Bretten Allen

Math Instructional Program for N.L.

Objective Reinforcement
Objective: NL will be able to select the Type:
correct number of objects when a number Social praise – “Good job!” “High five!”
card is showed to him. Reward activity – Puzzle, iPad, or a toy.
Intrinsic reinforcement – Being able to
Functional Routine: The skill will be used successfully participate in games and other
throughout the day; sharing with others, activities.
table time, calendar. However, data will be
collected during table time when Bretten Schedule of delivery:
comes during the week. After points to correct word = social praise
After each period of class time that he
completes 5 trials for 1 number = Reward
activity
Over time = intrinsic reinforcement
Program Steps Error Correction
Discrete Skill
1) 1-2 Stop: “Hold on. Let’s think first.”
2) 3-5
3) 1-5 Back-step: “That is ____ (not the requested
4) 6-8 amount).”
5) 1-8
6) 9-10 Prompt: “Show me ____ (the requested
7) 1-10 amount) puzzle pieces?”

Location/Setting Criteria for Moving to Next Step

Practice in the library or classroom. Successfully pull the correct amount of

objects out of the group five consecutive
times.

Materials Needed Prompt Strategy

Cut out number cards. Least to most:

Puzzle pieces. Independent, Gesture, Indirect Verbal, Direct
Verbal, Hand-over-hand

Instruction Generalization
Instruction/Cue: Stimulus Factors:
Teachers or peers ask him to bring them a
“Show me _____ puzzle pieces?” number of objects.

Naturally occurring cue for the behavior: Response Factors:

 Bretten Allen

Retrieves the correct amount of objects.

The pile of puzzle pieces and the specific
number card laid out on the table.
Student Response/Behavior Special Considerations
The student will select the requested amount Have student say the number when pointing.
of puzzle pieces correctly from a pile when Count each piece when reviewing.
shown a number card. If the student is not
able to remember, he will make an attempt
to point to a card or ask for help.

Summary

See attached Excel document for raw data and graphs. During baseline assessment the
student displayed independence on five consecutive attempts on the last trial for the numbers
1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. I attribute this to a new process and as he learned the process of the
assessment, he became more comfortable with displaying the knowledge that he has. I
determined that the student was advanced enough in these areas to start the instructional
program at 6, 7, and 8. During each trial there were five attempt opportunities. Each attempt
was marked with the prompts needed including independent, gesture, verbal, and physical.
Before implementing the instructional program I believed the student would not need physical
prompting, however as his distractibility became more evident I knew that hand over hand
would be necessary in some instances.

Analysis

The beginning trials for counting with correspondence for 6, 7, and 8 all required some
hand over hand prompting. Overall, the level of prompting needed decreased over time, which
allowed me to believe that the instructional program was in fact working. 6 was the number
that was the quickest for the student to learn and this was not surprising. I assumed that the
smallest numbers would be more familiar to NL. During trial 5 on the number 6 the student was
able to independently count the correct amount of puzzle pieces. This also happened during
trial 7 and 8. Success was seen for the numbers 7 and 8 as well but we are still working on five
out of five independent attempts. Unfortunately, during trial 9 and 10 for each number, there
was a regression in needed prompts. There was some extenuating circumstances that I believe
affected the student’s ability to concentrate and perform. The student has Prader-Willi
Syndrome and kept repeating how hungry he was during trial 9 and the observer came to sit in
on trial 10.
 Bretten Allen

Modifications

As the trials went on I noticed that the student was not counting and moving puzzle
pieces at the same time. On some attempts he would count too fast and end up with not
enough puzzle pieces; other times he would count too slow and end up with many more than
was necessary. I started requiring him to recount after he had grouped the puzzle pieces to
make sure that he actually had the correct amount. I also had to add that he needed to count
slowly and to only move puzzle pieces with one hand. An additional problem that he had was
picking up too many pieces at one time and counting them all as one. During the trials I noticed
a bit of irregularity in the data and I wasn’t comfortable moving past the number 6 with only
one fully successful trial. Because of that, I continued working with all three numbers for the
rest of our time together to really prove his ability.

Critique

This experience has let me learn so much about students’ individuality and the amount
of information needed to produce a really good instructional program. The more you know
about a student the better fit the IP will be to their abilities. The reason I make this note is
because if I had more time to observe and work with the student beforehand the less
adaptations I would have had to make. Throughout the time with this student I did believe that
the IP was working, his prompting continued to decrease and he really enjoyed the
reinforcement. The most difficult aspect of this experience was that the student was so easily
distracted. It made the process take a much longer time than expected and he did not progress
as quickly.

When Paula came to observe me working with NL she had some ideas that could help
and a lot of her suggestions were ones that I had been thinking about already. Continuing with
this IP I would reinvent the method given to be much more structured. One idea would be
creating a sticker chart in order to earn putting the puzzle together at the end instead of
allowing him to complete it just because he finished the amount of attempts I wanted him to
get through. It would give him more responsibility.

I am so excited to be able to be in the classroom full time in the near future. I know that
with more frequency and fidelity, skills are more easily learned and retained. This experience
would have gone better if I could have been in the classroom every day, but I think that it went
well with what we both had to work with. I left feeling much more confident in my ability to
create and alter instructional programs and connect with students. NL is such a wonderful
student and moments of us working together will be remembered for a very long time.