scholarly journals Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavioral Interventions in General Education Classrooms: A Descriptive Analysis of Literature

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-120
Author(s):  
Ha young Choi
2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terrance M. Scott ◽  
Anne Bucalos ◽  
Carl Liaupsin ◽  
C. Michael Nelson ◽  
Kristine Jolivette ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 386-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally M. Barton-Arwood ◽  
Joseph H. Wehby ◽  
Philip L. Gunter ◽  
Kathleen L. Lane

This study evaluated the intrarater reliability of two functional behavior assessment rating scales: the Motivation Assessment Scale and the Problem Behavior Questionnaire. Teachers rated 30 students from 10 self-contained classrooms for students with emotional or behavioral disorders on three separate occasions using both rating scales. Pearson correlation coefficients and exact and adjacent agreement percentages indicated variable and inconsistent ratings across administrations and rating scales. The authors discuss possible reasons for inconsistencies, as well as implications for practice and future research.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 101-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terrance M. Scott ◽  
Justin T. Cooper

While functional behavior assessment (FBA) has been a part of special education law and embedded in Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) since 1997, a precise definition of what actions or processes constitute a legal FBA has never been adequately addressed in the law. This article provides an overview of the underlying logic of FBA leading to effective function-based intervention. When focusing on a simplification of the logic behind FBA, there are three big ideas that serve as a foundation for considering the intersection of effectiveness and practicality: function matters, FBA requires repeated observations of behavior, and the only purpose of an FBA is to develop an effective intervention. These big ideas are discussed, leading to a conclusion as to how logic and simplicity must share priority in the process.


2001 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Shriver ◽  
Cynthia M. Anderson ◽  
Briley Proctor

2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-64
Author(s):  
Watinee Opartkiattikul ◽  
Michael Arthur-Kelly ◽  
Ian Dempsey

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document