Skip to main content

Being the Change That You Want to See: Using Behavior-Analytic Strategies in Preservice Teacher Training to Support Inclusive Learning in the Czech Republic

Abstract

In the Czech Republic, and other counties in Central Europe, inclusive education, as well as behavior analysis, is emerging as theoretical concepts and practical applications. Teaching strategies supporting a diverse learning population are not yet commonplace. An initial step to establishing better practices in primary and secondary education is modeling the changes we want to see at the postsecondary level, specifically in preservice teacher training classrooms. Therefore, data on student engagement were collected within a pilot study that was conducted with 15 learners in an undergraduate teacher education course in the Czech Republic. The larger goal of the pilot was looking at the method of information delivery (online vs. in person). However, it also used a behavior-analytic method for promoting student engagement that involved an active student responding system and participation-contingent reinforcement. Data revealed that using the behavior-analytic strategies in the higher education classroom created an effective model for the preservice educators. Data demonstrated strong student participation, accuracy, and social validity. A review of the process suggested it was easy to use, created a didactic teaching environment, and could set the stage for better practices in inclusive education.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Abery, B., Tichá, R., & Kincade, L. (2017). Moving toward an inclusive education system: Lessons from the US and their potential application in the Czech Republic and other Central and Eastern European countries. Sociální Pedagogika, 5(1), 48–62.  https://doi.org/10.7441/soced.2017.05.01.03

  2. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303.

  3. Arreaga-Mayer, C. (1998). Increasing active student responding and improving academic performance through classwide peer tutoring. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34(2), 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/105345129803400204.

  4. Bartoňová, M., Vítková, M., & Vrubel, M. (2014). Inclusion in education for students with special educational needs from the perspective of research. Masaryk University.

  5. Bashan, B., & Holsblat, R. (2012). Co-teaching through modeling processes: Professional development of students and instructors in a teacher training program. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20(2), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2012.678972.

  6. Bondy, E., & Brownell, M. T. (2004). Getting beyond the research to practice gap: Researching against the grain. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700105.

  7. Bonwell, C. C. (1996). Enhancing the lecture: Revitalizing the traditional format. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 67, 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Briesch, A. M., Chafouleas, S. M., Neugebauer, S. R., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2013). Assessing influences on intervention implementation: Revision of the Usage Rating Profile–Intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2012.08.006.

  9. Brown, T. W., Killingsworth, K., & Alavosius, M. P. (2014). Interteaching: An evidence-based approach to instruction. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(1), 132–139.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Campbell, N. (2007). Bringing ESL students out of their shells: Enhancing participation through online discussion. Business Communication Quarterly, 70(1), 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cedro, Á. M., Borges, J., Diniz, M. L. N., Rodrigues, R. M., Rico, V. V., Leme, A. C., & Huziwara, E. M. (2019). Evaluating concept formation in multiple exemplar training with musical chords. The Psychological Record, 69(3), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00346-5.

  12. Chafouleas, S. M., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Sassu, K. A. (2006). Acceptability and reported use of daily behavior report cards among teachers. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8(3), 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007060080030601.

  13. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In A. Iran-Nejar & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 249–305). American Educational Research Association.

  14. Elliott, J., & Tudge, J. (2007). The impact of the west on post-Soviet Russian education: Change and resistance to change. Comparative Education, 43(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060601162420.

  15. Florian, L., & Becirevic, M. (2011). Challenges for teachers’ professional learning for inclusive education in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Prospects, 41(3), 371-384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-011-9208-4.

  16. Girgin, K. Z., & Stevens, D. D. (2005). Bridging in-class participation with innovative instruction: Use and implications in a Turkish university classroom. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(1), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290500049059.

  17. Greenwood, C. R., & Abbott, M. (2001). The research to practice gap in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(4), 276–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640102400403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Greer, R. D. (1991). The teacher as strategic scientist: A solution to our educational crisis? Behavior and Social Issues, 1(2), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v1i2.165.

  19. Heward, W. L. (1994). Three low-tech strategies for increasing the frequency of active student response during group instruction. In R. Gardner III, D. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. Eshleman, & T. A. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurable superior instruction (pp. 283–320). Brooks/Cole.

  20. Humphrey, N., Bartolo, P., Ale, P., Calleja, C., Hofsaess, T., Janikova, V., Mol Lous, A., Vilkiene, V., & Wetso, G. M. (2006). Understanding and responding to diversity in the primary classroom: An international study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760600795122.

  21. Hundley, V. (2002). The importance of pilot studies. Nursing Standard, 16(40), 33–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jarkovská, L. (2018). Ohrožují soukromé školy rovný přístup ke vzdělávání v České republice? [Do private schools threaten equal access to education in the Czech Republic?]. Sociální Pedagogika, 6(1), 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kellum, K. K., Carr, J. E., & Dozier, C. L. (2001). Response-card instruction and student learning in a college classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 28(2), 101–104. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP2802_06.

  24. Kezar, A. (2000). The importance of pilot studies: Beginning the hermeneutic circle. Research in Higher Education, 41(3), 385–400. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007047028758.

  25. Kingsdorf, S., & Pančocha, K. (2020a). A survey of the use of applied behaviour analysis for children with autism in the Czech Republic. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(5), 722-733. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1726092.

  26. Kingsdorf, S., & Pančocha, K. (2020b). Teaching behavior analysis to pre-service teachers in their nonnative language: Does method matter? Journal of Behavioral Education.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09409-y.

  27. Konrad, M., Joseph, L. M., & Eveleigh, E. (2009). A meta-analytic review of guided notes. Education and Treatment of Children32(3), 421–444.

  28. Lechta, V. (2016). Inkluzivní pedagogika [Inclusive education]. Portál.

  29. Machovcová, K. (2017). Czech elementary school teachers’ implicit expectations from migrant children. International Journal of Educational Development, 53, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2016.12.006.

  30. Mandinach, E. B. (2012). A perfect time for data use: Using data-driven decision making to inform practice. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.667064.

  31. Marmolejo, E. K., Wilder, D. A., & Bradley, L. (2004). A preliminary analysis of the effects of response cards on student performance and participation in an upper division university course. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37(3), 405–410. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2004.37-405.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Morcom, V. E., & MacCallum, J. A. (2012). Getting personal about values: Scaffolding student participation towards an inclusive classroom community. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(12), 1323–1334. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2011.572189.

  33. Musti-Rao, S., Kroeger, S. D., & Schumacher-Dyke, K. (2008). Using guided notes and response cards at the postsecondary level. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(3), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406408330630.

  34. Nieswiadomy, R. M. (2002). Foundations of nursing research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

  35. Nilsen, H., & Foltová, H. (2008). Assumptions for better learning in the classroom; 1(st) International School, Czech Republic. New Educational Review, 16(3–4), 89–99.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Randolph, J. J. (2007). Meta-analysis of the research on response cards: Effects on test achievement, quiz achievement, participation, and off-task behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007070090020201.

  37. Roll-Pettersson, L., Gena, A., Eldevik, S., Moderato, P., Sigurdardottir, Z. G., Dillenburger, K., Keenan, M., & Ala’i-Rosales, S. (2020). Higher education and behavior analysis in Europe: Creating a unified approach for the training of autism professionals. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 21(1), 158-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2020.1758990.

  38. Saville, B. K. (2011). Interteaching: A behavior analytic approach to promoting student engagement. Promoting Student Engagement, 1, 128–133.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Neef, N. A., Norman, R. V., & Ferreri, S. J. (2006). A comparison of interteaching and lecture in the college classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2006.42-05.

  40. Skinner, B. F. (1990). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. B. F. Skinner Foundation (Original work published 1938).

  41. Stowell, J. R., & Nelson, J. M. (2007). Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation, learning, and emotion. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701700391.

  42. Straková, J., Greger, D., & Soukup, P. (2017). Factors affecting the transition of fifth graders to the academic track in the Czech Republic. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 26(3), 288–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2017.1290541.

  43. Tincani, M., & Twyman, J. S. (2016). Enhancing engagement through active student response. Center on Innovations in Learning, Temple University.

  44. Winett, R. A., & Winkler, R. C. (1972). Current behavior modification in the classroom: Be still, be quiet, be docile. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5(4), 499–504. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1972.5-499.

  45. Zayac, R. M., Ratkos, T., Frieder, J. E., & Paulk, A. (2016). A comparison of active student responding modalities in a general psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 43(1), 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620879.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sheri Kingsdorf.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical Approval

The manuscript and research reported adhere to the ethical policies described in the Author Guidelines.

Data Sharing Policy

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kingsdorf, S., Pančocha, K. Being the Change That You Want to See: Using Behavior-Analytic Strategies in Preservice Teacher Training to Support Inclusive Learning in the Czech Republic. Behav. Soc. Iss. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-021-00048-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Active student responding
  • Higher education
  • Preservice teachers
  • ESL learners
  • Czech Republic