Case Studies

To assist you in developing positive behavioral supports, the following case studies are examples of how the material from this web site can be used.

Additional case studies will be added on a regular basis.

Case Studies

Go to Jack example  

Go to Tommy example 

Go to Devan example 

Go to Barbara example 

Go to Barney example 

Jack

Jack is an active 4-year-old boy who loves to climb, run and play. Jack is non-verbal and seems to find the structure in his new preschool setting challenging. Although Jack loves physical activity, he refuses to join the class in the gym for physical education. He physically resists and will run away from the teacher when they approach the gym. A Functional Assessment confirmed escape as the function of Jack's behavior. A positive support plan that includes Tolerance for Delay will be implemented. Initially he will be required to only enter the room before being presented with an “all done” symbol and allowed to play on the equipment in the gym. Expectations for class participation in activities, directed by the teacher, will be added in very small increments.

Return to top

Tommy

Tommy is a 4-year-old child who refuses to help pick up toys at the end of free play time. When the teacher repeats her request, he only laughs and sometimes hides. The teacher has also tried telling him that he will not get to play with the toys the next day, but he still refuses. They are currently trying a time-out area that he is to go to when he does not help pick up the toys. Tommy is happy to go to time-out and watch the other children pick up the toys.

Through a Functional Assessment, it was determined that the purpose of his behavior was to avoid the task of picking up toys. By putting Tommy in time-out, he was happy because he was successful in avoiding the task of picking up toys. Some strategies that might be used to increase Tommy's participation in toy pick-up are Choice-making and Collaboration.

Return to top

Devan

Devan was playing with building blocks when his teacher, Ms. Anderson, announced it was time to clean up and get ready for the bus. Devan ignored her and continued playing with the blocks. She approached Devan and offered to collaborate to get the toys picked up, adding again that it was time to get ready for the bus to go home. Devan continued to play and Ms Anderson continued to verbally prompt him while she picked up the toys. When the task was completed, she told Devan to go to his locker and put on his coat. Devan continued to play with the last two building blocks, ignoring the request. She approached him, made eye contact to be certain he was hearing her, and repeated the directive. He looked back at the toys and started to play, at which time she removed the toys and took him by the hand to his locker area. He stood and watched the other children as they put on their coats, but made no move toward his own coat. Ms. Anderson repeated that it was time to get ready. When she tried to physically prompt him, he became limp. She continued to request participation, each arm in the sleeve, zipping, etc., but he stood there, limp, allowing her to complete the task. At one point the limpness caused Devan to lose his balance and he fell sideways, hitting his head on his locker. He started to whine and, as Ms. Anderson consoled him, he leaned into her for a hug. It was time to go and everyone left for the bus. A similar scenario occurred daily.

A Functional Assessment was completed. It appeared Devan was trying to escape the tasks of picking up toys and getting his coat, but direct observation data brought focus to the amount of attention he was receiving when asked to complete these tasks. An Environmental Manipulation was done to verify the attention function of Devan's behavior. The positive support plan for Devan, based on that function, included Shaping, Positive Reinforcers (see Social Reinforcers), Choice, Collaboration, Prespecified Reinforcer and Requesting Attention.

Return to top

Barbara

Barbara is a four-year-old who was referred to the Behavior Assistance Team because she frequently spits and bites both her peers and staff at her preschool. The staff conducted an ABC Analysis: 

ABC Analysis
Name: Barbara
Description of behavior(s) of interest: Spitting and biting

Reichle, J., & Johnston, S. (1993). Replacing challenging behavior: The role of communication intervention. Topics in Language Disorders, 13, 61-76. Copyright © 1993, Aspen Publishers, Inc., http://www.aspenpublishers.com/default.asp .

Baseline frequency recording data were collected:

Example of Data for Barbara

This ABC Analysis indicated the function of both behaviors was to gain attention. Based on this hypothesis, intervention strategies were implemented. The use of collaboration prior to challenging behavior provided attention and an opportunity for the staff to determine the need to teach new skills. A schedule of differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO) was also implemented. Ongoing data confirmed that the challenging behavior was decreasing. Staff also determined that Barbara needed assistance with various skills, indicating that some of her attention seeking may have been a request for assistance. Collaborative activities focused on providing opportunities to increase Barbara’s skills with her fine motor, i.e., zip her coat, art projects. Requesting assistance was also added to the interventions in her positive support plan. In the future, tolerance for delay will be used to gradually increase her level of independence.

                Jan 15 - Jan 25...... .Baseline
                Jan 26...... ...... ...... Implemented DRO and Collaboration
                Feb 8 ...... ...... ...... Began fine motor skill building and Request Assistance

Text description of graph content:

Behavior during the seven days of baseline indicated that Barbara engaged in challenging behavior an average of 19 times each day. After seven days of implementing DRO and Collaboration, challenging behavior was decreased to 8 times each day. Fine motor skill building and request for assistance were implemented. Challenging behavior remained the same for the first six days of learning those new skills.

Return to top

Barney

Barney is a six-year-old attending a Head Start program. He has developmental delays and his special education consultant reported problem behavior during his one-on-one time with the occupational therapist. The behaviors of concern are a short attention span and leaving an activity. Through a functional assessment, it was determined that the function of his behavior is to escape the activity. In addition, observations showed the toys on the shelf in the therapy area easily distracted him. Environmental arrangement changes included decreasing the visual stimulation and reducing the number of items available during an activity. An evaluation was done on the effect of staff positioning. It was determined that Barney would remain engaged the longest when the occupational therapist was seated behind him. After determining the critical time period* for engagement (8 seconds), an intervention to request a break was implemented using a switch that says, "I need a break." If he has not requested a break within the 8 seconds, staff prompt him with a visual cue, moving the switch closer. When he activates the switch, he is released for 30 seconds. During this time, he is free to move about in the room or play with the item(s) that are available for break. After the 30 seconds, the occupational therapist presents the next activity and says, "Barney, come here and play with the markers."

When Barney is successfully initiating the request for a break independently 85% of the time without challenging behavior, a tolerance for delay will be implemented.

*What is a critical time period?
The critical time period is the shortest amount of time the child will independently participate in an activity before engaging in attention-seeking or escape-motivated challenging behavior. Escape-motivated challenging behavior may occur in response to the presentation of an undesired event or because the duration of the activity or the work associated with it has resulted in the child tiring of the activity. Knowing the critical time period, or critical number events, allows the interventionist to predict when the child is likely to engage in challenging behavior.

PROGRESS FORM FOR BARNEY

Student's name: Barney Date: 3/11
Activity: OT, one-on-one
Observer: A.K.

Early Childhood Behavior Project
Center for Early Education and Development (CEED)
University of Minnesota

Mary McEvoy, Ph.D., and Joe Reichle, Ph.D., Co-Principal Investigators
LeAnne Johnson, Ph.D., Project Coordinator, Phone: 612-626-3457 E-mail: chaf0032@umn.edu
Shelley Neilsen Gatti, Ph.D., Phone: 612-626-9528, neil0024@umn.edu

College of Education and 
Human Development   

[Home] | [Personnel] | [Presentations] | [Strategies] | [Case Studies] | [Discussion] | [Links] | [Contact Us]