Comparing the Minimum Celeration Line and the Beat Your Personal Best Goal-Setting Approaches during the Mathematical Practice of Students Diagnosed with Autism

Autor/inn/en	Vostanis, Athanasios; Padden, Ciara; McTiernan, Aoife; Langdon, Peter E.
Titel	Comparing the Minimum Celeration Line and the Beat Your Personal Best Goal-Setting Approaches during the Mathematical Practice of Students Diagnosed with Autism
Quelle	In: Journal of Behavioral Education, 32 (2023) 1, S.21-50 (30 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Vostanis, Athanasios) ORCID (Padden, Ciara) ORCID (Langdon, Peter E.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1053-0819
DOI	10.1007/s10864-021-09432-7
Schlagwörter	Autism Spectrum Disorders; Students with Disabilities; Males; Mathematics Instruction; Teaching Methods; Goal Orientation; Multiplication; Division; Drills (Practice); Graphs; Token Economy; Program Effectiveness; Special Education + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Autism; Autismus; Student; Students; Disability; Disabilities; Schüler; Schülerin; Studentin; Behinderung; Male; Männliches Geschlecht; Mathematics lessons; Mathematikunterricht; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Zielorientierung; Zielvorstellung; Multiplikation; Grafische Darstellung; Token-Programm; Special needs education; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen
Abstract	This study compared two goal-setting approaches found in the Precision Teaching literature, namely the minimum celeration line and the beat your personal best during the mathematical practice of three male students diagnosed with autism, aged 8-9. An adapted alternating treatments design with a control condition was embedded in a concurrent multiple baseline across participants design. Each approach was randomly allocated to either the multiplication/division (×÷) table of 18 or 19, while no approach was allocated to the ×÷14 table that acted as a control. Instruction utilized number families and consisted of (a) untimed practice, (b) frequency-building, (c) performance criteria, (d) graphing, and (e) a token economy. Upon practice completion, an assessment of maintenance, endurance, stability, and application (MESA) was conducted. Participants improved with both conditions and maintained their performance well, while improvements with the control condition were weak. The beat your personal best approach was highlighted as slightly more effective in terms of average performance and more efficient in terms of timings needed to achieve criterion. No differences were identified in terms of learning rate (i.e., celeration) or performance on the MESA. More research is warranted to identify which goal-setting procedure is more appropriate for students in special education. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01