|
In 1991, Susan Etscheidt
wanted to know if a specific CBI could decrease the
aggressive behaviors of students with EBD as
compared to students who did not receive the
instruction. She also wanted to determine if the
addition of a positive consequence (e.g., listening
to music at the end of class) would further enhance
the effectiveness of the CBI.
Etscheidt's program
components were adapted from the Lochman, Nelson,
and Sims (1981) Anger Coping Program, which
provides students with a way to change aggressive
responses into appropriate alternatives by
modifying their thinking processes regarding the
circumstances surrounding certain situations. The
instruction also assists students in developing,
evaluating, and selecting appropriate alternative
responses. Etscheidt's goals included increasing
self-awareness; identifying a student's reaction to
peer influences; providing avenues to identify
problem situations; and using problem-solving
techniques to identify, evaluate, and select
alternative solutions for a specific social
situation.
In Etscheidt's program,
students used the following sequential strategy
when approaching a problem situation:
1. Stop and think before
acting. Students are taught to restrain aggressive
responses through the use of covert
speech.
2. Identify the problem. The
students are required to distinguish the specific
aspects of a problematic situation that may elicit
an aggressive response.
3. Develop alternative
solutions. Students generate at least two
alternative solutions to a problematic situation,
either thinking about something else until able to
relax and/or moving to another location in the room
to avoid further provocation.
4. Evaluate the consequences
of possible solutions. Students assessed the
benefits of each possible solution.
5. Select and implement a
solution. The students carried out the selected
alternative.
Etscheidt employed three
comparison groups. The first group received the
CBI, the second group received the CBI and the
positive consequence, and the third group (control)
received neither the CBI nor the positive
consequence.
The results indicated that
the two groups who received the CBI demonstrated
more self-control than the control group students.
In fact, the students in the control group
exhibited significantly more aggressive behaviors
than those who received the training. Finally,
Etscheidt found that the addition of a positive
consequence did not significantly increase the
effectiveness of the CBI.
|
|
Researchers at the University
of Florida are studying the effects of a CBI, the
Tools for Getting Along: Teaching Students to
Problem Solve curriculum, on 4th and 5th grade
students who exhibit behavioral problems. It has
been found that the curriculum can help students
reduce their aggression and classroom disruption
and the effects can be maintained. The curriculum
was designed to help students learn to find
positive solutions to social problems. The
curriculum was designed using a problem-solving
framework focused on understanding and dealing with
frustration and anger, since anger is a frequent
correlate of disruptive and aggressive behavior and
can be preceded by frustration. The lessons include
anger management and problem-solving concepts
similar to Etscheidt's program in which students
use a sequential strategy when approaching a
problem situation. Also included are direct
instruction, modeling, guided practice, and
independent practice for skill development, along
with opportunities for skill generalization.
Teachers who use Tools for
Getting Along help students develop self-management
of behavior through the purposeful manipulation of
overt speech and eventually, the use of covert
verbalizations. The use of paired or small-group
learning, opportunities to enhance generalization
by having students solve real life problems, and a
self-monitored point system to reward participation
are also encouraged. For example, a "Tool Kit"
provides students with cumulative review, practice,
and periodic opportunities to relate learned
concepts to their experiences at home or school.
Teachers instruct students to self-assign points
for completing the Tool Kit and participating
appropriately in class.
Formal lessons range from
30-40 minutes and are taught 2-3 times per week.
Following an overview of the general, step-by-step
problem-solving approach in Lesson One, three
lessons are devoted to problem recognition, a
necessary first step in any problem-solving skill
sequence. In the curriculum, problem recognition
includes recognizing anger in oneself and others
and understanding how anger and frustration can
create and/or exacerbate problems. Lessons Five and
Six detail step two strategies to prevent the
escalation of frustration and anger and to engage
students' cognition (i.e., "calm down and think").
The remaining lessons cover the steps of problem
definition, solution generation, strategy
selection, and outcome evaluation. A total of 20
lessons cover the 6 problem-solving steps. Each
lesson begins with a cumulative review and ends
with an opportunity to practice learned skills.
There is a need for
innovative methods to teach children to control
their own behavior especially when adults are not
around to monitor their activities. As teachers
continue to teach in diverse classrooms, behavior
management will always be a significant part of the
school day. Cognitive-behavioral interventions can
be used by teachers to provide students with
methods to successfully control their own behavior.
CBI may offer a viable method for assisting
students to become more independent, thus creating
better learning environments with higher levels of
safety.
|
|
Conduct
Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Initial
impact of the Fast Track prevention trial for
conduct problems: I. The high-risk sample. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 631-647.
Etscheidt, S.
(1991). Reducing aggressive behavior and increasing
self control. A cognitive-behavioral training
program for behaviorally disordered adolescents.
Behavioral Disorders, 16, 107-115.
Harris, K.
R., & Pressley, M. (1991). The nature of
cognitive strategy instruction: Interactive
strategy construction. Exceptional Children, 57,
392-404.
Kendall, P.
C. (1993). Cognitive-behavioral therapies with
youth: Guiding theory, current status, and emerging
developments. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 61, 235-247.
Lochman, J.
E., Nelson, W. M., & Sims, J. P. (1981). A
cognitive-behavioral program for use with
aggressive children. Journal of Clinical Child
Psychology, 10, 146-148.
Mahoney, M.
J. (1974). Cognitive and behavior modification.
Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Meichenbaum,
D. H. (1977). Cognitive-behavior modification: An
integrative approach. New York: Plenum Press.
Meichenbaum,
D. H., & Goodman, J. (1971). Training impulsive
children to talk to themselves: A means of
developing self-control. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 77, 115-126.
Robinson, T.
R., Smith, S. W., Miller, M. D., & Brownell, M.
T. (1999). Cognitive behavior modification of
hyperactivity/impulsivity and aggression: A
meta-analysis of school-based studies. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 91,195-203.
Smith, S. W.,
Siegel, E. M., O'Connor, A. M., & Thomas, S. B.
(1994). Effects of cognitive-behavioral training on
aggressive acts and anger behavior of three
elementary-aged students. Behavioral Disorders, 19,
126-135.
|
