Students With autism spectrum disorders (ASD) present unique challenges to educators trying to plan effective instructional programs. Although an impressive body of research identifying effective practices has emerged, there have been minimal attempts to integrate the findings into a curricular foundation to be adopted by school districts. This article provides a description of 6 core elements that have empirical support and should be included in any sound, comprehensive instructional program for students With ASD. These core elements are (a) individualized supports and services for students and families, (b) systematic instruction, (c) comprehensible/structured learning environments, (d) specialized curriculum content, (e) functional approach to problem behavior, and (f) family involvement. This article provides illustrations of the core elements in the form of specific instructional practices that have been demonstrated to be effective With students With ASD.

Although there is literature supporting the effectiveness of tertiary behavioral supports, the majority of the studies have been conducted with single-subject designs. The Prevent—Teach—Reinforce (PTR) model is a standardized model of a school-based tertiary intervention. This study reports initial results from a randomized controlled trial to compare whether the PTR model, as implemented by typical school personnel, is more effective than interventions typically used (i.e., services as usual). To date, 245 students in Grades K-8 have been enrolled in the study, and preliminary results show that students who received the PTR intervention had significantly higher social skills and academic engaged time and significantly lower problem behavior when compared with students who received services as usual. Teachers gave high social validity ratings to the intervention. Implications for widescale school adoption are discussed.

Although there is a substantial empirical foundation for the basic intervention components of behavior analysis and positive behavior support (PBS), the field still lacks a standardized program model of individualized PBS suitable for widespread application by school personnel. This article provides a description of a standardized PBS model that is in the process of development and large-scale evaluation. The “Prevent-Teach-Reinforce” (PTR) model is designed to meet the behavior support needs of students with serious behavior challenges in a broad range of school settings. Included in this article are an overview of the model’s components and implementation process, two case examples, and a discussion of the model’s status and future directions.

This study was conducted to examine the feasibility and potential efficacy of implementing an adapted, family-centered version of the school-based prevent-teach-reinforce (PTR) model. The research included two families who implemented the PTR process for their children in collaboration with the researchers. The adapted PTR was tested using a multiple baseline design across routines to examine changes in child behavior across experimental conditions. Results indicated that the adapted PTR intervention was associated with reduction in child problem behavior and increases in alternative behavior in both target and non-target routines. The results also indicated that the parents were able to implement the behavior intervention plan with fidelity and successfully use the PTR process for a novel routine. The PTR intervention also had high social validity ratings; both self- and novel-rated validity indicated that the PTR intervention was acceptable to both families and the community at large. The data are discussed in terms of the expanding evidence related to the PTR model and the extension to a family context.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent disorders in school-age children. Children with ADHD often have difficulty at school and at home. Medication is a common treatment for children with ADHD; however, it has been shown to be more effective when combined with behavioral interventions. Self-management has extensive research support showing its effectiveness for children with ADHD primarily in academic settings. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact a self-management intervention would have on the on-task behavior of children during various routines, both academic and nonacademic, in the home setting. Participants were trained to use a self-management intervention. In addition, parents were trained to conduct accuracy checks on their child’s performance as well as deliver feedback and rewards. All three participants showed an increase in on-task behavior following the implementation of the self-management intervention; two of the three participants’ on-task behavior maintained high, stable levels as the self-management schedule was faded. One participant’s on-task behavior did not maintain high levels and therefore required implementation of a self-management plus reinforcement for on-task behavior condition to reestablish high, stable levels of on-task behavior. For one participant, the duration of the targeted routine increased. Current limitations are discussed, and recommendations for future research in this area are provided.