| OCR Text |
Show 11 Several suggestions have been made to deal with individual problems in group systems. The first suggestion is that the group reinforcement contingency could be combined with other behavior management procedures (Cooper et al., 1987). Another suggestion is that individual contingencies be established in conjunction with the group contingency for the problem students (Cooper et al., 1987). Jenson and Reavis (1996) also provide some suggestions for troubleshooting problems within group contingencies. The first step they suggest is to evaluate the rewards to determine if they are effective for the problem student and, if not, possibly establishing an individual reward. Another suggestion is to evaluate the criterion. If it is too difficult for some students, the criterion can be reset at a lower level for the entire group, or it can be kept the same for the group and set lower for the less capable students. It is important in this scenario to slowly raise the criterion for the lower ability students as they acquire the required skills. Some children may not be motivated by the reinforcement contingency and will still exhibit problem behaviors. These behaviors could be motivated by a variety of consequences (obtaining tangible items, avoiding or escaping aversive situations, gaining teacher or peer attention, sensory stimulation), which may not be a part ofthe group system (Carr et al., 1994). In recent years an approach, termed functional assessment, has been developed that could be of use in group contexts. Functional assessment is a process that helps determine the motivating factors of an individual's challenging behavior. In this process the investigator gathers information on the problem behaviors, the setting events and antecedents to the problem behaviors, and consequences that may be maintaining the behavior (O'Neill et al., 1997). According to Homer et a1. (1990), |
