Advertisement

The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 293–299 | Cite as

Fostering Multiple Repertoires in Undergraduate Behavior Analysis Students

  • David A. D. Polson
Article

Abstract

Eight techniques used by the author in teaching an introductory applied behavior analysis course are described: (a) a detailed study guide, (b) frequent tests, (c) composition of practice test questions, (d) in-class study groups, (e) fluency building with a computerized flash-card program, (f) bonus marks for participation during question-and-answer sessions, (g) student presentations that summarize and analyze recently published research, and (h) in-class behavior analysis of comic strips. Together, these techniques require an extensive amount of work by students. Nevertheless, students overwhelmingly prefer this approach to the traditional lecture-midterm-final format, and most earn an A as their final course grade.

Key words

college instruction behavior analysis study guide frequent tests practice test questions study groups fluency student presentations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acker, L. E. (1991). The applied behavior analyst. In R. Gifford (Ed.), Applied psychology: Variety and opportunity (pp. 217–242). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  2. Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Binder, C. (1993). Behavioral fluency: A new paradigm. Educational Technology, 33, 8–14.Google Scholar
  4. Catania, A. C. (1992). Learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Heward, W. L. (1994). Three “low-tech” strategies for increasing the frequency of active student response during group instruction. In R. Gardner, III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. Eshleman, & T. A. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 283–320). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  6. Johnson, K. R., & Layng, T. V. J. (1992). Breaking the structuralist barrier: Literacy and numeracy with fluency. American Psychologist, 47, 1475–1490.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Lutzker, J. R., & Martin, J. A. (1981). Behavior change. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  8. Malott, R. W. (1993). Why we fail to train expert behavior analysts. The ABA Newsletter, 17(1), 48.Google Scholar
  9. McDade, C. E., Rubenstein, S. B., & Olander, C. P. (1983). Parallel between frequency testing and performance on essay questions in a theories of personality course. Journal of Precision Teaching, 4, 1–5.Google Scholar
  10. Michael, J. (1991). How to teach a college content course. Unpublished manuscript. Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.Google Scholar
  11. Olander, C. P., Collins, D. L., McArthur, B. L., Watts, W. O., & McDade, C. E. (1986). Retention among college students: A comparison of traditional versus precision teaching. Journal of Precision Teaching, 4, 80–82.Google Scholar
  12. Owens, A. M. (1980). Generative and passive questions in learning from text. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 51, 714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Parsons, J. A. (1989). Think fast [Computer program]. Victoria, BC: Author.Google Scholar
  14. Pauk, W. (1989). How to study in college (44th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  15. Sanders, N. M. (1966). Classroom questions: What kinds? New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  16. Tudor, R. M., & Bostow, D. E. (1991). Computer-programmed instruction: The relation of required interaction to practical application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 361–368.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Counselling ServicesUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations