Reinforcement To Increase On Task Behaviour In Children With Disabilities

On task behaviour is very rare in children with disabilities. In Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA), reinforcement is a proven effective tool in improving this skill. Several experiments were conducted to test the cause and effect relationship between reinforcement and on task behaviour, and most show a positive, direct correlation. The participant in the first study received tokens if a certain task was completed, which were redeemable as free time after the session was complete. The second study also utilized a token method, in which students were rewarded tokens if on task behaviour was demonstrated during a reading lesson. The third study the participants target behaviour was so be able to complete academic tasks with the help of both social and material reinforcements. Furthermore, in all 3 studies, the results supported that reinforcement strengthens on task behaviour in children with disabilities.

On task behaviour in a child is hard to attain, and becomes even more challenging in a child with a disability. The first study examines a 14 year old Autistic boy named Aaron. His condition was not severe, as he was able to complete academic maths at middle level and verbalize sentences. For the procedure of this experiment, Aaron’s target behaviour was to be given a math worksheet which was to be completed in a 10 minute session. The worksheet included 15-30 moderate addition problems. Aaron was placed at a table in a 6x3m room, and beside him was a white board used for the collection of tokens. On and off task behaviour is defined differently in every experiment conducted. In this particular study, on task behaviour consisted of a steady focus on the worksheet, writing and using the iPad as a calculator. Off task behaviour was considered any other action that was not listed in the on task behaviour list.

The study’s main goal was to examine Aaron’s on task behaviour, therefore it is the measurable variable and the accuracy of the worksheet was not relevant. The experiment was divided into 2 sessions; the work session and the reinforcement session. When Aaron began each session, he was informed that he would have to complete a full math worksheet and was told that in order to earn tokens, he had to do his work. To observe Aaron, a therapist would enter the premise every 30s to monitor him. The session of 10 minutes was broken down into 20 30s intervals. This check every 30s determined if he was on task, and weather or not he would receive a token. The results of this study varied greatly from his initial baseline condition. Aron’s starting point showed that he rarely engaged in on task behaviour and would instead exhibit distracted behaviour. When the reinforcement technique (mDR intervention) was established, a 70% escalation of on task behaviour occurred. The intervention was removed and reintroduced into Arons schedule to reveal that when it was removed, his on task behaviour declined exponentially, and when reestablished, rapidly increased. Aaron’s overall on task behaviour was considered to be high. Furthermore, the results of this study clearly convey the benefits of reinforcement and how it positively effects on task behaviour. Not only can reinforcement be deemed effective in increasing on task behaviour in participants with autism, but also with reading disabilities. Research supports that having effective reading and language skills is the most important academic ability to be learned in order to be a successful.

The main goal of this study was to identify if reinforcement was able to increase on task behaviour, as well as their language and reading skills. The participants involved were between the ages of 12 and 13 in the seventh grade. There were 4 participants total. Mel, Lora, Sarah and Jen. 2 of the girls were in a special education program. All 4 of the students were determined to be significantly below their current grade level and struggled with language and speech skills. There were 3 separate 2 minute sessions within the lesson in which the participants were observed and information was recorded. During these 2 minute sessions, on task behaviour was recorded in a 6 second interval. Within the sessions the data was gathered based on a 2 minute timed reading of a specific story passage unique to each day. After the reading was complete, both the student and the researcher would determine all the words read precisely. During the baseline phase, 45 minute reading lessons were conducted, and social reinforcement on the children was a significant tool used. Along with the praise the students received for being productive, material reinforcement was also used in baseline. Similar to the previous study with Aaron, a token administration network was in place. In this token system, the tokens were called “Sac Bucks”, and were administered when on task behaviours were displayed.

In this study, on task behaviours included 100% correctness on workbooks and comprehension questions, and a steady focus throughout the entire lesson. A maximum of 4 “Sac Bucks” could be rewarded per lesson. Mel’s baseline for on task behaviour was 58% and when the reinforcement method was introduced, increased to the mean score of 97.6%. Lora’s baseline started at 72%, and when the reinforcement package was introduced, increased to a midpoint of 97%. Sarah’s on task behaviour ranged from 40-72%, however she showed sizeable improvement as her average inclined to 100% when the reinforcement method was present. Jen, the final participant of the study had a baseline score of 54% and then increased to a midpoint of 98%. Furthermore, when the reinforcement package was introduced, taken away and reintroduced, the results displayed that their on task behaviour declined when it was taken away, thus establishing that the reinforcement was the cause of the on task behaviour. In the final reinforcement package, all 4 students displayed a mean off 100% for on task behaviour. This study is a clear example of the direct cause and effect relationship reinforcement has on productive behaviour. Each time the reinforcement was introduced, the inclination of on task behaviour with each participant was evident.

This particular study’s aim was to increase on task behaviour in a participant with Autism by using 2 methods of reinforcement; material and social. The study also wanted to investigate which type is more effective on increasing on task behaviour. The experiment included a 10 year old boy with High Functioning Autism (HFA). Unlike the boy in the first study, the participant demonstrated severe difficulty in being on task. The goal of this study was to measure the benefits of material and social reinforcement in raising on task behaviour. The baseline condition of the child was that he was unable to complete academic tasks without a considerable amount of instruction. The participant would often refuse to do tasks in general and would struggle finding motivation to complete tasks independently. The experiment had the child complete a series of educational tasks such as simple math and science worksheets. Each session lasted an estimate of 30 minutes. These tasks were then accompanied with either a method of material or social reinforcement, which would alternate from week to week. In this experiment, on task behaviour comprised of being concentrated in the task at hand, using the materials pertaining to the specific task, and generally following direction. Off task behaviour consisted behaviours that showed he participant was disengaged from the specified task, lack of following instruction, misuse of materials provided, and general behaviours that were deemed to be inappropriate (quoting videos, singing, playing with toys, and failure to follow the researcher’s instructions). Although the study was looking at what method of reinforcement, material or social, was more effective on increasing on task behaviour. The results still conveyed that reinforcement in general increases on task behaviour. Material reinforcement on its own was able to drive the participant to be on task for 77.1%, and off task for only 22.9% of the total time of the experiment. In comparison to the child's baseline, which consisted of him refusing to do tasks, this is a dramatic improvement. This is yet another example of how on task behaviour can be drastically increased with the presence of reinforcement. Reinforcement is a key factor in ABA and in helping children with disabilities. This method is also the foundation for increasing on task behaviour. The results in Arons study clearly conveyed a strong connection between the two variables as he experienced an improvement of 70% when a reinforcement package was present. The same pattern occurred in the 4 girls with reading disabilities. When the reinforcements were introduced each of their average scores increased to 90% or above. In addition, when the reinforcement in this study was revoked, their scores plummeted, verifying that the reinforcement was the motivation for the inclination in on task behaviour. In the final study examined, the participants initial baseline was refusal to complete tasks and severe defats in completing tasks self-sufficiently. The end of the study concluded that reinforcement was able to increase his on task behaviour by %77.1.

Although each study was unique in participants and data, they all conveyed a general result that in children with disabilities, reinforcement has a direct impact on increasing on task behaviour.