and accuracy improvement mu1 t i pl iers in word recognition and comprehension a t the four placement 1 eve1 s showed normal ly spread dis- tributions, b u t no differences for any placement level (see Charts 3 and 4) . Median t e s t (Siege1, 1956) comparisons yiel ded no s ignif icant dif- ferences a t any placement level ( p <.01).

- - -

--

DAILY BEHAVIOR CHART (DCM-SEN) 6 C Y C L E - 1 4 0 O A Y S (PO W K S ) B E H A V I O R R E S E A R C H C OCALENDAR WEEKS BOX 3361 - K A N S A S C I T Y K A N S 6 6 1 0 3

- L L

Chart I. One C h i l d ' s Frequencies and Celerat ions- Word Recognit ion

:"'~~""~""~""~""~"+'""""LJ~i':""~'"'~""~"~1~""~"~'~'1'~:~"'~"~'~"'~~1~"~~i1'~u~~~~~1~0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS FEMALE SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER BEHAVER AGE LABEL C O U N T E D

- ( IL=I -NSTRUCT IONAL LEVEL GL=GRADE- LEVEL) WORDS D E P O S I T O R AGENCY T I M E R C O U N T E R C HA,RTER

D A I L Y B E H A V I O R C H A R T (DCM-BEN) 6 CYCLE - 1 4 0 D A Y S ( 2 0 W K S ) B E H A V I O R RESEARCH COCALENDAR WEEKS BOX 3 3 5 1 - K A N S A S C I T Y K A N S 6 6 1 0 3

opi OF' obi 0pif , - . . i 0 pi - / 4 I2 I6 2

1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I

. 005 Chart 2. One C h i l d ' s Frequencies and Celerations- Comprehension

.001

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER BEHAVER AGE LABEL COUNTED

IIG

U I = I

U ,

IW

I G

II

UIIU

L I

II

U~I C

J ,

UY

UC

II. L

IIU

I

L IIIY

L

U

LU

III).I.JI

c

LII I

IU

I r

11

3

-le

arn

ing

at fo

ur

diffe

ren

t re

ad

ing

performance

lev

els

. J

~u

rn

a&

~,,,~

,~,,ccT

-s,-

,,,,, o

f P

rec

ision

Tea

chin

g,

Volum

e I

, Num

ber 1, A

pri 1 , 1980.

Neufeld,

Karen

and L

ind

sley,

Ogden.

Ch

arting

to com

pare D

AIL

Y C

HA

RT

TRA

CER

(CT

-8)

ch

ildre

n's learn

ing

at

fou

r diffe

ren

t readin

g perform

ance lev

els. JournaZ

o

f P

rec

ision

T

each

ing

, V

ol urne I, N

umber

1,

Ap

ril, 1980.

a l l y , t h i s s tudy

This s tudy cha l lenged bo th . Tt h i s s tudy deserve c a r e f u l evarev01 u t i o n i ze c u r r e n t research

DISCUSSION

Th is s tudy used the Standard Behavior Chart and i t s r e l a t e d research p r i n c i p l e s t o examine t h e quest ion: was the i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l o f the in fo rma l r ead ing i n v e n t o r y o r any o f th ree o ther performance l eve l s a l e v e l t h a t promoted h i g h e s t 1 earn ing? D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f speed and accu-

dif ferences i n c h i l d r e n ' s l ea rn ing

racy c e l e r a t i o n s showed no s i g n i f i c a n t a t any o f t he performance l e v e l s . Thus, ne i t he r the inven tory i n s t r u c - t i o n a l l e v e l n o r any o f t he o t h e r performance l e v e l s promoted h ighes t l ea rn ing .

ImpZicatwns for EducationaZ Practice

The f i n d i n g s f rom t h i s s tudy chal lenge reading teaching p rac t i ces t h a t p lace a premi um on h i g h performance. One o f these p rac t i ces i s to p lace c h i l d r e n i n read ing m a t e r i a l s a t the i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l o f t h e in fo rma l reading i nven to ry . I f placement a t t h i s l e v e l does no t promote h ighes t learn ing , shou ld teachers use the l e v e l a t a l l ? Fur ther research i s needed t o t e s t whether o r n o t placement a t the inventory i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l achieves any o t h e r purpose.

ng inven tory?

Did t h i s s tudy e l i m i n a t e the need f o r the in formal readi Although the i n v e n t o r y does n o t s e l e c t a performance l e v e l f o r h ighes t learn ing , i t may s t i l l be u s e f u l f o r assessing s t rengths and weaknesses. This s tudy cha l lenged o n l y one use o f the informal reading inven tory .

Observations on the Use o f t h e Standard Behavior &art

How e f f e c t i v e was the Standard Behavior Chart as a research inst rument? The Chart a l lowed v i s u a l c o ~ p a r i s o n s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n s , which had the same advantages ove r s t r i c t l y s t a t i s t i c a l comparisons t h a t a photograph has over a verbal d e s c r i p t i o n . The Char t also proved appropr ia te f o r com- par ing c h i l d r e n ' s behav io r f requencies. The ce le ra t ions and d i s t r i b u - t i o n s o f ce l e r a t i o n s s u b s t a n t i a t e d L inds ley ' s c laims t h a t 1 earn ing i s l i n e a r on t h e sem i l oga r i thmic sca le and t h a t human behaviors w i t h i n and between people spread by t h e same mu1 t i p l e up as down. As a research t oo l , the Char t was very e f f i c i e n t . Although t h i s study used both s ta - t i s t i c a l and v i s u a l comparisons and drew ce le ra t i on l i n e s by both the freehand method and the 1 i n e a r reqress ion formula, v i sua l and freehand methods a lone produced adequate in fo rmat ion t o f o h u l a t e research con-

assumed from previous research t h a t the

c lus ions. F i n f requencies were s e n s i t i v e and s p e c i f i c enough t o a1 1 ow a compa r a t i ve study between seve ra l c u r r i c u l a t r i e d minutes apart . The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s tudy con f i rmed t h i s assumption.

Educators seldom q u e s t i o n t he use o f h igh performance l e v e l s f o r reading i n s t r u c t i o n o r the use o f t r a d i t i o n a l s t a t i s t i c a l research techniques.

he f i nd ings and techniques descr ibed i n l ua t ion . I f subs t a n t i ated, they could and teaching p rac t i ces .

REFERENCES

Behavior Bank. Precise beha Kansas City: Precision Media, 1971.

Cooper, J . L . The e f f e c t of reading achievement. Unpublished doctoral d i s

vior facts. 2 vols.

adjustment of basal

se r ta t ion , Boston Uni versi t y , 1952.

s.

,

Hnetish, H . Educational charts (1940-1975) and projections (1975-2000) and the Libyan Arab Republic. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i on , University of Kansas, 1977.

Johnson, N . Acceleration o f inner c i t y school pupil ' s reading performanceUnpublished doctoral d i s se r ta t ion , University of Kansas, 1971.

Koeni g, C. H . Charting the future course of behavior. Kansas Ci ty : Precision Media, 1971.

Li ndsley, 0. R. Precision teaching in perspective. Teaching Exceptional Children, 1971, -3, 114-119.

McCracken, R. A. The evaluation of chi ldren 's readi ng. In Perspectives i n reading, n d e r 8 . Newark : International Reading Associations , 1967.

Neufeld, K . What charted learning t e l l s supervisors &out reading per- formance levels. Unpublished doctoral d i s se r ta t ion , University of Kansas, 19 78.

Powell, W . R. Validity of the IRI reading levels . Elementary EngZish, 1971, ­48, 637-642.

Siege1 , S. iron-parametric s t a t i s t i c s . New York: McGraw H i 11, 1956.

Skinner, 8. F. The behavior o f organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1938.

S t i l e s , R . L . , & Martin, 6 . L . Step-wise multiple regression s tud ies o f basic movement cycle data with norm-referenced achievement and ap t i - tude batteries from selected e Zementary pupils. Tacoma : Chi 1 d Service Demonstration Programs, S .S .T . Learning D i sab i l i t i e s Project , 1973.

Karen Neufeld i s Associate Professor of Education, Tabor College, Hi l ls ­boro, Kansas 67063. Ogden Lindsley i s Professor o f Education, Bailey HallKansas University, Lawrence, Kansas 66045.

A l l o f these ele

Course Manageme

'preparat ion o fThe authors g rthe APPILOT prtyped the man

Charles T. Merb i tz , Ph.D. and Charles P. Olander, Ph.D. Jacksonvi ZZe S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y

The Center f o r I n d i v i dual i zed I n s t r u c t i o n was an Advanced I n s tit u t i o n a l Development Program (AIDP) grant- funded u n i t whose f u n c t i o n was t o use the bes t of modern i n s t r u c t i o n a l technology t o develop and o f f e r some exemplary i n d i v i d u a l i z e d courses a t Jacksonv i l l e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .

The general method o f teaching used a t t he Center grew f rom t h e work o f B. F. Skinner (1968) and the a p p l i c a t i o n o f o p e r a n t c o n d i t i o n i n g t o teaching. Human behav io r was seen as a l a w f u l f u n c t i o n o f i t s env i ron-ment, and t h e problem o f teaching was t o c o n t r o l r e l e v a n t aspects o f the teaching environment so t h a t the app rop r i a te behav io r s were learned i n the quickest, most e f f i c i e n t and humane manner. Courses were gene ra l l y organized i n the Personal ized System o f I n s t r u c t i o n (PSI) method (Kel l e r , 1968) using s e l f - pac i ng and repeated t e s t i ng ove r a g i ven u n i t o f ma te r i a l u n t i 1 mastery was demonstrated. Other undergraduate s tuden ts served as proctors who p rov ided immediate feedback on exams, personal a t t e n t i o n , and d iscuss ion o f missed t e s t items.

Microprocessors were used i n some courses t o p r o v i d e computer-assis t ed i n s t r u c t i o n (CAI), academic exerc ises, and t e s t s . The computers p re -c i s e l y t imed the s tuden t a c t i v i t i e s and k e p t permanent records of per -formance.

Measurement of academic a c t i v i t y a t t he Center r e1i e d on t he work o f Pennypacker, Koeni g, and L inds ley (1972), White and H a r i ng (1976) and t h e i r assoc ia tes. Tests and exerc ises were t imed, a1 though there was no t ime 1i m i t , and frequency o f c o r r e c t and i n c o r r e c t responses pe r minute were p l o t t e d on D a i l y Standard Behavior Char ts . The Charts pro-vided graphic assessment o f t he p o s i t i o n and d a i l y progress o f each student.

ments func g f l o w o f educat ional

nt. Course

t h i s a r t i ca t e f u l l y ac

ogramming, uscr ipt .

t ioned w i t h i n an ongoin

a c t i v i t y as a system which prov ided and fed-back t h e da ta needed t o i m -prove. Fo l low ing a re expanded d iscuss ions o f t h e components o f the sys-tem, and examples o f some o f the data generated.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

s housed a t the Center used t h e b a s i c P S I model

- -

(see a lso Ruskin, 1977; Sherman, 1977; Taveggia, 1977) . Each course was d iv ided i n t o a s e t of we1 1-de f ined u n i t s p resen ted sequen t i a l l y , some w i t h review u n i t s . General ly a standard tex tbook formed the c e n t r a l c u r r i c u l um e l emen t f o r Center courses. Combi n a t i o n s o f s l ide/ tape,

l e was supported i n p a r t by Grant #G-00-76-02485. knowledge t h e he1 p of R. Yaracs, who d i d much of and o f J. Schwarz who p a t i e n t l y typed and re -

vi deo/tape, audio/ tape, small discussions, 1 ive 1 aboratory exercises , CAI exercises, workbooks, and lectures provided suppl emental information. Both comnercial and locally produced materials were used. A syl labus o r

course pol icy statement out1 i ned the procedures f o r each course. Courses presenting a great diversi ty of elements a1 so provided extensive study guides w i t h flow diagrams to d i rec t students into the a c t i v i t y appropriate for thei r level of attainment a t that time.

The students began by studying the material f o r Unit One. When ready, students presented themsel ves indi vi dually fo r t e s t i ng on U n i t One. Immediately fol lowi ng the t e s t , the students met with advanced-student advisors fo r discussion of the concepts presented in the focusing on the concepts missed.

Mastery c r i t e r i a were specif ic to each course and were defined as percent correct (usually 80-90 percent). If students demonstrated mastery of the material, they proceeded to the next u n i t ; i f n o t , they restudied and l a t e r took another t e s t . Some courses arranged for mu1 t i p l e forms of each t e s t , while others selected a new s t r a t i f i e d random sample of items for each tes t .

The elements of th is arrangement worked together as a system. Study guides and the curriculum presentations provided the concepts t o be learned. The self-pacing feature permitted the we1 1 - intentioned s tu ­dents who had minor gaps in a u n i t ' s background to spend the ex t ra time needed to adequately prepare fo r tha t un i t ' s t e s t . The mastery require- ment insured that the students had learned the crucial material i n tha t u n i t before proceeding to the next. The unl imi ted r e t e s t component made each t e s t a motivational tool , as well as an evaluation instrument. When a u n i t t e s t was fai led, the potential reinforcer of a good grade was s t i l l available, since only the highest u n i t t e s t s counted f o r grades. The student advisors individually discussed the t e s t s w i t h the students , giving imnediate feedback and covering the points t ha t were not mastered. As peers, the advisors explained concepts in the s tuden t ' s language and interacted with the students in a fr iendly and personal way.

~croprocessors . Six A ple I1 2 microprocessors w i t h floppy disks used the BASIC o r APPILOT I1 5 language to present t e s t i tems in te rac t ive ly fo r three courses using the "concealed mu1 t i p l e choice" (Bowl e s , 1977), o r the f i l l in the blank format. In concealed multiple choice, a ques-

t ion was presented followed by the f i r s t randomized f o i l , to which the student responded with a yes o r no, corresponding to t r ue and f a l s e . The next foi l was then presented and answered. The student was given feedback as to which responses were correct. The microprocessor ran­domized the selection of i tems and f o i l s , and recorded the number of correct and incorrect responses, the t e s t time and the latency of each

'~pp le I1 i s a trademark of the Apple Computer Co., Cupertino, Cal i f .

'APPILOT copyright 1978 by Si las B . Warner available from MUSE, 7112

Darl ington Dr., Baltimore, M D 21234.

response. Percent correct was also calculated. The information was permanently stored for subsequent anal ysi s . Precision Measures. Student performance on t e s t s was measured in two ( 2 ) ways: (1) frequency of correct and incorrect responses per minute, and (2 ) percent of correct responses. The frequency measure was used t o monitor and improve student performance and learning, while the percent measure indicated current performance in relat ion t o the mastery cr i - ter i on. A1 though there was no time 1 imit, the t e s t s were timed. The advisors plotted frequency correct and incorrect as well as the recard floor on Dai ly Standard Behavior Charts ( Pennypacker, Koenig , Lindsley , 1972; White & Haring, 1977). The resulting graphic display took the advisor about 20 seconds per tes t t o plot because the "Frequency Finder" method was used instead of a table or manually dividing count by time.

After a few tests i n a given unit, any student 's Chart could be i n ­spected and tentative celeration 1 ines drawn through the frequencies-- correct and incorrect. Projecting celeration 1 ines indicated imme- diately whether the student was making rapid enough progress. A change in the student's behavior was seen as e i ther frequency change or a change in celeration (s lope) , and provided an estimate of the extent t o which the teaching environment controlled the behavior. Thus, each unit formed a se t of repeated measures that a1 lowed experimental tac t ics to be evaluated. Chart 1 shows one student 's performance and learning on chapter tests in a Human Physiology course in Fa1 1 , 1979. Frequencies plotted between the day lines indicated more than one t e s t taken per day. As shown in Chart 1 , the instructor intervened with a discussion of eff icient study techniques and student progress on day #38. Notice that in the f i r s t 35 days of the semester, (before the intervention) she completed only 1 chapter. Foll owing the intervention, she compl eted the remaining 9 chapters in only 64 days.

While s ta t i s t ica l measures for the above elements were possible (see Pennypacker, Koenig, Lindsley, 1972; White & Haring, 1977; Koenig, 1972; Pennypacker, l976a, 1976b), visual assessment was generally used for i t s speed and ease. Also, since these measures were absolute, direct , inde­pendent, and con t i nuous, other advantages accrued. Si nce frequency was an absolute and direct measure l ike the meter, as opposed t o an indirect or s ta t i s t ica l measure dependent on the observed var iabi l i ty of the sample a t hand, Charts from all courses a t the Center ( o r anywhere else) could be directly compared. As frequency (as opposed to percentage) was an independent measure, there was no necessary linkage between frequency correct and frequency incorrect. Thus, intervention could be di rected a t reducing one or increasing the other, depending on circumstances. As frequency was continuous, the minimum change in a s tudent 's per-

formance that could be measured was not determined by the number of t e s t items, as were percents, b u t depended on the accuracy of the clock used. (For a more complete discussion of these points, see also Pennypacker, 1976a, l976b)

DAILY BEHAVIOR C H A R T ( F M - S E N ) 6 CYCLE-1 .0 D A Y S ( 2 0 W K S I

E S E A R C H C OEEKS A N S A S C I T Y K A N S 6610

Chapter 1

3.' ," M I N HRSud 3 2

- 5 '- I a Y

m R - 2 p w o

J 0 ru -2

- 5 %'c m - 1 0 n o e..

- 0)- 2 0 e.w 0 1

- -% X r g

- 5 0 - I ;.3 R d-

Q o -loo -2 g3

I n s t r u c t o r D iscuss ion - 200 3 -4? 2 - 5 0

,500 -8 z

0 : " " ~ 1 " ~ ~ " " J i 1 i ' ~ i " ~ ~ ' L i ~ ~ " " " " ' ~ ' i ' 1 ~ ' 1 ' 1 ~ W ' ~ ' ~ " - " ' ~ " ' c ~ " " ~ " ~ ' ~ " ' 1 ~ ' c " ~ " ' ~ : ' c " ~ " a ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Chart 1. One S tuden t ' s Performance and Learn ing on Chapter Tests i n a Human Physiology course

O_LAmm- .-- --SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS AM ANSWERS ­

SUPERVISOR A D V I S E R M A N A G E R B E H A V E R AGE L A B E L C O U N T E D

-.- ­ AM L-Ill.-.- TEST QUESTIONS D E P O S I T O R A G F N C Y rlMEP ',I:UNTtW CHARTER

Operating S ta t i s t ics . The Center had a f u l l t ime s ta f f o f two, an i n ­s t r u c t o r f o r each course, and a f l u c t u a t i n g s t a f f of s tuden t adv isors wo rk i ng f o r c r e d i t , money, o r recommendations. Twelve (12) sec t i ons o f

8 courses were p h y s i c a l l y housed 0 sq. ft. f a c i l i t y open from 8-4:3takei n B

Enro l lments f o r 2 Years and

Co 1 1 ege A1 gebra S t a t i s t i c s A n a l y s i s o f C h i l d Behavior

r e p o r t e d i n Merb i tz , Olander andof t h e pac ing dev ice on one s tudt h e s t u d e n t was exposed t o the pcuss ion w i t h he r i n s t r u c t o r . A

i n a 140

t s l e d

0 weekdays (see Table 1). Chart 2 shows t he t o t a l number o f t e sn p e r day by a l l students i n a l l courses and by 42 students e n r o li o l o g y 102 (16 u n i t s ) dur ing the f i r s t 5 weeks i n 1980.

Table 1

Spr ing Semester, 1980, f o r Courses

Housed a t the Center f o r I n d i v i dua l i z e d I n s t r u c t i o n

Courses 1978 1979 Spring, 1980

Academic Su rv i va l Ski 11s 14 R e i n f o r c i n g Quan t i t a t i ve

S k i 11s 30 General B io l ogy ---­Human Physi 01 ogy H i s t o r y - -

24 -­

--­

RESEARCH

The system descr ibed was se l f - improv ing i n the l ong term, as i t p rov ided .m

a b a s i s f o r i n s t r u c t o r s t o t e s t t h e i r no t i ons o f how students l e a r n . Work under way i n one semester inc luded an at tempt t o use the power o f Char ted d i r e c t measures t o i n v e s t i g a t e the use of soph i s t i ca ted l o g i c a l s t r a t e g i e s and an e f f o r t t o measure t h e e f f e c t o f feedback-t iming on pe r - formance and r e t e n t i o n i n mu1 tip l e-choi ce t e s t i n g . Another i n v e s t i g a t i o n invo lved the use o f a p r e d i c t i o n o f the course com­p l e t i o n da te as a pacing device. While t he program used a computer, i t was a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d conversion of an opera t ion t h a t can be done s imp l y on t h e Chart. The student accessed an on-1 i n e computer program. The machine c a l c u l a t e d the average number o f days the students had spen t p e r u n i t passed, m u l t i p l i e d t h i s by the number of u n i t s i n t h e course, and p r o j e c t e d the ca lendar date f o r complet ion o f t h a t course. The program was i n i t i a t e d a t se lected po in ts i n the semester i n var ious courses. The e f f e c t o f t h i s pacing device on actua l complet ion date, u n i t s completed p e r day p e r week and un i t s attempted per day pe r week were assessed and

McDade (1980). Chart 3 shows t h e e f f e c t s ent e n r o l l e d i n B io l ogy 102. On day #Z6, acing program and p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a d i s ­

t t h a t t ime, the p ro jec ted course comple t ion

-- --

I DAILY B E H A V I O R CHART (D,CM-SEN) 6 C Y C L E - 1 4 0 D A Y S ( 2 0 W U Y BEHAVIOR RESEARCH COEEKS BOX 3351 - K A N S A S CITY U A N S 66103

Chart 2 . Number o f Tests Taken Per Day

A Z Z Center Courses

BY 102 Only

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS A~~ cENTER sTUDENTS TAKE TESTS - -.-

SUPERVISOR ADVISER MANAGER BEHAVER AGE LABEL C O U N T E D

- .-

D t P O S l T O R A G E N C Y T I M E R COUNTER CHARTER

ILY BEHAVIOR CHART (DCM-SEN)

E S E A R C H C O A N S A S C I T Y K A N S 66103

I*) 3 m 1500 - <". 0­23 "' d-

CDJN 3 * m t 1 C)

uA.J100- - <Dl -50 2 3

c m m g;m

y1

0 - m 0,10- * 1 3

d-n 5 - D m

z 7 2 4. OJ

M I N HRSW4 2 2

I- - I -% :- a * CQQnew O N 0

5 - p r o j e c t e d - 2 ' J

a DJ

complet ion %2,- 5 v c

'a .I-: -10 :. 7

- % Ga

.05 - - 20 e.-0 a 1

I --1/2 a m CI

I . - 50 - I Y "-'am R "­n 0-100 -2-01- pacing I 3'3 e. 3 -ii n t e r v e n t i o n I Pro jec ted F g

1 Compl e t i o n CI J

I 13N0~80

0 ~ 1 " ' ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ ' " " " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ ~ " ' ! " " : ' t " ~ " ~ ' ~ " " ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ " " ~ " ~ ' ~ " ' ~ : " ' ~ " 1 ~ " ' ~ ~ " " ~ " " ~ " " ~ " ' L ~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

Chart 3. The E f f e c t s o f a Pacing Device on Pro jec ted Course Completion SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS BAT BY 102 ANSWERS

- ----- - cpo - -- ­

SUPERVISOR ADVISER M A N A G E R BEHAVER AGE L A B E L C O U N T E D

pp -OEPOSl TOR A G E N C Y ' T I M E R C O U N T E R C H A F T E R .

date was Nov. 13, 1980, o r 312 days i n t o the semester. A f t e r the i n t e r - vent ion the s tuden t r a p i d l y completed 6 addi t ional u n i t s such t h a t her p ro jec ted complet ion date became March 6, 1980, o r on ly 60 days a f t e r

the beg inn ing o f the semester.

OUTCOMES

Using these technologies has improved the product, behavior change o f students, whi l e making the courses e f f e c t i v e and accountable. The

e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t he courses w ted by the change i n student behavior recorded from the beg end of each u n i t and the

Kel l e r , F. S. "Goodbye TeacheAnaZysis, 1968, 1 ( 1 ) , 78-89

as demonstrainning to the

number o f u n i t s completed. Since costs to run a course can be found, a c o s t e f f i c i e n c y and e f fec t i veness ca lcu la t ion based on student be- hav io r change can be generated f o r f i s c a l and performance accoun tab i l i t y (see Sexton, Merbi t z , & Pennypacker, 1974).

Another e f f e c t of t h e system was t o fos te r t rue equa l i t y o f educat ional oppor tun i t y , i n t h a t the data permi t ted the student 's work t o be viewed o b j e c t i v e l y , separa t ing i t from any imp1 i e d assessment o f the student 's worth o r p o t e n t i a l as a human being. I n addit ion, since l ess s k i l l e d students e n t e r i n g the system were required to remedy de f i c i enc ies and reach a d e f i n e d l e v e l o f competence before progressing, they were not passed along w i t h a low grade and an i n f e r i o r superstructure o f s k i l l s r e s t i n g on a poor foundat ion. The repeated measures and teaching oppor- t u n i t i e s made sure t h a t s tudents spent the time needed and go t the a t ten- t i o n necessary f o r maximum progress.

The Charted performance data f reed the ins t ruc tors to teach by p u t t i n g them i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f managing learning, whi le the i n d i v i d u a l i z e d nature o f t h e system gave the i ns t ruc to rs the power, f l e x i b i l i t y , t ime and feedback needed t o exper imenta l l y determine the appropr iate condi ­t i o n s o f l e a r n i n g f o r each student. The data also made i t poss ib le for students t o f i n d o u t which t a c t i c s were e f fec t ive , and made i t the s tu - den t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o a c t u a l l y use those tac t i cs . The union o f t he i n s t r u c t o r and s tudent i n l ea rn ing meant t ha t i ns t ruc to rs could do t h e i r best, most c r e a t i v e teach ing w i t h every student.

As a grant-funded organ iza t ion , t he Center i s not ava i lab le t o i n s t r u c t o r s from o the r i n s t i t u t i o n s . However, the Center s t a f f i s w i l l i n g t o share c u r r i c u l a r m a t e r i a l s and programs developed here and t o encourage appl i-c a t i o n o f these techno1 og i es e l sewhere.

REFERENCES

Bowl es , K. L . M i crocomputer-based mass education. Journal of Personalized Instruct ion, 1978, ?(3) , 1 51 -1 56.

urnal of Applied Behavior

r . . . " Jo .

Koeni g , Car l H . Charting the future course of behavior. Kansas C i t y : Prec i s ion Media, 1972.

Merbi t z , C . T. , 01 ander, C. P ., & McDade, C. Prediction of completion dates as a PSI pacing device. Poster presentation, Associat ion f o r Behaviora l Ana lys is , Dearborn, M I , May, 1980.

Pennypacker, H . S. The r o l e of d i r e c t measurement i n the evolu t ion of a complex educa t ion system. L . E . Fraley and E . A. Vargas (Eds.) , Froceedi ngs o f t he third natinal conference on behavior research and techno logy i n higher education. Gainesvi 11 e , FL : Socie ty f o r Behavioral Technology and Engineering, l976a, 259-266.

Pennypacker, H . S . Measurement, accountab i l i ty , and t h e economics of a complex i n s t r u c t i o n a l system. L . E . Fraley and E . A. Vargas (Eds .), Proceedings of t he third nationaZ conference on behavior research and technology i n higher education. Gainesvi 11 e , FL: Soc ie ty f o r Behavioral Technology and Engineering, 1976b, 31 1-320.

H a ,Pennypacker, H. S . , Koenig, C . & Lindsley, 0. R . Handbook of the Standard Behavior f iart . Kansas City: Precis ion Media, 1972.

Ruskin, R . S. The persona l ized system o f i n s t ruc t ion . EducationaZ Technology, 1977, -9 , 5.

Sexton, J . , Merbi tz , C . T. , & Pennypacker, H. S. Accountabi l i ty: Cost e f f i c i e n c y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s measures i n behavioral co l lege teach- ing. Behavior Research and Technology i n Higher Education, 1975, 463-473.

Sherman, J . G. Ind iv idua l ized Ins t ruc t ion i s not enough. Educational Technology, 1977, -17(9 ) , 56-60.

Skinner , 8. F. f i e technology of teaching. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J. : Prent ice-Hal l , Inc , 1968.

Taveggia, T. C . Goodbye t eache r , goodbye classroom, he1 l o learn ing: A r ad i ca l a p p r a i s a l o f teaching-learning 1 inkages a t t h e co l l ege

1 eve 1 . Journal of Personalized Instruction, 1977, _2( 2) , 1 1 9- 1 22.

White, 0. R . , & Hari ng, N . W . Exceptional teaching. Columbus: Charles E . M e r r i l l , 1976.

Charles T. Merbitz i s the Director of the Center for IndividwzZized Instruction and Charles P. OZander i s Associate Professor of Biology a t JacksonviZ Ze S ta te University, Jacksonville, Alabama 36265.

mgge~nnuiv

Allow three weeks for delivery. No cashstamps, or C.O.D.3 accepted. Offer lim

Advertisement

three

Rovides pritzce in basic tool .dzlls for:

Math Phonics

' Kel,"r&n+i ng Problem solving Memory Directionality Spelling Language

three leveb ofprhury too L skill5

tedchers mmud inmurional strategtes

om for man1 yfu l sea twor

ratiomtn

cinZ6ZXGd nons

le and ye@ ob/ecrtves num acceptable performance alms

Can Do at $29.95 each . . . . . $

5 I+ ~kyline Drive plus $2.00 postage and handling. . . . . . $

$fa- %h, 0 4 OR school purchase order enclosed #

Name

School

Zip

Address

City State

, 36 ited to U.S. and Canada.

mg;;

c, o m

mcrr

-5

CL

dY

G g

t i v e oppor tun i t i e s f o r educagrowth . . . and a good evenbenef i t s such a s f i v e ( 5 ) wepension program, and an oppopeopl e.

REQ

We a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n obtainint ion of Prec is ion Teaching S

ART

Mason, R . D . Essen t ia l s o f Hall , 1976, pages 46-53 semi logari thmic paper ) .

JOB OPENINGS

TEACHER COUNSELORS--Work i ndi vi dual l y o r i n groups w i th a u t i s t i c ch i 1 dren and adolescents . Congenial s t a f f , t r a i n i n g and supe rv i s ion provided. Motivation and f l e x i b i l i t y requi r ed .

A t the Behavioral Development Center s t u d e n t s range from b i r t h t o over 21. Program components s t r e s s e d a t BDC i ncl ude devel opmen t a l c u r r i c u l a i n reading, language, and communication ; independent 1 i ving ski 1 1 s; behavioral procedures such a s re1 axat ion t r a i n i n g , imagery-based s e l f - c o n t r o l programs, social ski1 1 s development; and community , r e c r e a t i o n a l and employment s k i l l s . Data c o l l e c t i o n based on P rec i s ion Teaching Systems.

The Center i s l oca t ed i n an urban s e t t i n g i n Providence, . Rhode I s land ( t he Ocean S t a t e ) . Providence (and nearby Boston) provide many a t t r a c -

t ional ing l i feks pair tuni ty le

UEST FO

g w r i tummary

ICLES H

S t a t i s t(concer

(share

and p ro fe s s iona l in te r -change and e too. A job a t BDC i nc ludes many d vaca t ion , Blue Cross Plan 100, a t o work wi th e n e r g e t i c and compatib

MENT CENTER, INC . enue 02906

BEHAVIOR DEVELOP80 Mount Hope AvProvidence, R. I .

402-274-6320

esenta-

R INFORMATION

t e n in format ion regard ing t h e prChar t s .

e Zopment Center

June Groden Behavioral Dev80 Mount Hope Avenue Providence, Rhode I s land 02906

ORTH READING

S t a r1i n , Cl ay . Eva lulatifig and Teaching Reading to " IrreguZ a r tt Kids. Iowa Department o f Publ ic In s t ruc t ion , Special Education Div is ion , Grimes S t a t e Off ice Building, Des Moines, Iowa 50319. ( sha red by the au thor )

i c s . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Pren t ice ning cons t an t r a t e s of i n c r e a s e and d by Er i c Haughton)

PRECISION TEACHING PUBLICATIONS

Binder, Ca r l . Da publication. Behavior P ros t ool, Box 158, Belmont, Massa

Analyst i s t h e o f fI t publishes a r t i c

Accelerat ing visor expa dot on

Accuracy Improveme

ta-sharing Newsletter. A f r e e monthlyhes i s Lab, Walter E . Fernald Sta te Schchusetts 021 78.

-

Becke, Alan. !7ke P r e c i s i o n Teacher. A monthly newsletter. Area Educat ion Agency #9, 501 North 2nd S t r e e t , Clinton, Iowa 52732.

JOURNAL ANNOUNCEMENT

The Behavior Analyst i nvi t e s submi ss ions and subscript ions. The Behavior

i c i a1 jo ion f o r Behavior Analysis. l e s on e s and developments in the

nt Mul t

urnal o f the Associatt r e n d s , i s s u e s , po l i c is . I t does not publish

f i e l d of Behavior Analysi experimental o r applied

s tud ie s , nor a r t i c l e s on Behaviorism a s a philosophy. For fu rh te r in- formation, con tac t Dr. J u l i e S. Vargas, Edi tor , 608 Allen Hal 1 , West Virginia Universi ty , Morgantown, West Virginia 26506.

J o u r n a l of Prec is ion Teaching STANDARD GLOSSARY A N D CHARTING CONVENTIONSJ

(first- draft- April, 1980)

o r super- by placing

Target--a movement the behaver, manager, advisorects t o a c c e l e r a t e ; t he frequency i s symbolized the Char t .

ip l ie r - -a measure o f change in accuracy over time;

ce le ra t ion c o r r e c t / c e l e r a t i o n i n c o r r e c t .

Accuracy Multiplier--meas ure of accuracy : frequency correc t / f requency inco r rec t ; d i s t ance from frequency inco r rec t to frequency co r rec t .

Accuracy Pair--two movements, usual l y co r rec t and incorrec t , charted simultaneously.

~ d d - s u b s t r a c t Scale--any measurement sca l e on which adding and subt rac t - ing by a cons tan t amount i s represented by a constant dis tance.

Advisor--person who advises a manager, usual l y viewing Charts on a weekly bas is .

~ehaver- -person whose behavior i s di splayed on the Chart. Behavior Floor-- the lowest dai l y frequency possible f o r a part i cu lar be-

havior; l/number o f minutes behavior can occur; symbolized by drawing a sol i d hor izonta l l i n e on the Chart.

Bounce Around Celeration--up bounce and down bounce combined; the range of devia t ions of f requencies from the cel e ra t ion 1 i ne.

ce lera t ion--bas ic u n i t of measurement of behavior change; change i n f r e - quency per u n i t time.

Celeration Aim--the expected ce l e r a t i on f o r a gi ven movement . Celerat ion ~ u l t i p l i e r - - v a l ue by which one cel erat ion i s mu1 tip1 ied o r

divided t o obta in a second. Change Day--fi r s t day of a phase change; synibolized by drawing a ve r t i ca l

l i n e covering t h a t day l i n e on the Chart.

Counting Period Ceiling-- the highest frequency observable under a given counting procedure; symbol ired by drawing a dash 1 ine on the Chart connecting the Saturday and Monday l ines .

Counting Period Floor--the lowest frequency detectable by a given count­ing procedure; l/number of minutes spent counting; symbolized by draw- ing a dash l ine on the Chart connecting the Tuesday and Thursday lines.

cycle--distance on the Chart between consecutive powers of 10. D a y ~ine - -ve r t i ca l 1 ine on the Daily Standard Behavior Chart. BceZerating Target--a movement the behaver, manager, advisor, or super­

visor expects t o decelerate; the frequency i s symbolized by pla.cing an "xu on the Chart.

am Bounce--the distance from the celeration l ine to the frequency far thes t below i t .

Duration--the amount of time i t takes to complete one occurrence of a behavior; l/number of mi nutes spent behaving.

Event-follming Celeration Line--a cel era t i on 1 i ne drawn through a1 1 fre- quencies fo r a given movement jus t prior to a phase change.

Frequency--basic unit of behavioral measurement; the number of movements per unit time.

Frequency Aim--the expected phase-endi ng frequency for a gi ven movement; symbolized by drawing a t the expected frequency on the day the aim was s e t .

Frequency Line--horizontal l ine on the Chart. Freehand ~ethod--a method of vi sual ly estimating and drawi ng cel erat i on

1 ines . hequency Multiplier--value by which one frequency i s multiplied or di-

vided to obtain a second. Geometric ~ean- - the appropriate method for obtaining an average on a

mu1 tiply-di vide scale. Ignored ~ a y - - a day on which the behavior being measured occurs b u t i s not

charted. k t e n q - - t h e amount of time between the occurrence of a signal and the

beginning of a movement; l/time from signal to s t a r t of movement. ~~nager--personwho works with the behaver on a daily basis. Median Celeration--the middle celeration in a celeration distribution;

symbol i zed by drawi ng a " < " on the Chart Median Frequemy--the middle frequency in frequency distributions ;

symbolized by drawing a " < " on the Chart. ~ o s t%cent Celeration Line --a cel eration 1 i ne drawn through the 1 as t

7-10 frequencies fo r a given movement. muemat--recorded behavioral event; usually specified in terms of a move- ' ment cycle with a beginning, middle and end. hl t iply-divide Scale--any measurement scale on which multiplying and

dividing by a constant amount i s represented by a constant distance; the "up the l e f t " sca le on the Standard Behavior Chart.

NO Chance ~ay--a day on which the behavior being measured has no chance to occur.

Overall Celeration Line--a celeration l ine drawn through a l l frequencies for a given movement.

Periodic Celeration Line--a cel era tion 1 i ne drawn through a1 1 frequencies for a given movement in a specif ic time period, such as bi-weekly or monthly.

Phase Change--a del ibera te a1 t e r a t ion made t o t h e behaver 's envi ronmen t i n an e f f o r t t o improve the behavior being measured.

Quar t e r - in t e r sec t Metbd--a method f o r computi ng and cons t r u c t i ng ce l e r a -

t i o n l i n e s .

Recorded Day--a day on which the behavior being measured has the oppor- t u n i t y t o occur and i s recorded.

S t anda rd Behavior Chart--a standard, six-cycl e semi-1 ogari thmic c h a r t t h a t measures frequency as movements/time and ce l e ra t ion a s move- ments/time/time; Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Yearly and Summary ve r s ions a r e avai 1 ab l e .

supervisor--person who views the Charts on a monthly bas is . T o t a l Bounce--dis tance from the highest t o the 1 owest frequency;

analogous t o the range of an add-subtract s ca l e . Trend-following CeZeration Line--a cel e r a t ion 1i ne drawn through vi s i bl e

t r ends f o r a given movement. up Bounce--distance from the ce le ra t ion 1 ine t o the frequency f a r t h e s t

above i t .

' ~ d a ~ t e dfrom Pennypacker, H . S . , Koenig, C . H . , & Lindsley, 0. R. Handbook of t h e Standard Behavior Chart. Kansas City, Kansas: Pre­

c i s i o n Media, 1972. (by permission of H . 5. Pennypacker).

Dedicated t o Mrs. I r e n e McGreevy , a v e r y spec ia l person, and t o t h e c h i l d r e n , who, by s h a r i n g t h e i r Charts, t augh t us what we know.