Beyond Time Out and Table Time: Today's Applied Behavior Analysis for Students with Autism

Abstract

Recent mandates related to the implementation of evidence-based practices for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) require that autism professionals both understand and are able to implement practices based on the science of applied behavior analysis (ABA). The use of the term “applied behavior analysis” and its related concepts continues to generate debate and confusion for practitioners and family members in the autism field. A general lack of understanding, or misunderstanding, of the science and practice of ABA is pervasive in the field and has contributed to an often contentious dialogue among stakeholders, as well as limited implementation in many public school settings. A review of the history of ABA and its application to individuals with ASD is provided, in addition to a discussion about practices that are/are not based on the science of ABA. Common myths related to ABA and ASD, as well as challenges practitioners face when implementing practices based on the science of ABA in public school settings are also described. The use of applied behavior analysis (ABA) with students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is not a new concept, as many professionals working in the autism field state that they “do” ABA with their students/clients. Though the science of ABA has been in use for decades questions remain about what constitutes ABA, its efficacy, and its use with individuals on the autism spectrum. Critics of ABA have historically disputed the evidence of efficacy of ABA for reasons ranging from criticisms that it is too punishment-based, lacks generalizability across settings and contexts, and issues with study methods and design. Such criticisms are not without merit, as will be discussed in this paper. However, much criticism is based on broad misconceptions about what it means to “do” ABA today in public school settings. ABA is much more than “Table Time” or discrete trial training, and “time out” or punishment. Today’s ABA is based on a well-founded and researched science, uses positive reinforcement over punishment, seeks to establish a clear connection between treatment and outcome (e.g., functional relationship, discussed later in this paper), and is focused on generalization of socially important skills to the natural environment. This paper provides an overview of ABA. This overview lays the foundation of the science and provides a historical context. Next, strategies and interventions based on the science of ABA will be discussed, as well as some of the myths and misconceptions of ABA as it pertains to individuals with ASD. Finally, challenges in the implementation of ABA (e.g. personnel preparation, litigation, blended methodology) are presented. The purpose of this paper is to provide readers, both new and seasoned professionals in the field of ASD and ABA, a reference for the use of ABA techniques with students with ASD, and to provide clarity about what today’s ABA is, and is not, for individuals with ASD. Overview of Applied Behavior Analysis Applied behavior analysis was first defined by Baer, Wolf, and Risley in 1968 as “the process of applying sometimes tentative principles of behavior to the improvement of specific behaviors, and simultaneously evaluating whether or not any changes noted are indeed Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kara Hume, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, FPG Child Development Institute, 517 South Greensboro Street, Carrboro, NC 27510. Email: kara.hume@unc.edu Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 2012, 47(1), 23–38 © Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities Today’s Applied Behavior Analysis / 23 attributed to the process of application” (p. 91). Using principles of behavior to shape, modify, or change behavior has a lengthy history in the field of special education, yet behavior modification alone does not qualify as ABA. Applied behavior analysis specifically includes the analysis of whether or not changes in behavior are caused by the behavioral modification techniques used, or whether there were other variables, or pure coincidence that leads to behavior change (Alberto & Troutman, 2009). In this way, the field has gone beyond training and moved to evaluation and prediction as well. In order to say with confidence that a particular intervention has led to a change in behavior, one must evaluate it according to specific criteria (e.g., against baseline) and determine whether or not it is likely that this behavior change would be seen again if the same intervention were to be used. This is known in the literature as establishing a functional relation between the behavior and the intervention, and is key to the analysis of behavior change (Kennedy, 2005).