Precision Techniques in the Management

of Teacher and Child Behaviors

MARIE GAASHOLT

Abstract: A practical methad of eaaluating teaching shills through prectstont,eaching techniques is presented. Specific topics include: (a) measuring

teacher contacts with aari,ous pupils; (b) measuring the effects of teacherbehaaior on pupil performance; and (c) establishing profici,ency leaels in

writing and ari,thmetic,

Po*ENT-teacher conferences and reporrcards require teachers to evaluate pupilprogress. Unfortunately, these appraisalsare often inadequate because the observa-tion periods are too short, the tests impre-cise, and the goals undefined (Zimmerman,1969) . Lack of time, heavy class loads, andinadequate materials too often result in theacceptance of less than precise measuringtechniques and evaluation.

Important as the measurement of pupilperformance, is the evaluation and measure-ment of teacher performance. Yet, system-atic evaluations of teacher performance as

it influences pupil performance are rarelycarried out. Precision teaching, a system ofcontinuous and direct recordirg of a pin-pointed movement (Lindsl.y, 1969) , is atechnique whereby teachers can efficientlyand economically evaluate both pupil per-formance and their own instructionalendeavors. Precision teaching involves fivebasic steps:

l. Pinpointing a pupil behavior.

2. Recording this behavior daily, com-puting the rate (number of responses

Manrs GeesrrolT as Doctoral Student i,nSpecial Education and was a teacher at theEngineered Learning Proiect, [Iniuersity ofOregon, Eugene, during the 1965-69 aca-demic year.

over elapsed time) , and charting iton a 6 cycle behavior chart.

3. Recordirg teacher behavior in rela-tion to pupil behavior.

4. Analyzing data to decide what changein teacher performance might affectpupil performance, if a pupil per-formance rate needs to be changed.

5. Making only one change in teacherperformance at a time and then re-evaluating.

Method

Children and Setting

Six or seven children were referred tothe Engineered Learnirg Project (ELP)experimental classroom every I weeks. TheELP, a unique teaching situation (Wa1ker,Mattson, & Buckley, 1969) , is sponsored bythe Department of Special Education, Uni-versity of Oregon. The students, of averageor above average intelligence, were behav-ior problems in their respective classrooms.Twenty-five children (24 boys and I girl)in grades 3 through 7 received instructionduring the 1968-69 school year. All thechildren were below grade level in one ormore subjects, as indicated by the GatesMcKillop Reading Test, Stanford Diag-nostic Arithmetic Test, and daily perform-ance rates.

EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 129

The goal of the project was to alterteacher defined deviant behaviors of thestudents. Within this primary focus, theinstructional goals were to pinpoint eachchild's deficit areas and to teach theneeded skills as effectively as possible whilesearchirg for materials and motivatorswhich could be used in the regular class-room.

Charting

Performance rates were charted on equalproportion 6 cycle chart paper with unitsranging from .001 to 1000 over 6 logarith-mic cycles. (See Figures l-6.) This stand-ardized chart is specifically designed forrecordirg broad ranges of behavior, a greatadvantage when two very different behav-iors are being charted. A teacher con-cerned with a behavior, €.g., temper tan-trums, which might occur only once a dayand a teacher concerned with oral readingrates which could occur at a rate of 200words per minute could use the same typeof chart paper to record either behavior.

Data Collection

Direct observation of academic behaviorwas made by the teacher, the teacher aide,and the students. Students recorded theirstart and stop times, while either theteacher or the teacher aide recorded andcharted the rate on the 6 cycle chart

PaPer.Since the children attended the ELP

classroom for only I weeks, immediatedaily feedback was needed if the teacher'sclassroom planning was to be effective.The followirrg teacher questions were typi-cal: "Should Robert advance to 3-placemultiplication, or does he need additionalinstruction and practice on basic facts and?-place multiplication problems?" "lvillMark read better if I say 'good' for everythree sentences he reads correctly?" "Am Igiving equal instruction, time, and effortto each child?" By direct recordirg andcharting, the teacher had a firm basis forthe decisions she would have to make inprogram planning.

feacher-Pupil lnteraction

It is generally assumed that help andencouragement will accelerate pupil per-formarrce. Ffowever, without data teachershave no way of knowing how often inter-action occurs between pupil and teacher orwhether the contact is pupil- or teacher-ini-tiated. To obtain such data, a sheet ofpaper taped to each child's desk was usedto record the times a teacher or teacheraide \Ment over and spoke to the child.The sheet also indicated whether the con-tact was student- or teacher-initiated andnoted in which subject area it occurred.

Figure I shows the teacher-pupil interac-tion data for one group. The vertical linesindicate the range of teacher interactionswith the seven pupils, while the short hori-zontal lines show the daily median ormiddle rate. These pupil-teacher interac-tions were recorded daily for 166 minutes.The record floor at .006 on the chart wasdetermined by dividing I by the time of theobservation (l -+ 166 _ .006) . The record.floor indicates the time of the observationperiod and indicates the lowest rate (otherthan zero) at which a behavior couldoccur.

As illustrated on the figure, the firstday's range extended from .l to .3 with amedian at .2. Multiplying these rates bythe observation time determines frequencyof interaction. On the first dry the rangeof interaction was foom about 17 to 50with a median of 33. These data indicatedthat over a 22-day period the range ofinteractions remained about the same butthe median rate of interacting had deceler-ated.

When the individual d.ata were &rIB'lyzed, it was revealed that on some daysone child was asking for and receivirgteacher attention at a rate 8 times higherthan the other six students. When the Pat-tern persisted on the fourth day, it was

decided to cut down on teacher-initiatedcontacts, and this decision was successfullyimplemented.

The data also revealed that one childrarely received any teacher attention.What little interaction was made was initi-ated by the student. Although it was

OCTOBER . 1970DO

lrlF

==GlrlA.

ElrJ:EC)

lrlFtts3zo-FC)

trlrlF

=Joo

100

rooo

10

I

0204060

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

2. Programed event$: The classroomevents used to elicit Mark's readingresponses were the book Smashup andverbal instructions such as "Remem-ber to look at the ends of the words"and "Try not to repeat so many Pas-sages today."

3, Movement cycle: Oral words read cor-rectly was the behavior to be counted.

4. Arrangement: The ratio between themovement cycle and the arrangedevent was 3 to I, the first numberreferring to the movement cycle, thesecond to the arranged event.

5. Arranged event: After Mark readthree sentences correctly, the teachersaid "Goodt"

The program and programed events for

80

FIGURE I. Range and middtes of interactionsbetween teachers and seuen students during

individualized instruction periods.

decided to pay more attention to the pupiland a conscious effort to give him. equaltime was made, the chart showed that theprevious pattern recurred.

When the teacher-pupil interactionrecords of various groups of children werecompared, it was obvious that variationwas great between groups and among indi-viduals within groups.

Effect of Teacher Behaviors onPupil Performance

Filling out an IS Description is the firststep of a teaching plan. The IS Descrip-tion is a list of the environmental compo-nents which could have an influence uponthe behavior, the specific effects of whichhave not been determined. With a lessonplan based on an IS Description (Lindsley,1969) , teacher behaviors, like instructionor verbal praise, are specified and can,therefore, be independently measured. TheIS Description has two sides, one describ-irg acceleration and the other, decelera-tion. The followirg is an explanation of a

child's reading session planned on the ISDescription:

1. Program: The activity was scheduledbetween 9:30 and 10:00 a.m. Thechild's oral reading rate was sampledfor 2 minutes.

portronidentical

tion side. Incorrect words were counted,rated, and charted as the movement todecelerate but no arranged event, hence,no arrangement, was contingent on thatbehavior.

Consistency in followirg a lesson plan isimportant, but often difficult to maintain.Therefore, the teacher's responses, whichformed the programed and arranged eventsfor the child, were monitored. For exam-ple, if the teacher said "good" after threecorrect sentences, her response was countedas correct. If the teacher failed to say"good" or said "ggod" regardless of thenumber or the quality of the sentencesthat the pupil read, her response wasincorrect and so tallied. Teacher errorsdeclined from 3.0 per minute the first 5days to zero the last 5 days during thecharting.

Since teacher errors were reduced, theproject was considered successful. Flowever,the function of the change on pupil prog-ress could be determined only by consultingrhe student's chart. These latter data indi-cated that as the teacher adhered moreclosely to her teaching plans, the pupil'scorrect reading rate accelerated.

In a similar project, "teacher helps" anda pupil's oral reading rate were simultane-ously measured. Teacher helps consisted ofteacher statements such as "Think hard,"

the decelerationDescription were

of Mark's ISto the accelera-

{4,,fl-, r*

';r'

RECORD FLOOR

EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN DI

"What's the beginnirg sound?" or point-irg to a particular word or to part o[ aword. These data revealed that for aperiod of about 5 weeks the median rateof teacher helps in a 3O-minute readingperiod was one per minute. During thissame time, the boy's median correct oralreading rate was about 15 per minute.During the final phase of the project,when the teacher attempted to reduce thehelping rate, her median rate was zero andthe pupil's 45. Apparently, teacher helpswere hinderirg the boy's performance.

An analysis of the teacher's actions indi-cated that some helps like "come on" wereprogram events (preceding or not contin-gent on pupil behavior) whereas otherssuch as pointing to a mispronounced wordwere arranged events (followed by or con-tingent on pupil performance) . On theteacher's IS Description or plan sheet shehad not included coaxing as a programedevent or pointing as an arranged event.She had written out a plan, but had notfollowed it consistently. This informationwould not have been available withoutmeasurement of teacher behavior.

Setting Proficiency Levels in Math

Teachers have many questions which arenot answered by curriculum guides orteacher manuals: "Should the student beable to do basic facts (add, subtract, multi-ply, and divide) ut 10, 30, or 60 answersper minute before advancing to moredifficult problems?" "Will acquisition ofnew material vary when different profi-iiency levels are used?" "FIow can class-room data indicate when a child is mostlikely to succeed at a new task?"

In an attempt to find answers to suchquestions, performance ratbs of two chil-dren in the ELP classes were examined.To obtain these data the pupils were pro-vided with a ditto sheet of 60 problemsinvolvirg one or two movements. A sumrequirirg one written numeral, 2 x 3 :

-,

was counted as one movement, whilea solution requiring two written numerals,suchas6x9- wasconsideredtwomovements. Five different dittos contain-irg a mixed affangement of the same 60basic facts were used daily. To avoid posi-

tional memorization, no child received thesame ditto two days in succession.

Both students, Robert and Sam, beganon multiplication facts where the multi-plier and multiplicand were from 0-5.According to Robert's chart (Figure 2) hiscorrect and error rates throughout the first17 days generally accelerated. His mediancorrect rate was 7 and his median errorrate was .2 answers per minute.

0-5's 6-g's

v

.t $

0

0 80 100 120 140

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

I

lrJt-z

=Etrlo.

aFotL

xoam

1000

100

t0

.01

FIGURE 2. Robeft's correct and error rates ofbasic multiplication facts. He had not reached aproficiency level in the first phase. Correct ratedecelerated while error rate accelerated whenthe second phase (more difficult problems) wasbegun. The x's on the record floor indicate a

rate of one, those x's placed immediately belowthe record floor indicate a zero error rate.

In the second phase of the study moredifficult problems were programed. Themultiplication program throughout thisphase included problems whose multipliersand multiplicands were from 6 to 9. Thedata throughout this phase also revealedthat correct and error rates were generallyaccelerated. It may be additionallyobserved, however, that an immediate cor-rect rate drop and error rate increase werenoted when the more difficult materialswere scheduled. These performancechanges continued to be noted as Robertwas advanced to successively more difficultmaterials. Probably, Robert's initial correct

112 OCTOBER . I97O

IT

rate of. 7 and error rate of ,2 were not pro-ficient, since he experienced more andmore difficulty as he was advanced to moredifficult material.

Sam'$ performance on multiplicationfacts is illustrated by Figure 8. As notedthroughout the first phase of l0 days whenthe 0-5 type problems were scheduled, hismedian correct rate was 20 and his medianerror tate, zero. When the more difficultproblems were scheduled throughout thesecond phase, his correct median rate roseto 30 per minute, while his error rateremained generally at zeto.

When still more difficult multiplicationproblems were subsequently scheduled,Sam's performance continued to improve,Unlike Robert, Sam probably reached aproficiency level on the first set of multi-plication facts, since his rates on successiveproblems were always satisfactory.

I 000

below the written number rate since thegoal is complete masterli however, solvingcomplex problems may produce a slightlylower performance rate.

Multiple digit problems require moremovement cycles per problem than one ortwo digit basic facts problems. The prob-lem 608 x 2, for exarnple, has 5 movementswhen all written numbers and the processof carrying to the tens place are counted.All movements must be counted to giveequal credit for performance on more dif-ficult problems. When all movements aretallied, a fairly consistent digit per minuterate is maintained whether complex prob-lems or basic facts are involved.

Setting Proficiency Levels in Writing

This project attempted to set reasonableproficiency levels for cursive writing, andto assess the effects of student self-chartingon individual writing rates. Accordirg tostudies by Kunzelmann (1969) , somepupil performance rates are about halfthat of adults. With this information inmind, the teacher calculated her own writ-irg rate for several days. She observed that

. ...,her rates were about 100 letters perv ,';' 1ir'ri;':i-.minute, and. shg therefore established a

writing rate of 50 letters per minute as aprofici.T.y level for her plpils-

.

*, [? ";ij;fl d'

h

"

f.: f t

" : "Hllr,f, *'

" ?-;, -i

graphs of cursive writing, p€nmanshippaper, and pencil were distributed eachduy. At the signal, everyone, includi*g theteacher, wrote as quickly and as neatly as

possible for one minute. Then everyonecorrected his own paper by circling anyincorrectly formed letters. A brief discus-sion concernirrg the formation of lettersoccasionally preceded this correctionperiod,

Although not all the children hadreached the assumed proficiency level,every child, on the twelfth day of the proj-ect, was given his correct and error chartsand told how to chart his own rate.

In the first phase, before self chartingwas introduced, the middle group rate was

28 correct letters per minute and was accel-erating. After student charting began, themiddle rate was slightly higher. The data

t0

0 80 100 120 140

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

FIGURE 3, Sam's correct and error rates ofbasic multiplication facts. During the first phasea proficiency level had been reached. tn thesecond phase, when more difficult problemswere scheduled, his performance continued to

be satisfactory.

One way to set a proficiency level inmath is to have children write numbers forone minute. If the numbers are correctlyformed and the child has worked efficiently,the number writing rate indicates the high-est possible response rate (Haughton,1969) . Basic facts rates may be set just

100u.lFf

==GlrlA.

@F()]L

x(Joo

.1

.01

.ool

0-5's 6-9's

A

EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 113

for the first 11 days was 53, slightly abovethe assumed proficiency level. After hebegan to chart, his middle rate continuedto rise to 60 words per minute. Mark'sself-charting could therefore be interpretedas an aid to his writing rate (see Figure 5) .

On the other hand, Robert's chartshowed a middle rate of 17 for the first l0days, considerably below proficiency level,but accelerating. When self-charting wa$initiated, Robert's rates decelerated

:,.sharply, indicating that self-charting may"., have hindered a continued acceleration of

his writing rate (see Figure 6) .

suggest that charting may have hinderedthe rate of cursive writing, since, as agroup, performances during the secondphase were decelerating (see Figure 4) .

F- , t.-* ^.,,....

It,.clo

t

1000

100

t0

I

.01

o

lrll-3z

=&,tu0.

zlrJ

Ftr3otrlrlFFlrlJlrl

atEf,o

tr, r00oF3z

= tootrlrlo.

zlolrlFl-eI

=-ogI'J ,IFtr,JlrJ .01

og,D .001o0

coBBecl

3

.?ls$;

I{an

/

{

?,I

1

Itv

o 80 t00 120 140

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

FIGURE 4. This group summary contains thestudents' daily middle (median) rates beforeand after the students began charting their

own writing rates.

A further analysis of the relationshipbetween proficiency level and charting waspossible when the rates of individual stu-dents were examined. Mark's middle rat€

o 80 r00 t20 r40

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

FIGURE 6, Robert did not reach profiCiencylevel of writing cursive letters in the first

phase, After personal charting wasinitiated in the second phase his

rates begin to decelerate.

These writing data, like those in math,seem to indicate that when a child hasreached a proficiency level, new tasks andprogram events are less likely to cause a

rate decrease, and some new Programevents, such as self-charting, may actuallyincrease the rate. When the behavior is inthe acquisition stage, new program eventsmay slow down acceleration.

Gonclusions

A thorough study of performance datacan improve teaching skills. This studysuggested the followirg conclusions: (a)

Teacher behavior differs with different

-rcot3 '/*i"oo"

1000

100

t0

t

lrJF:)z

=trlrlo.

zlrJFl-G,

=otrtdFFUJJUJ

chtr3o

.."."

t

I

g

.0r

.0010

o 80 ro0 no t40

SUCCESSIVE CALENDAR DAYS

FIGURE 5. Mark reached proficiency level ofwriting cursive letters during the first phase.

His writing rate continued to accelerateafter personal charting.

fi4 OCTOBER . 1970

.1

children. Direct recordirg immediatelyclarifies these trends, allowirg teachers togive parents and administrators interactiondata objectively and accurately, and meas-ure$ the effectiveness of attempted altera-tions of teacher or pupil behavior. (b)What a teacher plans and what she doesoften differ. When planning is based on anIS Description and the teacher's perform-ance is recorded, possible strengths orweaknesses in the plan and the implemen-tation show up. (.) The attainment of aproficiency level before altering eventsseems necessary for optimum growth. Achild should not struggle with new tasksuntil he is proficient in basic ones.

References

Haughton, E. University of Oregon. Personal com-munication, 1969.

Kunzelmann, H. Research and interpretation.Paper presented at the Precision TeachingWorkshop, Eugene, Oregon, August, 1969.

Lindsley, O. Direct measurement and prosthesis ofretarded behavior. Revised edition, Uniaersityof Oregon Curriculum Bulletin, Eugene,Oregon, 1969, 25.

Walker, fI ., Mattson, R., & Buckley, N. Specialclass placement as a treatment alternative fordeviant behavior in children. In f.A.M.Benson (Ed.), Modi,fying deaiant soci,al behaa-i,ors in aariaus classroom setti,ngs. Eugene;University of Oregon Press, 1969.

Zimmerman, C. Classroom academic feedback andelementary administrator and staff behavior.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universityof Oregon, 1969.

Single copies of Exceptional Chil-dren may be purchased from:

The Council for Exceptional Chil-dren

Publications SalesI4l I S. Jefferson Davis HighwayJefferson Plaza Suite 900Arlington, Virgin ia 22202

Price $1.50 per copy includes postageand handling if check or money orderaccompanies order.

EXCE,PTIONAL CHILDREN 115