Brief Biography

Andrea M. Zawoyski, MA - Ms. Zawoyski is a fifth year student studying school psychology in the Educational Psychology PhD program at the University of Georgia. She has been a practicum student with the Marcus Autism Center School Consultation program since August 2014. Ms. Zawoyski has gained practicum experience in Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) in a clinic and a school setting. She also conducts eye tracking and reading research at the University of Georgia.

Dana T. Zavatkay, PhD, BCBA-D, NCSP - Dr. Zavatkay is the program manager of the Marcus Autism Center School Consultation Program. Dr. Zavatkay provides school consultation services to schools in Georgia and designed procedures for the Marcus Autism Center Model Classrooms. Dr. Zavatkay is also the program manager for the Marcus Autism Center Camps and Respite Program. She has coordinated day camps and sleepaway camps for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Dr. Zavatkay is interested in researching techniques for implementing applied behavior analysis (ABA) in the school setting and determining methods for effective school consultation.

Highest Degree of Presenter(s)

Andrea M. Zawoyski, MA

Dana T. Zavatkay, Ph.D., BCBA-D, NCSP

Presentation Abstract

According to IDEIA (2004), students who engage in problem behavior that interferes with their ability to attain a meaningful education must receive a functional behavior assessment (FBA). Although methods used in FBAs were derived from research with individuals who have autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or other developmental disabilities, FBAs yield important information to guide treatment of problem behavior for students regardless of their disability status. The purpose of the FBA is to identify reasons why problem behavior occurs (i.e., the function of problem behavior) so that an effective treatment plan can be developed. The exact methods that should comprise an FBA are not well-defined; therefore, implementation of FBAs varies across school districts. Methods range from checklists and narrative observations to functional analysis (FA). FAs provide the only way to identify a causal relationship between events that can yield conclusions about the function of problem behavior; Indirect or descriptive assessments yield hypotheses. FAs are also more likely to lead to positive, reinforcement-based treatment strategies (Pelios, Morren, Tesch, & Axelrod, 1999). Although indirect or descriptive methods are not ideal, they may be appropriate in certain situations (e.g., limited resources, untrained staff).

The purpose of this presentation is to teach attendees about different components of FBAs. Attendees will learn about the functions of problem behavior, methods for data collection, and FA procedures. Additionally, the presentation will teach attendees and how to interpret data from FBAs. Suggestions for environmental arrangement and modifying FA methodology to suit a school environment will be discussed. Finally, the presentation will include case examples demonstrating how data from FBAs were used to develop function-based interventions for treating problem behavior (e.g., self-injurious behavior, aggression, non-compliance) in children with ASD. Ultimately, this presentation can help parents learn about the science of problem behavior and how FBAs/FAs can yield successful treatment.


Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (2004).

Pelios, L., Morren, J., Tesch, D., & Axelrod, S. (1999). The impact of functional analysis methodology on treatment choice for self-injurious and aggressive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 185–195.

Share

COinS
 

Conducting Functional Behavior Assessments and Functional Analyses in Schools

According to IDEIA (2004), students who engage in problem behavior that interferes with their ability to attain a meaningful education must receive a functional behavior assessment (FBA). Although methods used in FBAs were derived from research with individuals who have autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or other developmental disabilities, FBAs yield important information to guide treatment of problem behavior for students regardless of their disability status. The purpose of the FBA is to identify reasons why problem behavior occurs (i.e., the function of problem behavior) so that an effective treatment plan can be developed. The exact methods that should comprise an FBA are not well-defined; therefore, implementation of FBAs varies across school districts. Methods range from checklists and narrative observations to functional analysis (FA). FAs provide the only way to identify a causal relationship between events that can yield conclusions about the function of problem behavior; Indirect or descriptive assessments yield hypotheses. FAs are also more likely to lead to positive, reinforcement-based treatment strategies (Pelios, Morren, Tesch, & Axelrod, 1999). Although indirect or descriptive methods are not ideal, they may be appropriate in certain situations (e.g., limited resources, untrained staff).

The purpose of this presentation is to teach attendees about different components of FBAs. Attendees will learn about the functions of problem behavior, methods for data collection, and FA procedures. Additionally, the presentation will teach attendees and how to interpret data from FBAs. Suggestions for environmental arrangement and modifying FA methodology to suit a school environment will be discussed. Finally, the presentation will include case examples demonstrating how data from FBAs were used to develop function-based interventions for treating problem behavior (e.g., self-injurious behavior, aggression, non-compliance) in children with ASD. Ultimately, this presentation can help parents learn about the science of problem behavior and how FBAs/FAs can yield successful treatment.


Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (2004).

Pelios, L., Morren, J., Tesch, D., & Axelrod, S. (1999). The impact of functional analysis methodology on treatment choice for self-injurious and aggressive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 185–195.