working for him or he wouldn’t be doing it,” and invariably sets the stage for interventions aimed at punishing kids’ challenging behaviors so the behaviors don’t “work” anymore, and rewarding adaptive replacement behaviors to encourage ones that “work” better. This is the foundation of most school discipline programs.
But this definition of “function” reflects what I call the “first pass” of a functional assessment. There’s an indispensable “second pass”—a deeper level of analysis—that, regrettably, often goes neglected. And that is: What lagging skills help us understand why the kid is getting, avoiding, and escaping in such a maladaptive fashion? The second pass begins with some very important questions: If the kid had the skills to go about getting, escaping, and avoiding in an adaptive fashion, then why is he going about getting, escaping, and avoiding in such a mal-adaptive fashion? Doesn’t the fact that he’s going about getting, escaping, and avoiding in a maladaptive fashion suggest that he doesn’t have the skills to go about getting, escaping, and avoiding in an adaptive fashion? These questions spring from the core mentality of the CPS model (kids do well if they can) and from the belief that doing well is always preferable to not doing well (but only if a kid has the skills to do well in the first place). The essential function of challenging behavior is to communicate to adults that a kid doesn’t possess the skills to handle certain demands in certain situations. This definition sets the stage for interventions aimed at solving the problems that are giving rise to challenging behavior and teaching the kid the skills he’s lacking.
So, back to the original question: What is the fate of the FBA? I can’t think of a reason to stop doing them. But if you want an FBA to help you get to the core of challenging behavior—lagging skills and unsolved problems—you’ll want to focus on the second pass rather than the first. By the way, you don’t need to do a full-blown FBA to complete the ALSUP and achieve a consensus on a kid’s lagging skills and unsolved problems.
Question: I’m not quite clear about what you mean by “unsolved problems.” Can you explain further?
Answer: Challenging kids aren’t challenging every minute. They’re challenging sometimes, under certain conditions, usually when the environment is demanding skills they aren’t able to muster or presenting problems they aren’t able to solve. As you’ve read, lagging skills are the why of challenging behavior. Unsolved problems are the who, what, where, and when of challenging behavior and help adults pinpoint the specific circumstances or conditions under which a kid’s challenging behavior is most likely to occur.
So if a kid is having difficulty in his interactions with a particular classmate (a “who”) or teacher (another “who”), and those interactions are setting the stage for challenging behavior, then getting along with that particular classmate or teacher is an unsolved problem. If a kid is having difficulties with a particular assignment (a “what”), and those difficulties are setting the stage for challenging behavior, then difficulty with that assignment is an unsolved problem. Difficulties on the school bus, in the cafeteria, or in the hallway (all “where” and “when”) are also unsolved problems. If the kid could resolve these problems in an adaptive manner, he would.
I use the terms “unsolved problems,” “triggers,” “circumstances,” “antecedents,” and “situations” interchangeably, but they all refer to the same thing. I like “unsolved problems” best, though, because it unambiguously tells us that there’s a problem the child is having difficulty solving on his own.
Question: What research supports the idea that challenging behavior is a form of developmental delay?
Answer: Much of the research is, for better or worse (mostly worse), tied to
But this definition of “function” reflects what I call the “first pass” of a functional assessment. There’s an indispensable “second pass”—a deeper level of analysis—that, regrettably, often goes neglected. And that is: What lagging skills help us understand why the kid is getting, avoiding, and escaping in such a maladaptive fashion? The second pass begins with some very important questions: If the kid had the skills to go about getting, escaping, and avoiding in an adaptive fashion, then why is he going about getting, escaping, and avoiding in such a mal-adaptive fashion? Doesn’t the fact that he’s going about getting, escaping, and avoiding in a maladaptive fashion suggest that he doesn’t have the skills to go about getting, escaping, and avoiding in an adaptive fashion? These questions spring from the core mentality of the CPS model (kids do well if they can) and from the belief that doing well is always preferable to not doing well (but only if a kid has the skills to do well in the first place). The essential function of challenging behavior is to communicate to adults that a kid doesn’t possess the skills to handle certain demands in certain situations. This definition sets the stage for interventions aimed at solving the problems that are giving rise to challenging behavior and teaching the kid the skills he’s lacking.
So, back to the original question: What is the fate of the FBA? I can’t think of a reason to stop doing them. But if you want an FBA to help you get to the core of challenging behavior—lagging skills and unsolved problems—you’ll want to focus on the second pass rather than the first. By the way, you don’t need to do a full-blown FBA to complete the ALSUP and achieve a consensus on a kid’s lagging skills and unsolved problems.
Question: I’m not quite clear about what you mean by “unsolved problems.” Can you explain further?
Answer: Challenging kids aren’t challenging every minute. They’re challenging sometimes, under certain conditions, usually when the environment is demanding skills they aren’t able to muster or presenting problems they aren’t able to solve. As you’ve read, lagging skills are the why of challenging behavior. Unsolved problems are the who, what, where, and when of challenging behavior and help adults pinpoint the specific circumstances or conditions under which a kid’s challenging behavior is most likely to occur.
So if a kid is having difficulty in his interactions with a particular classmate (a “who”) or teacher (another “who”), and those interactions are setting the stage for challenging behavior, then getting along with that particular classmate or teacher is an unsolved problem. If a kid is having difficulties with a particular assignment (a “what”), and those difficulties are setting the stage for challenging behavior, then difficulty with that assignment is an unsolved problem. Difficulties on the school bus, in the cafeteria, or in the hallway (all “where” and “when”) are also unsolved problems. If the kid could resolve these problems in an adaptive manner, he would.
I use the terms “unsolved problems,” “triggers,” “circumstances,” “antecedents,” and “situations” interchangeably, but they all refer to the same thing. I like “unsolved problems” best, though, because it unambiguously tells us that there’s a problem the child is having difficulty solving on his own.
Question: What research supports the idea that challenging behavior is a form of developmental delay?
Answer: Much of the research is, for better or worse (mostly worse), tied to
Similar Books
