1. Why Ecobehavioral Assessment Needed in AppliedBehavior Analysis?
Advanced Science and Technology Letters Vol.36 (Education 2013), pp.93-96
Why Ecobehavioral Assessment Needed in AppliedBehavior Analysis?
Kim Joungmin1, Lee Ok-In2
'PO Box , 268, Chungwon-daero, Chungju-si, Chungbuk, Republic of Korea
2College of Education, Jeonju University, PO Box , 45 Baengma-gil, Wansan-gu, Jeonju University, Republic of Korea
Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to describe why ecobehavioral assessment (EBA) is needed in Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). To answer the question, empirical studies were reviewed. In this study, a brief review of EBA research was conducted as a means for describing EBA methods, content, and findings. In addition, founded six experimental studies based on ecobehavioral assessments to collect ecological and behavioral variables for young children with disabilities were examined to support this empirical part.
Keywords: ecobehaivoral assessment, applied behavioral analysis
1 Introduction
Currently, more software system that guides observers using an ecobehavioral approach to collect classroom observation data such as Ecobehavioral Behavioral Assessment System Software (EBASS) (Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, Terry, & Delquadri, 1994). Computer technology has played a significant supporting role in the development of observational instruments such as EBASS (Greenwood et al., 1994) and have long since replaced the mechanical stopwatches and counters previously used to record the duration and frequencies of behavior (Greenwood, Carta & Dawson, 2000).
2 Role of EBA
Five primary roles have been found from the studies as following; (1) specialeducation vs. regular education, (2) inclusion and engagement, (3)
1 Kim Joungmin, First author (Konkuk University)
2 Lee Ok-In, Corresponding author (Jeonju University)
ISSN: ASTL Copyright 2013 SERSC

2. Advanced Science and Technology Letters Vol.36 (Education 2013)
transitioning, (4) English language learner, (5) progress towards school-wide ecobehavioral norm.
The six different EBA was using code system. All six EBA(ACCESS, ESCAPE, CAPER II, MS-CISSAR, CISSAR, ECSRIBE) include three categories; EBA, as compared to ABA, leads to better understanding of complex environmental conditions because it (a) measures both behavior and ecology (see Table 1); (b) shows the covariation between changes in ecology and change in behavior; (c) suggests why behaviors are different in different ecological settings; (d) describes the behaviors student will need relative to what is expected in future environments; and (f) it identifies students in which problem behaviors versus academic responding is promoted most. These EBA findings display some common findings across different
Table 1. Ecobehavioral assessments
Authors & types of E
Ecological Variables
Included
Primary Findings
from EBA
Role of EBA BA
Agar et al.
(1995) E*
ACCESS*
ESCAPecological
ESCAPE
(a) ecological (i.e.,
designated activity,
activity indicator,
materials), (b)
(i.e.,
location, grouping,
composition), (c)
(i.e., teacher definition, behavior and focus), and (d) student (i.e., target, competing, and verbal behaviors)
ACCESS
(a) teacher (i.e.,
approval, instruction,
No opportunities
for independent
work tasks in preschool settings.
Play and gross
motor activities were
more frequent in
preschool than kindergarten.
Teacher behavior
was similar in
pre to
kindergarten in group instruction
and transition
comparisonsteacher
To develop
and verify effective
instructional
practices
To make quantitative
of differences in independent
variables between
baseline and experimental phase
To track a single child for an extended period of
Brown et al. (1999)
CASPERI I*
dingsinging, etc.)
The focal student’s
immeiate contextual
(b)student (i.e.,
attending, preg,
circumstances: (a)
transitoning, etc.), c)
group arrangement, (b)
comp virs
peer group
(i.e., acting off
composion, (c)
task, self stimulatory), activity area or activity,
and (d) verbal
(d) initiator of the
tivity.
1. Children with
disabilities are a) more likely to be involved in one-to-
one with adult
arrangement, b) spend more time in
solitary activities e
1. To collect information about preschool environments and behavior of adult
and children
within those
environments
Johnsto
n et al. (2003a)
(a) ecological
ivit The foc
hav i.e., talk t
teacher, talk to peers
child’s peers an variable (i.e., physicl
undirected k)
placement of the
adults bavi (
child bhavior ) ch
target chld, size,
and interact with
1. The strategy as
adult, a c
successful in
limited teaching
learning
preschool aged
1. To assess the
impact of the intervention
procedure on a
94 Copyright 2013 SERSC

3. defined teacher) and (c) student variables (activity student
Advanced Science and Technology Letters
Vol.36 (Education 2013)
behavior of the
defined teacher) and (c)
student variables
(activity student
environment
al arrangement and the gradual fading of adult
2. To provide comprehensive ecobehavioral information
Johnston et al. (2003b)
ESCAPE
nga competin
(a) elogical
behviors
variables verba
(i.e.,
bhaviors)
designated activity,
activity initiator,
materials, location,
grouping, and
composition). (b)
teacher variables t
1. No errorless noticeabl le e
involvem changs sytematic or trends fadin
rom all prom
three participa
arding an
1. To assess the
early ldhd
impact of the classroom intervention setting
procedure on a
variety of classroom ecological variables
Odom et al.
(1990)
e., t definition
(a) ecological
variables, (b) teacher
behviors an focus
(c) stud vable
variables, and (c)
studen variables compe
(i.e., ta behavior
(sae
d verbal behaviors) as Johnston, 2003a) To observe specific
social interaction add nt
Two times of
proportion of play
Suested
occurred in the ECE
arranging
nment to cr than ECSE
communic
2. No difference
found from
ative
both settings
opponities,
b) mo
related to
2 provid
To observe
comprehensive the level of the
ecobehavi children’s
informatio development
rega and
social interaction
ly hihood
clas delays.
To develop
Schwartz et al. (1996)
w ories und
variables (i.e.,
students verb
bhavior “k to pee
designated activity, (TP)
activity initiator, materials,
location, grouping,
and composition). (b)
teacher variables (i.e.,
teacher definition,
behaviors, and focus)
(c) student variables
(i.e., target behaviors,
tunities
1. Majority of
implemen
a least-
for int language
instruction was
throgh ck
most rompt
tim, ne oor
direct instruction
hiearchy, d
of children with
actvites, nd
using traston.
disabilities than
time dey,
3. Ofn EC
pairs or larger
and
dering
owed a groups.
2. With mixed
cm baed on
natura
abilites, chilren
child lead
conses follow
4. with severe .
disabilities has
actic ba
proiate
To collect
interventio for
dividual, detailed
children with descriptive daa on disabilites. every child in
the sample
Additionally,
the Language Intervention Features Checklist (LIFC) adopted to collect
descriptive
studies, researchers, observation sampling designs, and EBA instruments
behaiors and verbl oppounities assroom (ie recording sometimes different ecological o behavioral content. This appears to
behaviors) prctice socal ocurrence or suggest that the approach used here in early hildhoodcommunication applicatios, nonoccurrncemodeled on other applications in K-12 special educations (e.g., Ysselyke & Algozzine, 2006;
skills including o languae
Greenwood et al., 1994; Shogren, Wehmeyer,Palmer, Soukup, Lttle, Garner, &
lack of eer tining
Lawrence, 2008), is systematic and conceptually sound. Overall. EBA was useful
model and engge stategie n
because (a) it makes available to describe the observed structure of environments
n age-approprite durng
up iii 5i semen)
across a variety of different settings (e.g., classroom, and home) and different
Dfied tht
individuals by quantifying other factors and events, (b) it makes available to build the
teacher’ best
effective intervention through experimental procedure, and (c) it makes
prices for
available to response the importance of mltiple causation and multiple effects on
student
a variety of occasions.
Copyright 2013 SERSC 95

4. Advanced Science and Technology Letters Vol.36 (Education 2013)
References
Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., Kamps, D., Terry, B., & Delquadri, J. Development and validation of standard classroom observation systems for school practitioners: Ecobehavioral Assessment Systems Software. Exceptional Children, 61 (1994)
Greenwood, C.R., Carta, J.J., & Dawson, H. Ecobehavioral assessment systems software. In T. Thompson, D. Felce, & F. J. Symons (Eds.), Behavioral observation: Technology and applications in developmental disabilities (pp. 61—70). Baltimore: Brookes (2000)
Ysseldyke, J. & Algozzine, B. A practical approach to special education: Teaching students who are gifted and talented. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press (2006)
Shogren, K.A., Wehmeyer, M.L., Palmer, S.B., Soukup, J.H., Little, T., Garner, N. Lawrence, M. Understanding the construct of self-determination: Examining the relationship between The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale and the American Institute for Research Self-Determination Scale. Assessment for Effective Instruction, 33, (2008)
Agar, C. L., & Shapiro, E. Template matching as a strategy for assessment of and intervention for preschool children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education,15(2), (1995)
Brown, W. H., Odom, S. L., Li, S., & Zercher, C. (1999). Ecobehavioral assessment in early childhood programs: A portrait of preschool inclusion. The Journal of Special Education, 33(3),
*Johnston, S., Nelson, C., Evans, J., & Palazolo, K. The use of visual supports in teaching young children with autism spectrum disorder to initiate interactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19(2), (2003a).
*Johnston, S. S., Mcdonnell, A. P., & Nelson, C. Implementing augmentative and alternative communication intervention in inclusive preschool settings. Journal of Early Intervention, 25(4), (2003b)
Odom, S. L., Peterson, C., McConnell, S., & Ostrosky, M. Ecobehavioral analysis of early education/specialized classroom settings and peer social interaction. Education and Treatment of Children, 13, (1990)
Schwartz, I. S., Carta, J. J., & Grant, S. Examining the use of recommended intervention practices in early childhood special education. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 16, (1996)
96 Copyright 2013 SERSC