Student learning as the basis for reinforcement to the instructor

Abstract

The present study reinforced the two instructors of two students with profound mental retardation first for the instructors' training behaviors, then for improved student learning in a multiple baseline across responses design. Reinforcement of the instructors' training behaviors increased their training behaviors, replicating the findings of previous studies, but had no effect on student learning. When the reinforcement for the instructors was instead made contingent upon student learning, the student learning improved and the instructors' lllgh level of training behaviors was maintained. In addition, the instructors began to request training for themselves. These findings suggest that staff motivation programs for instructors might usefully base the reinforcers not only on the instructor's performance, but on the progress of their students.Since persons with severe or profound mental retardation require intensive care and training, behavioral staff motivation programs have been developed for improving the performance of their caretakers and trainers. A variety of specified reinforcers for these employees have been used effectively in these staff motivation programs such as trading stamps

Feedback for improving staff training and performance in behavioral treatment programs

“…That is, staff apparently performed as instructed, but their process was not reflected in improved client outcome. Azrin, Jamner, and Besalel (1989) increased staff performance with process feedback backed by reinforcers including choice of days off, and more flexitime, but measures of targeted client self-care behavior showed no change. On close inspection of the procedures, it seemed that the staff behavior (i.e., process) was poorly selected and described.…”

Effects of outcome performance feedback on maintenance of client and staff behavior in a residential setting

“…No research has compared efficacies of either form, or investigated their combined effects. The prevailing assumption, however, is that regardless of how process feedback is used, outcome measures are essential for successful performance feedback methods (Azrin, Jamner, & Besalel, 1989;Fairbank & Prue, 1982;McInnis, 1978). It seems there are 2 basic ways of approaching the problem.…”