Shillingsburg, M. A., Frampton, S. E., Juban, B., Weddle, S. A., & Silva, M. R. (2022). Implementing an applied verbal behavior model in classrooms. Behavioral Interventions, 37(1), 56-78. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1807

Reviewed by: Xinyue Wang, MA, & Robert H. LaRue, PhD, BCBA-D
Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University

Why research this topic?

Research Synopses - Psuchological, Educational and Therapeutic InterventionsChildren diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often face significant communication challenges that affect their ability to develop language, engage with others, and access educational opportunities. Research has shown that early and intensive behavioral interventions can lead to meaningful improvements in communication skills for children with ASD. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) approaches have been established as evidence-based practices, with the early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) model pioneered by Lovaas in the 1980s showing promising results. As the field has continued to evolve, various intervention models have emerged from the original EIBI framework.

The Applied Verbal Behavior (AVB) approach represents one such evolution, incorporating Skinner’s (1957) analysis of verbal behavior as a foundational element of intervention. This approach conceptualizes language as discrete instances of verbal behavior under the control of the environment and emphasizes capitalizing upon child motivation, making instruction less aversive, and prioritizing functional communication. While components of AVB, such as pairing instructors with reinforcement, mand training, and errorless instruction have individually been shown to be effective, questions remain about whether these components can be successfully combined and implemented on a large scale in educational settings.

This research is particularly important because many students with autism, especially those with more significant disabilities, continue to struggle with acquiring functional communication skills despite receiving special education services. Additionally, there has been a gap between the research established in the literature and the implementation of these practices in real-world educational settings. This study aimed to address this implementation gap by examining whether comprehensive staff training could lead to the effective use of AVB techniques across an entire school and whether these techniques would produce meaningful improvements for students with significant autism and developmental disabilities.

What did the researchers do?

In the current investigation, the researchers implemented an AVB intervention package across 26 classrooms in a nonpublic school serving students with autism and developmental disabilities. The trainees included 15 teachers (all female with master’s degrees) and approximately 50 teaching assistants with varying educational backgrounds. The training included three components: computer-based modules (22 hours of content on behavior analysis principles and verbal behavior), performance and competency-based training (hands-on practice with feedback until mastery), and in-classroom coaching. Students in the study ranged in age from 4 to 22 years and presented with significant intellectual disabilities, minimal verbal skills, and challenging behavior. The researchers measured staff implementation of 16 specific AVB components: assessing preferences, having the correct instructional materials prepared, establishing instructional control, exposing students to varied activities, following student motivation, using varied voice/tone, mixing instructional types, implementing errorless teaching, fading prompts appropriately, mixing easy and difficult tasks, correcting errors, delivering reinforcement, using differential reinforcement, incorporating mand targets (i.e., requests), and responding to challenging behavior. In addition, the researchers also collected data on several student behaviors, including student engagement during instruction, interfering behavior, the amount/duration of breaks taken, and independent requests. Data were collected during 5-minute observational sessions before and after training.

After the training, a social validity measure was given to all trainees to evaluate their perspectives on the effectiveness of the intervention, whether the intervention was practical to implement, and whether they would be willing to implement the intervention package in their classrooms.

What did the researchers find?

The training package dramatically improved how teachers and teacher assistants worked with students. Before training, staff correctly used only about 30% of the recommended teaching techniques (ranging from 7% to 71%). After training, the implementation of these techniques increased to nearly 85% (ranging from 50% to 100%). Among the 15 teachers tracked individually, 14 reached the goal of using at least 80% of the techniques correctly in two consecutive observations, with just one teacher showing minimal improvement.

These improvements in teaching techniques led to positive changes in student behavior as well. During 5-minute observations, students spent more time engaged with staff and learning activities (increasing from about 167 of 300 seconds to 196 seconds on average). Interfering behavior decreased from an average of 28 seconds in baseline to about 7 seconds per observation after training. Students also made more spontaneous requests, with these independent requests increasing from an average of 0.3 requests to an average of 1.2 independent requests per session. A small decrease in the time spent taking breaks was also observed (from 105 seconds in baseline to 89 seconds after training). However, it is difficult to determine if this effect was clinically meaningful, as the effect on break duration was not statistically significant.

When asked about the AVB approach, the trained staff provided positive ratings. On a scale of 1 to 7, they rated the approach as reasonable (average score 5.3), effective (average score 5.4), and indicated they were willing to implement it (average score 5.6). These scores show that staff found the approach practical and useful in their classrooms.

What are the strengths and limitations of the study?

The study demonstrated several important strengths. First, it was conducted as a school-wide implementation rather than in a controlled research setting, showing real-world applicability. The current study also had a strong experimental design that allowed them to confirm the effectiveness of their training and verify the improvements in student performance. The study specifically included students with significant disabilities, minimal verbal repertoires, and challenging behaviors—a population often underrepresented in research. The procedures used in the current investigation produced robust improvements in teacher implementation and student performance. The training approach utilized pyramidal training (train-the-trainer), with eight supervisory staff becoming trainers themselves, creating sustainability within the school.

While the overall findings were positive, some limitations were identified. The intervention required substantial resources: Experts in AVB to develop materials, extensive training hours, and several months to implement the training procedures school-wide. In addition, the cohort-based training model was time-intensive, and individual data analysis for teaching assistants wasn’t feasible due to turnover and scheduling constraints. The study didn’t analyze which specific components of the training were most essential or cost-effective. For some classrooms, aspects of daily structure, like predetermined break periods, remained unchanged, potentially limiting full implementation effects. While the study demonstrated immediate improvements in student engagement and behavior, it didn’t track long-term student learning outcomes or progress on individualized educational goals. Finally, the observers were not blind to the condition (baseline vs. post-training), which could have introduced some bias in observations.

What do the results mean?

This study provides compelling evidence that AVB can be successfully implemented across an entire school serving students with autism, with meaningful benefits for both staff and students. The findings challenge the notion that older students with significant disabilities cannot benefit from language-focused interventions. For families, the results suggest that teaching approaches emphasizing following student interests, creating communication opportunities, and using methods that minimize frustration can lead to greater engagement and reduced challenging behaviors. For educators, this research offers a concrete model for implementing evidence-based practices on a school-wide scale, though it requires significant resources and commitment.

The authors note that following this study, the training package was implemented in three additional schools and four centers within the same agency, with modifications to improve efficiency. For example, they streamlined training modules to focus on proficiency rather than meeting regulated time requirements. In addition, the positive staff reception challenges concern that educators might resist behavior-analytic approaches due to philosophical differences. Instead, when these methods are presented as tools to enhance student engagement and communication, they appear to be readily accepted.

Future research directions include examining the long-term impact on student learning outcomes, evaluating which components of the training package are most essential, exploring the effectiveness of AVB with different student populations, and determining the cost-effectiveness of implementation. This study represents an important step in moving AVB from isolated research settings into widespread educational practice, potentially improving learning opportunities for students with autism and related disabilities in schools across the country.

References

Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1037/11256-000

Reference for this article:

Wang, X., & LaRue, R. H. (2025). Research Synopsis: Implementing an applied verbal behavior model in classrooms. Science in Autism Treatment, 22(8).

Related ASAT Research Synopses: ​

Related Clinical Corner Articles:

Other Related ASAT Articles:

 

#BehaviorAnalysts #Communication #Researchers #Schools

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email