Developing guidelines for the use of punishing interventions in the schools

Wood, Frank H.; Braaten, Sheldon

doi:10.1177/074193258300300413

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the necessity for discipline is frequently viewed as synonymous with "punishment" as a management tool for reducing unwanted behaviors (Braaten, Simpson, Rosell, & Reilly, 1988). Although the use of punishment has been well documented as an effective way to reduce many unwanted behaviors (Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders, 1990), the abuse of these procedures, along with the development of alternative interventions such as social skills training and reinforcement for incompatible behaviors, has resulted in the need for carefully considered appropriate, ethical, and effective interventions for reducing maladaptive behaviors (Gast & Nelson, 1977;Meyer & Evans, 1989;Van Houten, Axelrod, Bailey, Favell, Foxx, Iwata, & Lovass, 1988;Wood & Braaten, 1983). mental health personnel was largely left to the practitioners' discretion.…”

Section: Sheldon Braaten Is Coordinator At Harrison Secondary School mentioning

confidence: 98%

A Policy Model for Use of Aversive and Deprivation Procedures to Decrease Problem Behaviors of Students in Special Education

Braaten¹

1991

Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children a

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Sheldon Braaten Is Coordinator At Harrison Secondary School mentioning

confidence: 98%

A Policy Model for Use of Aversive and Deprivation Procedures to Decrease Problem Behaviors of Students in Special Education

Braaten¹

1991

Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children a

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Suggestions about guidelines for the use of aversive procedures are readily available (e.g., Repp & Deitz, 1978;Wood & Braaten, 1983). Because many behavior reductive procedures are controversial, it is incumbent upon administrators to insure that their staff members implement them appropriately.…”

Section: Administrative Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and Managing Self-Injurious Behavior

Zirpoli

Lloyd

1987

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As handicapped students are placed in public schools in increasing numbers, teachers are challenged to teach students exhibiting many maladaptive behaviors that they have not previously observed in the classroom. One of these, self-injurious behavior, presents teachers with a unique behavior problem with a complex etiology. Selfinjurious behavior is reviewed in this paper to help educators understand the scope of this maladaptive behavior. The major emphasis of the review is intervention procedures in school settings. SELF-INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR (SIB) is not a behaviorrestricted to the back wards of large, custodial institutions. Nor is it a behavior limited to individuals having severe emotional disorders or mental retardation. Ross and McKay (1979) found self-injurious individuals in group homes, infant day care and senior citizen facilities, prisons, detention homes for children and adolescents, hospitals, university residences, and institutions for individuals having mental and physical handicaps. Investigators report SIB in males and females, in individuals 5 months and older, in nonhandicapped individuals, and in individuals identified as mentally and emotionally handicapped. Ross and McKay (1979) identified 33 terms that have been used in the literature to refer to SIB. The most common terms are self-injury, self-mutilation, and self-destruction. In the present analysis, we use the term self injurious behavior because it is most accurate; not all self-injurious behaviors are mutilative and only suicide is truly self-destructive. Favell, Azrin, et al. (1982) defined SIB as &dquo;a broad array of responses which result in physical damage to the individual displaying the behavior&dquo; (p. 531). Matson (1986) stated that &dquo;because of the repetitive nature of these acts they are similar to stereotyped behaviors in general. It has been hypothesized by many that self-injury probably constitutes a subset of stereotyped responding&dquo; (p. 224). CharacteristicsSelf-injurious behavior has been classified into two types: direct and indirect (

show abstract

“…Until these issues are resolved, the use of corporal punishment with special education students should either be avoided or, at least, be considered experimental, with appropriate safeguards routinely required, just as with any other unproven technique. The safeguards necessary to lessen the risk of corporal punishment being inflicted arbitrarily or excessively should include at least (a) informed consent from the student and the parents or guardians (Carr & Lovass, 1983;Griffith, 1983), (b) proper training for instructional and administrative personnel and provisions for their supervision (Wood & Braaten, 1983), and (c) the establishment of a careful review process (Favell et al, 1982;Griffith & Henning, 1981).…”

Section: Remedial and Special Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporal Punishment with Mildly Handicapped Students: Five Years Later

Rose

1989

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a replication of a previous descriptive study, the uses of corporal punishment with mildly handicapped students in American public schools are described. A school discipline survey was mailed to 3 71 principals in 18 randomly selected states representing the nine U.S. census regions. Results indicated widespread use of corporal punishment with handicapped students at every grade level in the majority of regions of the United States. Descriptions of the use of corporal punishment across demographic and administrative/ procedural variables are provided and discussed. Comparisons of current findings to previous findings are made and trends noted and discussed. Further research directions and instructional implications are also provided.

show abstract

Developing guidelines for the use of punishing interventions in the schools

Cited by 15 publications

References 9 publications

A Policy Model for Use of Aversive and Deprivation Procedures to Decrease Problem Behaviors of Students in Special Education

A Policy Model for Use of Aversive and Deprivation Procedures to Decrease Problem Behaviors of Students in Special Education

Understanding and Managing Self-Injurious Behavior

Corporal Punishment with Mildly Handicapped Students: Five Years Later

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About