Download Examining issues in traditional behaviour support practices

EDAC 224: Assessment 1 - Essay
Examining issues in traditional behaviour support practices (the traditional application of
applied behaviour analysis) and alternatives to traditional approaches (positive behaviour
support).
Since time immemorial, there have been multiples of behaviour support practices, put in
place to cater for any types of behaviours that prevented people from engaging in their
normal daily routines in life, for, as described by Pear (1988), “...behavior is anything that a
person says or does...”. It can be said that some behaviour support practices have been really
good practices, whilst others are deemed to be inappropriate practices. It happened that over
time, some traditional behaviour support practices have been gradually changed into positive
behaviour support practices; for better outcomes in regards to understanding various
behaviours of different people. Throughout this essay, we are going to examine various
issues that existed in the traditional behaviour support practices and how they have been
improved into alternative practices that mostly reflect positive behaviour support.
Considering the history of behaviour analysis, most behavioural theories that were
established by the pioneers of behaviourism in the late 1900’s and early 2000’s, highlighted
the importance of observing certain behaviours of people, as “the behavioral explanation
states that human behavior, both adaptive and maladaptive, is learned” (Alberto & Troutman,
2006).
Amongst these traditional behavioural theories would figure Pavlov’s classic
conditioning and Skinner’s operant conditioning. As mentioned in Berk (2012, p. 179),
classic conditioning is a “form of learning, [where] a neutral stimulus is paired with a
stimulus that leads to a reflexive response”. As such, it can be seen as an approach that
conditions a person to have specific reactions to things within their daily settings, without the
things really shaping their behaviour. In operant conditioning, the person “...act on their
environment and their behavior is followed by either reinforcers, which increase the
occurrence of a preceding behaviour, or punishment, which either removes a desirable
stimulus or presents an unpleasant one to decrease the occurrence of a response” (Berk, 2012,
p. 200).
This approach would then help in classifying behaviours as whether being
acceptable or unacceptable, and how the acceptable behaviours would tend to get repeated
through reinforcers or the unacceptable behaviours, stopped by punishment.
In my opinion, even though the mentioned traditional behaviour theories and their practices
sought out to identify target behaviours and find interventions through learning
consequences, I should say that they merely reflect an “experimental analysis of behavior”
(Evans, Scotti, & Hawkins, 1999, p. 4) and their approaches are quite inappropriate to me.
Saying so, I find that they do ignore the various situations that form part of a person’s daily
Sila Devi Dhorassoo-Teeka - S00121867
Page 1
EDAC 224: Assessment 1 - Essay
life that can likely influence a person’s behaviour. If practicing the classical conditioning
approach, a person might be taught how to behave in a certain manner, but this practice does
not accommodate for any strategies or guidance, in case of an unmet need that can trigger a
challenging behaviour in the person. Referring to punishment; the negative reinforcer of the
operant conditioning approach, as a form of correcting unacceptable behaviour, I personally
feel that this practice is prejudiced and “coercion, as in punishment, is not a lasting change
agent” (Marshall, 2013), but only acts as a way of controlling a person’s behaviour in regards
to societal ethics of what is acceptable, rather than finding a solution to the real behavioural
problem. It thus ignores the biophysical, biochemical or even the brain damage effects on the
person’s behaviour and only focuses on the negative consequences of their behaviour.
Nevertheless, I find that these two approaches are quite limited in their exploration of
behaviour support practices and tend to focus more on the effect of behaviour consequences
as per ethical practices rather than adopting a holistic approach to behaviour support.
As Evans, Scotti, and Hawkins (1999, p. 20) put it, “...it is clear that behaviour analysis, if it
does not move forward, is at risk of stagnation”, hence explaining the need for the
development of the positive behaviour support practices, to further improve the interventions
relating to behaviour analysis. As described by Bambara and Knoster (2009, p. 6), “positive
behaviour support (PBS), a more effective alternative, is a problem-solving approach that
student-centered teams can use to understand and then address environmental factors that
contribute to a student’s use of problem behaviors.” Positive behaviour support practices can
be depicted as a follow-up from the traditional behaviour support practices, as it extends its
practices based on the fundamental ideas of the traditional approaches, like positivism and
positive reinforcement, as well as the antecedent, behaviour and consequences practices from
operant conditioning approach. Rather than focussing on behaviour consequences, it implies
behaviour modification with “...its strong emphasis on defining problems in terms of
behaviour that can be measured in some way... [and] its treatment procedures and techniques
are ways of rearranging an individual’s environment to help that individual function more
fully in society” (Pear, 1988).
Positive behaviour support practices is an alternative to the traditional behaviour support
practices as it deals with behavioural problems by developing positive preventive and
reactive strategies rather than coercive strategies, as “the way to influence people toward
internal rather than external motivation is through positive, non-coercive interaction”
(Marshall, 2013). Positive behaviour support practices cater for the unmet needs of people
with behavioural problems by considering the factors that are likely to affect their behaviours,
Sila Devi Dhorassoo-Teeka - S00121867
Page 2
EDAC 224: Assessment 1 - Essay
as Murphy (1995, as cited in McVilly, 2002) puts it “a person’s behaviours can usually only
be explained by a combination of variables, including biological, ecological/environmental
and operant factors”.
The positive behaviour support practices consider conditions like
health, communication, environmental, social issues; amongst others, that might contribute
towards affecting the people’s behaviours and set out to improve these conditions by guiding
the affected people through specific programs that will help them to overcome their
behavioural problem; an aspect that was completely ignored within the traditional behaviour
support practices.
“Applied Behavior Analysis is the process of systematically applying interventions based
upon the principles of learning theory to improve socially significant behaviors to a
meaningful degree, and to demonstrate that the interventions employed are responsible for
the improvement in behaviour” (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968, as cited in Eden II Programs,
2013). Applied Behaviour Analysis, has contributed a lot to the understanding of human
behaviours, whether it was through traditional or alternative positive approaches.
The
traditional practices had issues, as it tended to change the person and not the behavioural
problem, as put forward by Bambara and Knoster (2009, p. 5), “conventional approaches
often fail because they ignore the underlying influences for problem behaviors.” The positive
behaviour support approach, as alternative to the traditional practices, is far better as it strives
to improve the lives of people with behavioural problem by managing the behaviour problem
in question in a more positive way that also makes the person happier throughout the process,
as “the ultimate goal of PBS [positive behaviour support] is to help individuals with a history
of engaging in challenging behaviors achieve a quality life” (Bambara & Knoster, 2009, p. 6).
Sila Devi Dhorassoo-Teeka - S00121867
Page 3
EDAC 224: Assessment 1 - Essay
References
Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2006). Applied Behaviour Analysis for Teachers. Upper
Saddle River: Pearson Education.
Bambara, L. M., & Knoster, T. P. (2009). Designing Positive Behavior Support Plans (2nd
ed.). Washingtion, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental
Disabilities.
Berk, L. E. (2012). Infants, children, and adolescents (7th ed). Boston: Pearson Education.
Eden II Programs. (2013). What is Applied Behavior Analysis. Retrieved from
http://eden2.org/what-is-applied-behavior-analysis/
Evans, I. M., Scotti, J. R., & Hawkins, R. P. (1999). Behavioural Intervention Principles,
Models, and Practices. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Marshall, M. (2013). How to Discipline Without Stress, Punishment or Rewards. Retrieved
from http://specialed.about.com/od/behavioremotional/a/Marshall-Ed-D.htm
McVilly, K. (2002). Positive Behaviour Support for People with Intellectual Disability.
Putney: The Australian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability.
Pear, M. (1988). Behavior Modification: What is it and how to do it. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall.
Sila Devi Dhorassoo-Teeka - S00121867
Page 4