1

Group Training of Applied Behavior Analysis Knowledge Competencies to School-Based
Paraprofessionals for Students in Substantially Separated Classrooms
_______________________

A Dissertation
Presented to
The College of Graduate and Professional Studies
Department of Special Education
Slippery Rock University
Slippery Rock, Pennsylvania
______________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctorate of Special Education
_______________________
by
Nicole Grube-Benson
July, 2024
© Nicole Grube-Benson, 2024

2
Keywords: paraprofessional, training, supervision, applied behavior analysis

3
Committee Members
Committee Chair: Dr. Toni Mild
Department Chair of Special Education Department
Slippery Rock University
Committee Member: Dr. Ashlea Rineer-Hershey
Doctorate Program Coordinator of Special Education Department
Slippery Rock University
Committee Member: Dr. Tyler Ferguson
Professor of School Psychology
Northeastern University

4
Abstract
This study explores the efficacy of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)-based training for
paraprofessionals supporting students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in specialized
educational settings. The research, conducted in an urban northeastern public school district,
assessed historical data. Using a pretest/posttest quasi-experimental design, thirty-five first-year
paraprofessionals underwent structured training across three modules. Results demonstrated
significant knowledge gains: Module One saw a 14% increase, Module Two a 16% increase, and
Module Three an 8% increase. These findings underscore the importance of targeted professional
development in enhancing paraprofessionals' effectiveness in ABA-based classrooms for
students with ASD.
Keywords: paraprofessional, applied behavior analysis, autism, evidence based practice

5
Acknowledgments
I would like to give a big thank you to all my family and friends for supporting me,
listening to my ideas, and trying new interventions out as I went through school. Thank you to
my professors for their insight into special education. A special thank you to my chair and
dissertation committee for supporting me through the process. To my family, thank you for your
patience and support while you delivered meals to me at the computer. Thanks, Mom, for being
here. To Todd, what can I say that I have not already expressed? Thankfully, we both said yes to
going bowling. Who would have ever thought, at 17-years-old, we would be where we are now?
Look at all the accomplishments and wonderful moments we have had over the years. And we
both know there have been many! It is wild to think back to 1989. Did you know, “Three old
ladies….” Would lead to, “Do you own a vacuum?” Ending into years of the moving trucks
growing in size. I believe the first move PA to MO move we only had a pull along for Zachary’s
toys, clothes, and a mattress. Soo many wonderful moments with the kids. Remember our first
pets? How the frogs would play hide and seek with Zachary. Then came Jasmine, Brianna, Miles,
and Moe! Lunches in the car for nap times. Countless hours of watching the same DVD movies
on the portable television. Leading into the came the minivan. Yup, we were top notch parenting
in the minivan with hid away seats and the extended back version! We definitely need to update
our book The Places You will Go! Fabulous birthday parties, kids’ sports, kids’ music concerts
(OMG middle school), amazing trips, confirmations, kids’ graduations, your doctorate, and
countless trips to the emergency room for home construction projects. Time to start another
adventure!

6
Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 9
Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................................... 11
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................................... 11
Interest in the Study ................................................................................................................ 12
Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................ 13
Delimitations ........................................................................................................................... 15
Key Terms ............................................................................................................................... 15
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) .................................................................................. .15
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) ................................................................................... 16
Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) ..................................................................................... 16
Challenging Behavior ....................................................................................................... 16
Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) ........................................................................................ 17
Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)........................................................................... 17
Individualized Educational Plan (IEP).............................................................................. 17
Chapter 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 20
Review of Literature .............................................................................................................. 20
Roles and Responsibilities of Paraprofessionals............................................................... 21
Autism Spectrum Disorder..................................................................................................... 23
Challenging Behaviors Associated with ASD................................................................... 23

7
Evidence-Based Practices for ASD ................................................................................... 25
Applied Behavior Analysis ..................................................................................................... 30
Functional Behavior Assessment ............................................................................................ 31
Paraprofessional Training ....................................................................................................... 31
Barriers to Paraprofessional Training ............................................................................... 35
Need for the Training…………………………………………………………………….38
Assessment of Knowledge ................................................................................................ 39
Research Question .................................................................................................................. 40
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 41
Chapter 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 42
Method .......................................................................................................................................... 42
Research Design...................................................................................................................... 43
Site Permission........................................................................................................................ 44
Community Information …………………………………………………………………… 44
District ………………………………………………………………………………….……45
Specific Program Information ...…………………………………………………...………...46
Participants and Setting ……………………………………………………………………...49
Training Curriculum and Materials......................................................................................... 50
Data Collection Procedures..................................................................................................... 53
Training Procedure.................................................................................................................. 54
Pre-Training ...................................................................................................................... 55
Training ............................................................................................................................. 55
Post-Training ..................................................................................................................... 56

8
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 56
Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 57
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 58
Chapter 4…………………………………………………………………………………………60
Results ........................................................................................................................................... 61
Findings................................................................................................................................... 61
Chapter 5………………………………………………………………………………...……….75
Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 75
Implications............................................................................................................................. 81
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 84
Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 85
References ..................................................................................................................................... 88
Appendix A: Site Permission .......................................................................................................110
Appendix B: Pretest One ............................................................................................................111
Appendix C: Posttest One ……………………………………………………………………. 113
Appendix D: Pretest Two ……………………………………………………………………...115
Appendix E: Posttest Two ………………………………………………………………….….117
Appendix F: Pretest Three …………………………………………………………………….119
Appendix G: Posttest Three………………………….……….….………………….………....121

9
Dissertation: Group Training of Applied Behavior Analysis Knowledge Competencies to SchoolBased Paraprofessionals for Students in Sub-Separated Classrooms
Chapter 1
Introduction
Before the 1970s, over 4.5 million US children with disabilities were denied public
education (Wright & Wright, 2021). These children remained at home or institutionalized due to
medical, developmental, or mental-health challenges, such as emotional disturbance, intellectual
disability, or visual or auditory impairment. At the time, because each state could develop unique
laws for educating students with disabilities (USDOE, 1973), several states denied such students
from receiving education or participating in activities in schools (Mills v. Board of Education,
1972; P.A.R.C. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1972: USDOE, 2010; Wright et al., 2021).
As such, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 dictated the treatment and educational rights of students
with disabilities in public schools (Pub. L. 93–112, Rehab. Act), including students with severe
needs, highlighting the use of rehabilitative services (USDOE, 1973). In addition, this legislation
focused on the expansion of research and training opportunities related to individuals with
disabilities (USDOE, 1973). Without this legislation, many individuals with disabilities could not
access the support and opportunities needed to acquire skills to be independent (USDOE, 1973).
The Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975 quickly followed the Rehabilitation
Act, protecting children who were once denied or had unequal access to education (US
Department of Special Education, 2010), and ensuring that free and appropriate education was
provided to all students, regardless of their disabilities (US Department of Special Education,
2010).

10
In response to the increased school enrollment from these acts, federal officials developed
a new school role to aid teachers and ensure the educational needs of students with disabilities
were met (Watkins, 2015; Giangreco et al., 2001). This role was the paraprofessional. Because
paraprofessionals did not need a professional certification or a college degree to perform their
role, school districts could pay less for their services (Giangreco et al., 2001) and use them based
on the needs of the school. Clerical tasks such as attendance, making class materials, bathroom
breaks, and lunchroom duties became part of the paraprofessional responsibilities.
In January 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was updated to increase
accountability in schools relative to student academic outcomes. Additionally, this act stated that
paraprofessionals who provide instructional support must be supervised by teachers. This act was
the first to mention supervision of paraprofessionals. In 2004, NCLB was further updated with
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), in which paraprofessionals were
federally defined as “assistants who are appropriately trained and supervised…to assist in the
provision of special education” (IDEA Subchapter II, Section 1412 (a)(14)(B)). While NCLB
acknowledged the need for paraprofessional development and supervision, clear guidelines were
not developed at a federal or state level, leaving school districts on their own to determine how
and when to provide paraprofessional supervision and professional development times.
At the same time, applied behavior analysis (ABA) was introduced in special education
classrooms as a method of intervention for students diagnosed with autism. ABA is the scientific
analysis of behavior and the application of core behavioral principles—reinforcement,
punishment, extinction, and generalization—designed to develop meaningful and socially
significant behaviors among students (Bear et al., 1967). In schools that use this approach,
paraprofessionals use ABA techniques across school settings for academic instruction, social

11
interactions, and communication skills, as well as to increase meaningful behaviors and provide
replacement behaviors to decrease challenging behaviors such as aggression to others or self.
Statement of the Problem
Despite the role of paraprofessionals holding immense value in special education,
paraprofessional development remains limited (Tompkins et al., 2012), and district professional
learning opportunities are often exclusive to teachers. As a result, teachers are responsible for
delivering on-the-job training to paraprofessionals in their classrooms. School districts consider
this on-the-job training an adequate model for paraprofessionals to learn the needed skills, those
with the greatest level of student involvement remain to have the least amount of professional
development (Maggin, Fallon, Sanetti, & Ruberto, 2012). In fact, many paraprofessionals do not
have a background in special education or receive professional education opportunities after the
initial start-of-school-year training (Tompkins et al., 2012; Giangreco et al., 2010).
Paraprofessionals are on the front lines of student support in special education (Maggin,
Fallon, Sanetti, & Ruberto, 2012). They are considered a valued part of special education
classrooms. However, it is unclear whether they receive the necessary professional development
to fulfill their jobs. Paraprofessionals may struggle to effectively support students with special
needs if they do not adhere to a stringent and ongoing training regimen (Causton-Theoris &
Malmgren).
Organization of the Study
This thesis details the role of paraprofessionals in special-education classrooms
implementing ABA. Supervision and professional learning opportunities are reviewed, followed
by an examination of the skills that paraprofessionals need to work in such classrooms. Essential
key terms are then defined. Subsequently, a review of the literature on paraprofessionals is

12
presented, focusing on their role in special education and the training available to them.
Following this review, the research method is described, after which the results are presented.
Finally, the limitations of the study are addressed, and recommendations for future research are
provided.
Interest in the Study
Far too frequently, classrooms are challenged with the task how to address the
social/emotional and academic needs of an increasingly diverse student body. It is imperative for
educators to recognize the inherent connection between student learning and behavior, with
behavior emerging as one of the primary challenges faced within schools. Various strategies,
such as the use of ABA, do exist for educators whether specializing in special or general
education.
Over the 2019-2020 academic year, the substantially separated classrooms focused on
within this study experienced an increase of students enrolled from 8 to 11. To meet the needs of
the students, additional paraprofessionals were hired. Alongside the increase in students and
staff, there was a rise in student behavior concerns, the utilization of physical restraints, and staff
injury, all despite teachers and paraprofessionals receiving 12 hours of behavior management
training. Due to the increase in behaviors the specialized ABA-based program identified there
was a need for change for paraprofessional training.
Following the COVID-19 pandemic and the return to in-person classroom learning, April
2021, sporadic professional development opportunities were provided to paraprofessionals
employed within the district ABA-based elementry classrooms. Topics focus on understanding
ABA, Autism, and behavior management. While this training approach was helpful,
paraprofessionals continued to request additional training workshops to provide theory and

13

practice opportunities. Through a meeting between the special-education director, assistant
special-education director, and behavior specialist the special-education department agreed to
provide group ABA training workshops for paraprofessionals at the start of each school year.
Meanwhile at the national level, the Education Advisory Board (EAB) conducted a 2022
survey focused on current concerns within the classroom. Of the 1,109 respondents (teachers,
therapists, district administrators) 84% agreed that students' behavioral skills lag behind those of
the same age from two years ago. Additionally, 77% of respondents acknowledged that student
behavior ranks among their primary concerns this year, representing an increase from 61%
before the onset of the pandemic. The survey data further indicates a notable escalation in
reported instances of bullying, violence, and opposition in students' relationships with both peers
and adults since 2018.Correspondingly, 71% of teachers shared the same sentiment, estimating
an average loss of 144 minutes of instructional time per week (equivalent to 14.5 school days per
year) attributed to behavioral disruptions in the classroom.
Significance of the Study
Educating children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other disabilities is a
responsibility of public schools. Effective 1975, as part of the Education of All Handicapped
Children Act (now known as IDEA) public schools remain the primary setting for students with
ASD to receive specialized interventions until adulthood (Murdick, Gartin, & Crabtree, 2002).
To provide such interventions, public schools must adopt ABA-based programs for ASD students
at a rate that matches that of children enrolling every year. Professional development is the key
to ensuring that paraprofessionals have the required knowledge and skills to promote student
success in the classroom. Paraprofessionals must be able to make informed decisions based on
research to prompt the advancement of academic and social-emotional student skills.

14
The current benchmarks set by Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA) and federal
mandates, such as IDEA, also create urgency for the adoption of ABA-based treatment
interventions. Under the Least Restrictive Environment clause of IDEA, federal law requires that
students with disabilities be educated with their nondisabled peers to the greatest appropriate
extent. Students with ASD often display challenging behaviors that hamper the effective
implementation of this clause; however ABA-based interventions are effective at reducing such
behaviors to a level at which the students can be educated alongside their nondisabled peers, in
either general classrooms or a combination of self-contained and general classrooms (Dawson,
Jones, et al., 2012; Eapen, Rudi, & Walter, 2013; Grindel, Hastings, Saville et al., 2012; SackMin, 2008).
Furthermore, the financial toll on taxpayers when public schools fail to adopt ABA-based
interventions for students with ASD cannot be ignored. Under IDEA, children with autism are
guaranteed a free and appropriate public education that allows them to learn as much as possible.
However, when public schools can no longer support students due to the severity of behaviors or
lack of district resources, districts will seek alternative placement for the student. Additionally,
when public schools do not use interventions with proven effectiveness, parents may seek legal
advice resulting in a recommendation for costly private-school alternatives (Yell & Drasgow,
2000). The estimated cost of educating a student with autism in a private school can range from
$22,500 to $75,000 per year, with an additional cost of transportation. This financial strain
necessitates that public schools implement their own programs that are less expensive.
All these factors—the rising number of children with ASD enrolling in public schools,
the high costs of educating such children in private schools and on taxpayers (Chasson, Harris, &
Neely, 2007; Jacobson, Mulick, & Green, 1998), and the need for schools to adopt least-

15
restrictive interventions for students with disabilities (IDEA, 2004)—generate an urgency in
professional development opportunities for paraprofessionals is imperative. IDEA (2004) and
ESSA (2015) require all special-education professionals, including paraprofessionals, receive
continued training that includes content on evidence-based practice (EBP). Based on the 2009–
2015 May Institute EBP list, ABA is a vital method of interventions to support students with
ASD (Cook & Odom, 2013). Douglas et al. (2012) asked paraprofessionals about districtprovided training, and the paraprofessionals reported that the provided training was insufficient
to implement EBP. Chopra et al., (2011) concluded that the most common concern for
paraprofessionals was not only the lack of professional development provided by school districts
but also that supervising teachers were either unwilling or unable to provide guidance and
training. A central part of EBP is the creation of paraprofessional learning opportunities to ensure
consistency and fidelity to ABA interventions.
Delimitations
As this research was conducted for a doctoral dissertation, this was a single year study.
To address this limitation, historical data regarding paraprofessional development training
opportunities for paraprofessionals employed in substantially separate ABA classrooms for the
2022–2023 academic year was selected to examine. This researcher only had access to the 20222023 academic year data at the time of the study.
Key Terms
Applied Behavior Analysis
Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is the scientific analysis of behavior and the application
of the core behavioral principles designed to develop meaningful and socially significant
behaviors—namely, reinforcement, punishment, and extinction (Bear et al., 1968).

16
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Under IDEA, autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is defined as “a developmental disability
significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, usually
evident before age three, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. Other
characteristics often associated with ASD are engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped
movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual
responses to sensory experiences” (section 300.8 (c)(1)). IDEA points out that, should a student’s
emotional disturbance negatively affect the student’s educational performance, the term autism
does not apply.
Behavior Intervention Plan
Using one of the dimensions of ABA, behavior intervention plans (BIPs) are guided by
FBA outcomes. BIPs are step-by-step procedures for addressing behavior with a functionally
selected intervention (Cooper et al., 2017). Interventions are specifically outlined on BIPs in a
manner specific to the identified individual, which allows for consistently implementing the
intervention. BIPs describe targeted behavior for change, antecedent strategies, response or
consequence strategies, replacement behavior, reinforcement strategies, and systems for tracking
behavior change (Glasberg, 2006).
Challenging Behavior
These behaviors were defined as socially unacceptable behaviors that had a high intensity
topography, long duration, or high frequency and that harm students’ safety and daily living,
resulting in limited educational opportunities, vocational exposure, and community-based
outings (Emerson, 1995; Matson et al., 2010).

17
Evidence-Based Practice
In 2009 and then updated in 2015, the National Autism Center, through the May Institute,
conducted the National Standards Project (May Institute, 2015) to identify a comprehensive list
of effective research-based interventions to target traits of ASD (May Institute, 2015). EBP
within ABA is a decision-making process which combines empirical evidence, complex
decision-making along with the repertoire of a trained behavior analyst, when selecting an
intervention which is social valid and when applied will provide a meaningful change in
behavior for the individual.
Functional Behavior Assessment
In accordance with Cooper, Heron, and Heward (2007), a functional behavioral
assessment (FBA) is a systematic method of gathering information about a targeted behavior to
identify the relationship of the targeted behavior to environmental and motivational factors, and
the function or purpose of the behavior. The findings from FBAs steer the selection of functional
interventions to decrease the targeted behavior while increasing a socially appropriate
replacement behavior (Cooper et al., 2007).
Individualized Educational Plan
Individualized educational plans (IEPs) are legal documents reporting students’ current
academic, social, or behavioral performance based on assessment and observation by trained
educators and therapists. These documents outline the delivery rate of special education,
therapists, and services for those students who qualify for special education. IEPs contain
students’ educational placements, goals, necessary accommodations, modifications, and
frequency of service to achieve the advancement of skills relative to a school-based setting (US
Department of Education, 2010).

18
Summary
IDEA (2004) and ESSA (2015) require all special education professionals, including
paraprofessionals, receive continued professional education related to the content and
responsibilities they provide within the classroom. Based on the 2009, 2015, May Institute EBP
list, ABA is a vital methodology of interventions to support students diagnosed with ASD (Cook
& Odom, 2013). Douglas et al., (2012) asked paraprofessionals questions about district provided
professional development, and paraprofessionals reported the provided training was not enough
to implement EBP and, at times, not related to support they provide within the classroom. In
support, Chopra et al., (2011) conclude that the most common concern for paraprofessionals was
not only the lack of professional learning opportunities provided by school districts but also that
supervising teachers were either unwilling or unable to provide guidance and trainings. A central
part of providing EBP within the classroom is providing professional development times for
those implementing EBP to ensure consistency and fidelity to ABA interventions, which can only
occur with training and supervision by a trained teacher or applied behavior analysist.
Chapter two will provide a review of literature on paraprofessional role, within special
education classrooms implementing ABA. Supervision and professional development
opportunities will be reviewed followed by an examination of skills paraprofessionals need to
possess to work within a special education classroom utilizing ABA. Essential key terms are
defined in the definition section allowing the reader a better understanding of how the terms is
interpreted for the purpose of the study. Subsequently, a review of current literature related to
paraprofessionals will be conducted, focusing on their roles in special education and available
professional development training opportunities.

19
Following the literature review, chapter three the methodology of the research
emphasizes its quantitative nature. Group knowledge of ABA will be examined using a pre-test –
post-test approach . The study will review data collection and analysis, revealing new
information from the study. In conclusion, the study will address its limitations and offer
recommendations for future research. After the review of literature, the quantitative nature of the
methodology of the research will be explored. The reader will then explore the method of data
collection and analysis and what added information has been learned from the data analysis.
Finally, limitations and recommendations for future research and teaching sessions will be
examined and discussed.

20
Chapter 2
Review of Literature
Today, paraprofessionals are providing a tremendous amount of support by directly
teaching academics, social skills, and behavior strategies to students with ASD. This literature
review provides an overview of how paraprofessionals support special education classrooms by
examining their roles, the needs of students with ASD, challenging behaviors related to ASD, the
use of ABA, and the use of EBP by professionals to directly support the needs of students with
ASD.
Professional development is the key to ensuring that paraprofessionals have the required
knowledge and skills to promote student success in the classroom. This study aims to understand
the effectiveness of providing group training programs designed to teach paraprofessionals the
competencies of ABA to support the behavior and skill acquisition of students in substantially
separate classrooms. Professional development referred to as training is an essential tool for
paraprofessionals, providing them with research-based best practices to engage students in
learning (Gamrat et al., 2014). By providing paraprofessionals with the background and
knowledge of ABA, they will be able to apply their knowledge of researched-based interventions
within ABA-based classrooms to increase student skills while decreasing challenging behaviors.
Appropriate literature titles for this study were accessed using the Slippery Rock digital
library, EBSCO Mega FILE, ERIC, and Education Journal, for articles published between 1950
and 2023. Chosen articles were either empirical studies, peer-reviewed publications, or journals
focused on special-education laws, special-education paraprofessionals, paraprofessional
professional development needs, autism, and ABA.

21
Roles and Responsibilities of Paraprofessionals
Paraprofessionals have become especially important in special-education programs. The
development and use of paraprofessionals in the classroom is a strategy most frequently used to
support students with ASD (Etscheidt, 2005: Koegel et al., 2009: Petterson, 2006). However,
there is an “overall lack of understanding or consensus concerning the nature of the
paraprofessional’s role” (Forster and Holbrook, 2005, p. 156), which causes confusion regarding
paraprofessional duties (Washburn-Moses et al., 2013).
Historically, along with clerical tasks, paraprofessionals primarily focused on providing
support for students with disabilities on life-skills tasks, such as toileting, dressing, and eating
(Pickett & Gerlach, 2003). In addition, paraprofessionals were tasked with making classroom
materials, photocopying, completing attendance, and supervising the students during
unstructured times, such as lunch and recess (Doyle, 2002). Today, the paraprofessional role has
expanded to focus more on academic and behavior interventions in addition to “caretaker”
responsibilities (French, 2001; Giangreco & Broer 2005; Webster & Blatchford, 2015; Werts et
al., 2001, French & Pickett, 1997; Hughes & Valle-Riestra, 2008; Quilty, 2007: Shyman, 2010).
These expanded responsibilities include reinforcing concepts taught by teachers, offering one-onone support, performing small-group instruction, facilitating social communication groups with
technology, carrying out functional assessment tasks, adapting instructional materials, job
coaching, collecting data, facilitating social activities between peers, executing behavior plans,
teaching personal care skills and daily life skills, overseeing vocational training, and providing
community-based instruction (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; Giangreco & Broer, 2005; Giles, 2010;
Hall et al., 2010; Kraemer et al., 2008; Likins, 2003; Rogan & Held, 1999; Stahl & Lorenz,
1995; Suter & Giangreco, 2009). Increasingly, paraprofessionals are also tasked with providing

22
crisis management interventions when students display dangerous behaviors (Preston, 2015).
Carlson et al. (2008) point out that paraprofessionals supply a vast amount of instruction for
students with ASD, and for this reason, they should be provided with applicable training to fulfill
their responsibilities.
Due to the lack of initial training, paraprofessionals often use a combination of learning
approaches—such as trial and error, knowledge from their past experiences, and observing other
paraprofessionals—to learn their job responsibilities and develop strategies (Causton-Theoharris
& Malmegren, 2005; Downing et al., 2000; Rodriquez, 2010). Paraprofessionals who
participated in a study by Jones et al. (2012) commented that they often looked to teachers for
training, which was especially challenging when the teachers also lacked ABA understanding
and training. A study by Patterson (2006) revealed that 90% of paraprofessionals regard
managing student behavior as crucial for academic success. However, to manage behavior,
paraprofessional training must incorporate knowledge on addressing behavior effectively and
using behavior-management strategies (Patterson, 2006).
Studies have demonstrated that by providing professional development, paraprofessionals
improve their knowledge and skills (Friend & Cook, 2010; Giangreco & Broer, 2007), especially
for paraprofessionals who support students with ASD (Scheuermann et al., 2013). However,
Brock and Carter (2013) reiterated that many school districts fail to provide paraprofessionals
with overall training, which includes topics related to their job and role in classrooms (CaustonTheoharris & Malmegren, 2005; Downing et al., 2000; Passaro et al., 1994; Friend & Cook,
2010; Katsiyannie et al., 2000; Scheuermann et al., 2013).

23
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a developmental disability with various causes,
including genetic factors. It affects how individuals behave, communicate, interact, and learn.
ASD manifests early in life and can persist throughout one's lifespan, though symptoms may
improve over time (Hyman et al., 2020). People with ASD may face challenges in developing
and maintaining friendships, communicating, and understanding expected behaviors in various
settings, especially as they transition into adolescence and young adulthood. Individuals with
ASD commonly experience difficulties in social communication and interaction, as well as
exhibit restricted or repetitive behaviors and interests. Additionally, they may demonstrate
unique learning styles, movements, or attention patterns. These characteristics contribute to the
challenges individuals with ASD may face in various aspects of life (National Research Council,
2001).
Challenging Behaviors Associated with ASD
A wide range of characteristics can be displayed by students with ASD (Bingham et al.,
2007; Buschbacher & Fox, 2003; Fox & Smith, 2007; Horner et al., 2002; Kraemer et al., 2008;
Summers et al., 2004), especially when challenging behaviors are frequent (Kahal, 2008; Koegel
& Covert, 1972). Matson et al. (2010), reported challenging behaviors were documented among
94% of students with ASD. Further, Chebli et al. (2016) reported that in addition to challenging
behaviors stereotypical behaviors such as hand flapping, spinning, and repeated behaviors
occurred in 88% of children with ASD. Challenging behaviors in children with ASD can serve
different purposes referred to as function, such as access/obtaining or escape/avoid. The
challenging behaviors is a method of communication to express needs, express discomfort, or
cope with sensory issues Since 2009, the majority of behavior interventions utilized within

24
public schools are primarily function-based interventions (National Center for Autism, 2009;
Walker & Snell, 2017).
When providing behavioral support based on the challenging behavior’s purpose,
interventions are designed to address and modify behaviors by targeting the underlying purposes
the behavior provided to the student. It is important to understand why the student is displaying
challenging behavior, rather than simply trying to eliminate the behavior. Function-based
interventions focus is on teaching or reinforcing alternative behaviors that serve the same
function in a more acceptable way. Examples of function-based interventions can be seen in
Table 1. These examples represent only a few interventions. Specific interventions will be
developed after the completion of a functional behavior analysis (FBA) which is later described
in a below section.
Table 1
Function-Based Interventions
Why or Purpose of the Behavior
The student may engage in
challenging behavior to gain
attention of a peer or an adult.

Function-Based Intervention Examples
•
•
•

The student may engage in
challenging behavior to gain
access to preferred items,
locations, activities,

•
•
•
•
•

Have an adult frequently do check-ins with the
student.
Have an adult directly assist the student with
schoolwork.
Provide praise to all desired school behaviors
(raising hand, completing tasks, showing a calm
body).
Teach a communication skill to ask for help.
Schedule a moderately preferred activity between
highly preferred and highly non-preferred
activities.
Locate highly preferred items within the student’s
reach.
Make preferred activities more frequently
accessible.
Teach the student communication skills to make
requests.

25
The student may engage in
challenging behavior to escape or
avoid the task or environment.

•
•
•
•

Modify the task to the student’s cognitive ability.
Provide choices.
Increase the ability to gain access to preferred
items/activities.
Teach the student a communication skill of selfadvocating or how to terminate a task.

While most classrooms have conventional behavior management systems to address
unwanted behaviors, these systems often do not result in sustainable and meaningful behavior
improvements, because they do not provide individual strategies to meet the needs of each
student (Bambara & Kern, 2005; Maag, 2004; Sugai & Horner, 2006; Walker & Snell, 2017).
Sugai and Horner (2006) showed that 15% of all students need a moderate level of behavioral
interventions, while 5% require a higher level or functional behavioral approach, such as a
personalized behavior intervention plan (BIP).
In a 2007 study of children with ASD by Dominick et al., 32.7% of the participants
displayed aggressive behaviors (kicking, hitting, biting, and pinching), and 33% displayed selfinjurious behaviors (head banging, biting, or hitting themselves). In addition, 70.9% of the
participants had severe temper tantrums. Further research supports the idea that there is a link
between students exhibiting elevated levels of challenging behaviors (e.g., aggression towards
others or property, avoidance, self-injurious actions, repetitive behaviors, and externalizing
behaviors), and students diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). (Farmer & Aman,
2011, Matson et al., 2009; Minshawi et al., 2014: Tureck et al., 2014).
Evidence-Based Practices for Supporting Students with a Diagnosis of ASD
Evidence-Based Practice is a model used for decision-making for applied behavior
analysis incorporating student values and context in combination with selecting interventions
which are socially valid as well as being meaningful to the student (Slocum et. al, 2014). To

26
develop these guidelines for determining the effectiveness of interventions for ASD, the National
Autism Center conducted a study in 2005, releasing the first phase of EBP in 2009 (National
Center for Autism, 2009). The National Standards Project, in connection with The May Institute,
identified 27 evidence-based supports and interventions (Table 2) to help schools, families,
practitioners, and private organizations obtain the necessary tools and resources when selecting a
functional and effective intervention to support individuals with ASD.
EBP articles were first reviewed and then quantified based on the level of support
provided through interventions to address the characteristics of ASD among children and adults.
A total of 775 studies were identified, showing the effectiveness of interventions for children
with ASD. Trained reviewers read and coded the identified articles, resulting in all articles being
supplied with a scientific merit rating scale score that reflected the confidence the experts could
place on the specific article findings. The score was a conceptual model for evaluating articles
and was created by a team of experts in a study panel (National Autism Center, 2009). The
project findings produced a four-tier classification method that named autism treatment
interventions as set up, emerging, unestablished, or ineffective or harmful (National Autism
Center, 2009).
To date, this research project is the most comprehensive guide to interventions for ASD.
The project was last updated in 2015 (National Autism Center, 2015). Most established
interventions are based on analytic behavior principles (Autism Society of America, 2009, 2015;
CDC, 2007). Treatments are considered established when there is sufficient evidence to suggest
that the treatments produce favorable outcomes for individuals on the autism spectrum (Cook &
Cook, 2011). However, although emerging treatments produce favorable outcomes in some

27
cases, a thorough conclusion has not been reached; indeed, few treatments for individuals with
ASD are considered established.
Based on the clinical findings of this research project, ABA-based interventions are a
focal point in theory and interventions to address maladaptive behavior and skill acquisition for
children with ASD. ABA-based interventions use behavior-based techniques, reinforcement,
individualized goals, and the development of specific learning strategies while instituting a
rewarding environment (CDC, 2007; Conroy et al., 2015: Cooper et al., 2007; National Alliance
for Autism Research, 2005; National Autism Center, 2009). Additionally, educational
programming can diminish the challenges associated with ASD, such as problem behaviors,
weakness in social interactions, and reduced communication skills (CDC, 2007; National Autism
Center, 2009; National Research Council, 2001).
Table 2
Evidence Based Practices
Antecedent-Based
Interventions (ABI)
Cognitive Behavioral
Intervention (CBI)
Differential
Reinforcement of
Alternative,
Incompatible, or Other
Behavior (DRA/I/O)
Discrete Trial
Training (DTT)

Exercise (ECE)

ABI is the arrangement of events that come before an interfering
behavior, created to reduce the occurrence of that behavior.
CBI creates instruction on the management of cognitive processes
that trigger changes in outward behavior.
DRA is providing positive consequences for behaviors or the
absence of negative behaviors, ultimately reducing the happenings
of undesirable behaviors, when the individual behaves in a desired
alternative to an undesired behavior (DRA); when they’re doing
something that they couldn’t physically do if exhibiting in
undesired behavior (DRI); or when they’re not engaging in the
undesired behavior (DRO).
This typically involves one-on-one time between a service provider
and a student. Each trial starts with the provider’s instruction, the
student’s response, and a consequence. There is a pause before the
provider shares the next instruction.
Physical activity is increased to improve desirable behaviors or
reduce undesirable ones. This can be accomplished through a wide
range of exercises.

28

Extinction (EXT)
Functional Behavior
Assessment (FBA)
Functional
Communication
Training (FCT)
Modeling (MD)
Naturalistic
Intervention (NI)
Parent-Implemented
Instruction &
Intervention (PII)
Peer-Mediated
Instruction and
Intervention (PMII)
Picture Exchange
Communication System
(PECS)
Pivotal Response
Training (PRT)
Prompting (PP)
Reinforcement (R+)
Response
Interruption/Redirection
(RIR)
Scripting (SC)
Self-Management (SM)

Extinction is an intervention whereby you remove reinforcers of
undesirable behavior with the intention of reducing the frequency
of that behavior.
You identify events that come before or after an undesirable
behavior in order to identify actions that support that behavior.
FCT involves replacing undesirable behavior that has a
communication function with a different kind of communication
that still accomplishes that function.
The provider demonstrates a desired behavior or skill that the
student imitates and eventually acquires themselves.
This type of intervention strategy happens in the learner’s natural
setting. The teacher arranges for a learning event in that setting,
supports the student to participate in the desired behavior,
reinforces it when it occurs, and offers consequences.
Parents work one-on-one with their children to provide intervention
to improve desirable behaviors or decrease interfering ones.
PMII is similar to PPI, except it is their peers (as opposed to
parents) who help those with ASD to learn new behaviors,
communication skills, and social skills. Service providers work
with peers to teach them appropriate strategies.
With PECS, the student is taught to show a picture of a desired item
to a partner in exchange for getting that item. It includes six stages:
how to communicate, distance and persistence, picture
discrimination, sentence structure, responsive requesting, and
commenting.
In PRT, intervention practices are guided by pivotal learning
variables (like motivation) used in settings that build on the
student’s interests.
A peer gives verbal or physical assistance to a learner to help them
acquire a new behavior or engage in a new skill.
Reinforcement is an event or activity that occurs after a student
exhibits a desired behavior, which helps to increase the occurrence
of that behavior.
The teacher uses some kind of distracter to interfere with an
undesirable behavior and divert the student’s attention away.
Scripting can be a verbal or written (or both) description that
explains a skill or situation. It is a model for the learner, and it is
practiced many times over before that skill is applied in real life.
Self-management helps the learner to differentiate between
desirable and undesirable behaviors, monitor their own actions,
record their behaviors, and reward themselves when appropriate.

29
Social Narratives (SN)
Social Skills Training
(SST)
Structured Play Groups
(SPG)
Task Analysis (TA)
Technology-Aided
Instruction and
Intervention (TAII)
Time Delay (TD)

Video Modeling (VM)
Visual Supports (VS)

Narratives are used to explain social situations to learners. They
emphasize important cues and teach students how to respond
appropriately. Narratives should be created to suit individual needs.
SST teaches people with ASD how to appropriately interact with
others. It often includes activities like role-playing, communication
practice, and receiving feedback.
Structured play groups occur in defined areas with specific
activities and individuals fulfilling specific roles.
An activity is split up into smaller steps so that the provider can
assess and teach it.
Technology is used to help maintain or improve the learner’s skills
and behaviors. This might include tablets, computers, and computer
programs.
Time delay is used to give the learner a chance to use a skill
without being prompted to do so. A delay happens between the
chance to use the skill and the learner receiving any prompting.
This helps to gradually eliminate the need for prompting over time.
Demonstrations of desired behaviors or skills are shown through a
video recording to aid in learning that behavior or skill.
Visual supports aid the learner in acquiring a new behavior or skill
without the assistance of prompts. Types of support include
pictures, words, objects, maps, and labels.

To support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations, the
National Research Council (NRC, 2001) identified eight skill areas for students diagnosed with
ASD to access general-education classrooms: social pragmatic skills; expressive, receptive, and
nonverbal communication; functional symbolic or picture communication; fine and gross motor
skills; cognitive skills; the ability to follow acceptable classroom expectations using a class-wide
reinforcement plan; and the use of replacement behaviors in the absence of challenging
behaviors (NRC, 2001). Such programs, whether in public schools or private schools, should
also have a specialized curriculum focus and a function-based approach to addressing
problematic behaviors (CDC, 2007; Iovannone et al., 2003).
Iovannone et al. (2003) named eight empirically sound features for schools to
incorporate, including a well-developed, evidence-based educational placement for students with

30
ASD. These features included ongoing family collaboration across the student’s placement and
goal-area development; EBP curriculum and interventions to address the acquisition of
academic, social, communication, and behavioral skills; the use of positive and environmental
antecedent-based interventions; a schedule for consistency; the use of visual supports;
therapeutic services, all documented on an individualized education plan to outline the level of
needs of the student (Hagiwara, 2002); and a systematic approach to intervention and instruction
(Johnson et al., 2004; Collins, et al., 2007; Flores & Ganz, 2007)
Applied Behavior Analysis
Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is a scientific set of principles and dimensions aimed at
understanding and improving human behavior (Bailey & Burch, 2005; Cooper et al., 2007;
Maurice et al., 2001). The primary intention of ABA is to implement interventions based on the
principles of learning theory, which, when applied to real-world situations, meaningfully
improve behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2008; Bailey & Burch, 2005; Bear et al., 1968, 1987;
Buchanan & Weiss, 2006; Celiberti et al., 2008; Greer & Ross, 2008). Over the past 60 years,
ABA has evolved into various treatment models and intervention practices addressing deficits in
cognition, language, social skills, problem behavior, and daily living skills for individuals with
ASD (Dryer, 2013). The antecedents, behavior, and consequences model (ABC) is a foundational
approach, manipulating these elements to modify behavior effectively. This model analyses what
occurred in the environment or to the student prior (antecedent) to the behavior of interest, as
well as what occurred following the behavior of interest (Lovaas, 1987).
A study by Bethune and Kiser (2017) supported ABA as an empirically sound practice for
teaching students with ASD and increasing academic, social, behavioral, and vocational skills (
Bethune & Kiser, 2017; Bear et al., 1968; Roth et al., 2014). Increases in skill acquisition,

31
communication, relationship-building, social functioning, independent play, and adaptive living,
as well as the reduction of challenging behaviors, are all linked to ABA-based interventions
(Kim et al., 2016; Fenske et al., 1985; Smith et al., 1997; Eikeseth et al., 2007).
Functional Behavior Assessments
The 1997 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
mandated the use of functional behavior assessments (FBA) to guide the development of
Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs). The 2004 reauthorization specified that if a student's conduct
is a manifestation of their disability, the school must conduct a FBA and implement a BIP.
Empirical evidence supports the use of FBAs in improving outcomes for children and youth with
disabilities.
Within schools, the FBA process is grounded in the science of ABA. It involves gathering
pertinent data and information on the behavior of concern to understand the function of the
behavior. The primary goal is to design a function-based intervention that optimizes the
effectiveness and efficiency of behavior support. FBA serves as the initial step in the behavior
intervention process, enabling those conducting the assessment to identify and create a BIP. The
BIP is designed to decrease challenging behaviors and promote the increase of appropriate
behaviors. Within the school setting, once the applied behavior analysist has trained the teacher
and paraprofessionals, it is vital the plan is implemented with fidelity to reduce challenging
behavior.
Paraprofessional Training
When surveyed in a study by Carter et al. (2009), paraprofessionals indicated that
students with ASD were the largest student population receiving their support. Of these
paraprofessionals, 97% provide one-on-one academic support, and 79.4% provided behavior-

32
management support (Carter et al., 2009). When further questioned about the ability to support
students in these areas, paraprofessionals noted an overall lack of confidence in their ability to
implement behavioral interventions due to the lack of job professional development
opportunities and supervision (Causton-Theoharis et al., 2007; Giangreco et al., 2011).
Given the circumstances, EBPs outlined within BIPs are crucial strategies used daily in
classrooms. This reality of the lack of training and supervision is concerning for families with
students diagnosed with ASD (Brock & Carter, 2013). Austin (2013) found that
paraprofessionals are better equipped through training opportunities, which enables them to
meet the needs of students with ASD.
The professional development needs for paraprofessionals were further noted in research
by Riggs (2001), who found that the highest perceived need for training for paraprofessionals
related to types of diagnoses, behavior management strategies, communication strategies, types
of learning styles, and how to support inclusion times (Riggs, 2001). Other areas that require
staff development included assistive technology, providing small-group instruction, social
opportunities for students with disabilities, and special-education laws and procedures (Riggs,
2001). Sturmey (2015) assessed educators and service providers in six areas of ABA to
investigate training needs and found they needed development in preference assessments,
prompting strategies, differential reinforcement, and crisis-management interventions (Sturmey,
2015). Pindiprolu et al., (2007) asked paraprofessionals what areas they were most in need of
training, and the highest responses were in how to address challenging behavior and FBAs
(Pindiprolu et al., 2007). A study by Brenton (2010) surveyed 750 paraprofessionals about their
professional development opportunities and implementing strategies, of which 46% indicated
that their training was either “very poor” or “fair” (Brenton, 2010). In addition, regarding the

33
quality of their daily job supervision to support their roles and responsibilities, 29% reported that
they were either uncertain of the quality or found it poor (Brenton, 2010). Furthermore, Brenton
(2010) questioned the participants about their ability to support behavioral difficulties and the
need for training, and 63.5% noted training as a high priority.
Searching for a different way to complete professional development, Serna et al., (2015)
turned to developing an online training with first-person interactive practice. The focus was on
paraprofessionals directly collaborating with Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs). More
precisely, the online training, named LearningABA, was crafted to equip inexperienced
paraprofessionals with essential knowledge and proficiency in implementing Behavioral
Intervention methods. The study addresses the high demand for well-trained paraprofessionals in
behavioral intervention, especially for individuals with autism spectrum disorder and
developmental disabilities. To meet this demand, the researchers developed an online training
program called LearningABA. This program focuses on enhancing traditional online pedagogy
by incorporating first-person interactive practice, resembling live mentor/mentee training.
The preliminary evaluation data indicates the effectiveness of LearningABA. A one-way
ANOVA revealed significant group differences in pre-test to post-test change scores, favoring
the experimental group. The experimental group showed a substantial mean improvement in
correct responses (32.98%), compared to the control group's modest improvement (7.74%). An
ANCOVA was conducted to account for time differences between test administrations, and it
confirmed a significant main effect of group, supporting the earlier findings.
Additionally, a comparison of the time between tests for both groups showed a negligible
difference, suggesting that the observed group differences were not influenced by the time
elapsed between pre-test and post-test administrations. Overall, the study demonstrates the

34

potential of online training programs like LearningABA in efficiently preparing paraprofessionals
for face-to-face training and supervision in behavioral intervention methods.
More recently, Mason et al. (2021) conducted a study on paraprofessional perceptions
from the frontline across twelve school districts. The authors sought to understand the
responsibilities, professional development needs, and related issues of paraprofessionals, as well
as the professional development needs and related issues of teachers as supervisors of
paraprofessionals. The authors categorized the responses into two themes: first, common training
needs and challenges such as the need for clarification of the role, responsibilities, and team
building to avoid conflict; and second, criticism of training programs pertained to the need for
better behavior-management professional development, curriculum instruction, technology, and
requests for increased observation and feedback (Mason et al., 2021).
Wiggs et al. (2021) conducted a comparable study involving a randomized group of 215
paraprofessionals from sixty-two elementary schools spanning kindergarten to fifth grade. The
researchers administered a survey, encompassing eight items related to their current roles, six
items regarding professional learning they had undergone, and one item addressing their
professional learning needs. The reported hours of training received varied from zero to more
than fifteen over a 12-month period, with 43.7% indicating zero hours and only nineteen
paraprofessionals reporting over 15 hours. Respondents also conveyed their anticipated needs for
future professional learning. The predominant areas identified included behavior-based training,
managing student behaviors, and classroom-wide behavior management. Other reported training
needs encompassed social-emotional learning, instruction, educational technology, district and
state policies, evaluation systems, and communication with parents . The researchers concluded
that tailoring professional development for paraprofessionals based on their specific learning

35
needs holds the potential to enhance outcomes for students, teachers, paraprofessionals, and
other stakeholders.
In 2022 research conducted by Walker et al., a survey involving 768 paraprofessionals
was undertaken to assess their training requirements, classroom demands, and skills needs in
relation to Evidence-Based Practices for individuals with Autism. The study revealed that 46.1%
of the participants worked in inclusive classrooms, 45.9% in self-contained classrooms, and the
remaining 8% in other or mixed classrooms. Additionally, 9.1% of paraprofessionals did not
work with students with Autism, while 81.7% worked with both students with Autism and other
disabilities. The research methodology involved survey revision and a thorough examination of
data through various approaches. The survey comprised twenty-four items categorized into
paraprofessional characteristics, perceived skills, training needs, and classroom needs aligned
with Evidence-Based Practices, as well as training and skill characteristics. The study's findings
indicated that the majority of students served by the participants had low-moderate or high
needs. Paraprofessionals expressed higher training needs in self-management practices,
communication practices, and technology-aided practices. Conversely, the lowest training needs
were reported in visual support and peer-mediated interventions.
Barriers to Paraprofessional Training
To address the lack of training among paraprofessionals and minimize the effects of
improperly implemented EBPs, IDEA (2004) requires schools to provide all staff who offer
special-education services to have professional development opportunities appropriate to the job
and ongoing supervision (IDEA 20 USC. 1412(a; 14). Despite IDEA updating the
paraprofessional requirements for professional development and supervision, the legislation
lacks specific guidance on how the training and supervision should be provided (Picket, 1999).

36
As such, classroom teachers and principals are tasked with the additional job of training and
supervising the paraprofessionals with no specific guidelines (Drecktrah, 2000; French, 2001;
French & Pickett, 1997; Pickett et al., 1993; Wallace et al., 2001). Over the years, the task of
training and supervising paraprofessionals has become increasingly challenging for teachers,
particularly when teachers have not received professional development opportunities on EBPs
specific to students with ASD or supervising paraprofessionals in classrooms (French & Pickett,
1997; Wallace et al., 2001).
Scheuremann et al. (2013) identified two barriers connected with certification pathways
in higher education. First, there is great variation across states in the requirements for licensing
special educators, with some states requiring certification in specific disabilities and other states
not specifying. Mainzer & Horvath (2001) found that more teachers complete a noncategorical or
multi-categorical educational licensure, which raises concerns pertaining to whether the licensure
program sufficiently trains teachers across the various disabilities. Before training
paraprofessionals, teachers themselves need specialized instruction on low-incidence disabilities
like blindness, deafness, and ASD (Scheurmann et al., 2013).
However, it remains unclear whether these programs sufficiently train teachers to
understand students with ASD, let alone supervise paraprofessionals (Scheuremann et al., 2013).
Scheurmann et al. (2013) identified the following skills needed among teachers and
paraprofessionals: developing interventions for students diagnosed with communication
impairments (nonverbal or echolalic) and advancing knowledge for behavior-management
strategies. Barnhill et al. (2011) investigated autism-specific coursework across eighty-seven
teacher-preparation programs in thirty-four states and found that only about half the programs
offered a course about autism, and, of the programs that did, 35% supplied training on only

37
discrete trial procedures (Barnhill et al., 2011). In addition, when programs on ABA were
offered, the courses seldom supplied suggestions or resources for training paraprofessionals on
behavioral principles (Reid, 2017). Thus, practitioners are on their own when coaching
paraprofessionals, with on-the-job training being the primary method.
The shortage of special-education teachers is an additional barrier that influences
professional development opportunities (Barnhill et al., 2011). To address this shortage, school
districts can offer certification programs and expedite certification (US Department of Education,
2017). However, while this expedited route increases the number of teachers, those who were
once paraprofessionals but lack professional development now go through certification programs
that also lack the additional professional development (Darling-Hammond, 2002), particularly
related to educating students with ASD and providing on-site supervision to paraprofessionals
(Scheurmann et al., 2013). Teachers are not trained to effectively use or supervise
paraprofessionals (French, 2001; Giangreco et al., 2001; Maggin et al., 2012; Moshoyannis et al.,
1999; Pickett, 1999; Wallace et al., 2001); indeed, Capizzi and DaFonte (2012) noted that
“teachers who supervise paraprofessionals are often unprepared or untrained to provide
paraprofessionals with needed training” (p. 2). When teachers do not receive further
development opportunities on methods and teaching paraprofessionals, they may struggle with
paraprofessionals to provide cohesive support to students.
One barrier in special education pertains to the use of EBP, especially when
implementing ABA-based interventions (Stahmer et al., 2015). Because ABA principles and
interventions vary based on the function of the intervention, professional development on ABA
requires providing sufficient time to practice and achieve mastery (Stahman et al., 2015).
Specifically, Discrete Trial Training (DTT) requires multiple sessions with the guidance of a

38
trained teacher or behavior analyst. To effectively teach others, teachers also must be educated in
providing feedback, analyzing data, and making recommendations from the data gathered
(Wallace et al., 2001; French, 2001). Fundamentally, many teachers are inadequately and
inconsistently trained in ABA interventions and supervising paraprofessionals, leading to the
suboptimal implementation of ABA principles by paraprofessionals in classrooms.
Need for the Training
While there are federal guidelines regulating the qualifications of paraprofessionals,
ongoing development for paraprofessionals and supervision of paraprofessionals are the
responsibilities of individual school districts. Currently, there are no federal guidelines or
regulations in the state of Massachusetts outlining the ongoing professional development for
paraprofessionals. As paraprofessionals continue to be a critical part of the education of students
with special needs, the importance of paraprofessional cannot be overstated; without ongoing
training, paraprofessionals may be unable to adequately support students with special needs or
perform the tasks associated with their position (Causton-Theoharis & Malmgren, 2005).
Paraprofessionals continue to receive a vast portion of their job training from either their
supervising teachers—referred to as on-the-job training (French, 2001; Moody, 1967)—or oneday staff development at the start of school years (Carter et al., 2009; Rispoli et al., 2011).
Despite previous literature reviews (Azad, et al., 2015; Locke et al., 2016), the roles and
responsibilities of paraprofessionals that include the principles of ABA development are sparse.
Paraprofessionals who assist students with ASD must have training in ABA and knowledge of
teaching approaches to implement structured and unstructured learning, utilizing assistive
technology, implementing specialized curriculum such as modified tasks or discrete trial training
as well as folding in social and communication skills practice opportunities for generalization of

39
previously learned skills (Carter et al., 200). In addition, paraprofessionals should receive
specific professional education and supervision, and legislative acts should mandate as much
(Forster & Holbrook, 2005; Giangreco & Broer, 2005; Giangreco et al., 2002; Giangreco et al.,
2005; Minondo et al., 2001).
Daily, paraprofessionals are entrusted with implementing EBP strategies to improve
student skills, address challenging behaviors, and increase pro-social behaviors in social
interactions and communication (Brock et al., 2015). Riggs and Mueller (2001) report that
paraprofessionals often make instructional decisions and deliver instruction for students.
Knowing that paraprofessionals lack formal professional development and considering the
impact they have on student learning, IDEA directs schools to provide applicable staff
development and ongoing supervision to paraprofessionals (IDEA, 2004).
Knowledge Assessments
Knowledge assessments are tools used to gather information about a learning experience.
One common challenge many teachers have is understanding a student’s prior knowledge of
subject matter. Hailikari et al. (2008) defined prior knowledge as a “multidimensional and
hierarchical entity that is dynamic in nature and consists of different types of knowledge and
skills” (p.1).
A pre-test, prior to content review, is a way to acquire a baseline of learner knowledge.
Conducting a pre-test and post-test evaluation is essential to determining the effectiveness of a
training program. A pretest–posttest design has several advantages, such as measuring the change
in the outcome variable that is attributable to the intervention, detecting the differential effects of
the intervention on different subgroups of participants, and increasing the internal validity of a
study (Guskey et al., 2016).

40
Professional learning is defined as on-going engagement through a comprehensive,
sustained, and intensive approach to improve participants’ effectiveness by advancing their skills
or expertise (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Adult learners can master new knowledge and
skills and then transfer this knowledge to classrooms through a combination of effective
practices (Joyce & Showers, 2002). Thus, this study incorporated a framework that rested on
research on principles of adult learning, effective practices, and structural elements (Graner et al,
2018).
Learning can be inferred from the difference in performance between two points in time,
and the degree to which learning can be measured depends upon the amount of time and quality
of instruction between the two points in time. As such, when using a pre-test–post-test model, if
teaching has resulted in the expected learning, the post-test score will be higher than the pre-test
score.
Research Question
Paraprofessionals are often the primary support source for special-education students
(Fisher & Pleasants, 2012) and are part of the core special-education instructional team
(Giangreco, Suter, & Doyle, 2010). Both the National Resources Center for Professionals and the
Council for Exceptional Children (Hyman et al, 2020) agree that paraprofessionals must have
prerequisite knowledge for supporting students with disabilities as well an understanding of and
the ability to implement EBP. However, school districts continue to provide minimal or no
ongoing paraprofessional learning times. As such, the current study’s purpose is to gain an
understanding of pre-existing paraprofessional knowledge, provide specific ABA training, and
then test participant knowledge with a post-test. Understanding whole-group training knowledge

41
will aid in the development of paraprofessional learning opportunities. Therefore, this study
seeks to clarify:
1. In a group training of evidence-based practice, to what extent, if any, do
paraprofessionals advance their knowledge of applied behavior analysis?
Summary
This literature review highlights how paraprofessionals are in high demand to support
students with ASD. Based on the literature, not only do paraprofessionals need training in
characteristics of autism, but they also require distinct learning opportunities related to ABA
principles, behavior management, social skills, and communication. Hence, for paraprofessionals
to positively support students with ASD, schools must not only define the roles and
responsibilities of paraprofessionals but also provide meaningful staff development. Training
opportunities for paraprofessionals should entail the principals of adult learning: motivation to
learn new interventions, reinforcement of staff when implementing strategies, retention of skills
through ongoing practice, and transference of skills from learning to application within the
classroom (Bear, 2012). Meanwhile, through ongoing supervision by teachers and applied
behavior analysists, paraprofessional skills should be assessed, allowing for dialogue between
paraprofessionals and their supervisors. Research informs us that when paraprofessionals are
thoroughly trained, they can perform educational tasks with a high degree of fidelity (Brock &
Carter, 2016).
Chapter three will take a closer look at how this study was conducted. Overall district
information as well as the participating specialized program paraprofessionals’ information is
provided to allow for study replication. The study aims to answer the question of to what extent,
if any, will participating paraprofessionals advance their knowledge of ABA within a group

42
training. By using pretest and posttest data results for individual participants and group
comparison data will provide an insight of areas of paraprofessional growth and the need to
further provide professional development times.

43
Chapter 3
Methodology
Due to the evolving and multifaceted role of the paraprofessional in special education,
particularly in supporting students with a diagnosis of ASD, paraprofessionals need specialized
learning opportunities. However, there is a concern that many school districts fail to provide
comprehensive professional development, covering essential content areas related to the
paraprofessionals’ roles within an ABA-based classroom. With the lack of initial education,
paraprofessionals often rely on trial and error, past experiences, and observation to identify their
job responsibilities and develop strategies. The purpose of the current study is to determine
whether group training on the use of evidence-based practices advances paraprofessional
knowledge in ABA. The study will analyze the existing level of paraprofessional knowledge of
ABA, and also determine whether the knowledge levels have increased after a group learning
session focused on EBP within ABA.
Research Design
For this study, thirty-five full-time paraprofessionals were participants in a
pretest/posttest quasi-experimental design approach. Quasi-experimental research designs tend to
have real-world applications, which increases their external validity (Creswell and Creswell,
2018). The participants were a nonequivalent group of first-year paraprofessionals to the school
districts in substantially separate specialized classrooms using ABA-based principles.
Prior to the start of the school year for the students, the participants participated in a three
part series of workshop sessions on introduction to ABA. Each session was 2-3 hours based on
the content and responses from the participants. These sessions were embedded into the start of
the school year paraprofessional training for those paraprofessionals employed within the ABA-

44
based classrooms. Learning sessions consisted of participants completing pretraining
assessments, training, and post-training assessments for each session. Learning sessions
consisted of a series of slide-show presentations including ABA theory and practice.
This study utilized the historical data which was previously collected during
paraprofessional training sessions. Historical data allows flexibility in the type of data subject
matter for analysis, which has information about events of great practical importance, such as
paraprofessional knowledge of ABA. As such, the selected data had tremendous pragmatic value
for this study.
Site Permission
Site permission of research was granted by the district superintendent following a written
proposal to examine data from the 2022–2023 school year learning modules conducted at the
start of the academic year. The superintendent supplied written approval (Appendix A), allowing
for the analysis of the paraprofessional group training. The findings of this study will be
provided to the school district to enhance the paraprofessional learning modules for the
substantially separated classrooms implementing ABA-based supports and interventions.
Community Information
The city in which this study took place was founded in 1850 and is currently one of the
largest cities along the Atlantic coastline within New England. The city is 13.5 square miles with
a population of 100,891 with a median age of 36.3. Of this, 49.83% are males and 50.17% are
females. US-born citizens make up 61.42% of the residents, while non-US-born citizens account
for 20.5%. Additionally, 18.08% of the population is represented by non-citizens. The largest
identified race is white, 67.89%, followed by Hispanic or Latino, 18.4%.White-collar workers
make up 75.33% of the working population, while blue-collar employees account for 24.67%.

45
The average annual household income is $80,063, while the median household income sits at
$63,922 per year. Approximately 41.35% of the population in the city holds a high school degree
(that is 31,526 documented residents), while 18.38% have attained a college certificate. Table 3
displays a breakdown of the community demographics of which this study took place.
Table 3
Community Demographics with a Reported Population of 100,891
Median
Age
36.3

Gender
49.83%
Male
50.17%
Female

Citizenship
Status
61.42%
US-Born
Citizens
20.5%
Non-USBorn
Citizens
18.08%
NonCitizenship

Race

Employment

67.89%
White

75.33%
White Collar
24.67%
Blue Collar

18.4%.
Hispanic
or Latino

Household
Income
Average
$80,063

Education
Level
~41.35%

Median
$63,922
per year

~18.38%

District Information
The participating school district has a student population of 17,069 enrolled students.
Minority enrollment is 84% of the student body. The largest student race and ethnicity population
is Hispanic, 72.5% followed by white, 10.6%. English language learners consist of 43.4%. First
language learners, not English, make up 70.2% of the student population. Students identified as
having high needs make up 86.2% of the student population. There are 985 teachers within the
district and 151 special education staff including the special education administration. A
breakdown of the district details is displayed in Table 4, while Table 5 provides a breakdown of
the special education department by related therapists. Special education programs consist of
early childhood center, therapeutic social-emotional classrooms across all grades, ABA based

46
classrooms across all ages, multi-handicapped classrooms, life skill classes of all ages, as well as
substantially separated classrooms with primary diagnosis of developmental delay, intellectual
impairment, or specific learning disability.
Table 4
School District Details
Break Down

2 High Schools (9–12)
1 Vocational School (9–12)
1 alternative junior/senior
high school
3 Middle Schools (6–8)
20 Elementary Schools (PreK–5)

Students

Students with
IEP

Teachers

17,069

~3000

985

Teacher-toStudent
Ratio

14:1

Table 5
Special Education Related Therapist Breakdown for the District
Behavior

Speech

13
28
Behavior
Speech
Specialist Pathologists
6
4
Registered
Speech
Behavior
Assistants
Technicians

Occupational
Therapy
5
Certified

Physical
Therapy
3
Certified

10
Assistants

2
Assistants

Vision

Hearing

2
Certified

4
Certified

School
Phycologist
12
Total
6
Bilingual

Specific Program Information
The substantially separated ABA program within the district ranges from prekindergarten classrooms starting at 3-years-old, through high school up to 22-years-old.

47
Classrooms are located across five schools: two elementry schools, one middle school, one high
school, and one vocational school. Student diagnoses include ASD level 2 or 3, communication
impairment, a health impairment (attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder), specific learning disorders, or a combination of these diagnoses. Student IEPs consist
of a combination of the following goal areas: math, English language arts, pre-readiness skills,
communication, and social/behavior. Related services such as occupational therapy, physical
therapy, speech and language, and behavior specialist were included with the IEPs based on
student needs.
Student demographics, found in Table 6, of the classrooms consists of 67% Hispanic, 9%
Caucasian, 18% Black, and 6% Asian. Regarding gender, 75% were male and 25% were female.
Student communication skills consisted of 62% nonverbal students of which 17% of the
nonverbal students have less than four picture exchange icons (food related), and 38% were
categorized as Gestalt verbal learners ( i.e., learn chunk phrases or parts of the whole to
communicate). The use of alterative augmentative communication devices was modeled to
students on iPads or picture exchange. Toileting needs consisted of 48% fully potty trained, 20%
required dressing aid, while 32% required full diapering and dressing support. Transportation
was offered for all students; 92% used transportation, while 8% of families supplied
transportation. School breakfast and lunch were supplied for all students.
Table 6
Student within the Substantially Separated ABA-Based Classroom Demographics
Race

Gender

67% Hispanic

75% Male

Communication
Level
62% Non-Verbal
(17% less than 4
picture exchange)

Toileting Level

Transportation

48% Fully
Toileted Trained

92% Bus

48
9% Caucasian
18% Black

25% Female

38% Verbal

20% Dressing
Assisted
32% Full Support
Required

8% Family

6% Asian

Classrooms consist of eleven students, one special education teacher, and up to four
paraprofessionals. Classrooms with four paraprofessionals require a higher level of behavioral
interventions for student safety. Classroom methodology and delivery of instruction follow the
principles of ABA including explicit, systematic, sequential, and cumulative instruction based on
mastery. Explicit teaching means that what you are teaching is clearly explained and defined.
Expectations are clear and presented at the current level of student ability and broken into
manageable chunks. Lessons are written out procedures the student and teacher can easily
follow. Within the lesson directions, instructions are provided on how to present the
information, how to provide support within the lesson, and how to provide corrective
feedback when needed. Lessons are taught in a sequential order that will help your students
achieve mastery of the core concepts which are aimed at increasing student independence.
Support for task completion is provided in a one student to one adult or two students to one adult
ratio. Visual cues are paired with verbally presented information across all settings. To support
the retention of skills and knowledge, reinforcement and practice times are implemented daily.
Discrete trial training and natural environment training are embedded throughout the school day
targeting student specific skills to acquire or decrease. When the specific skill is learned, data is
collected to ensure the student has mastered the skill across time and the skill has been generalize
(Lovaas et al., 1073) across locations, materials, and people. Specific student behavior
management strategies are assessed using a functional behavior assessment followed by the

49
development of a behavior intervention plan. Formalized computer based data collection is used
to monitor student progress toward independence of skill acquisition and the reduction of
challenging behaviors.
Participant and Setting
The focus classrooms for paraprofessionals participating in this study include only
substantially separated ABA-based elementry classrooms, grades pre-kindergarten to fifth grade.
The fourteen classrooms span across two elementry schools as shown in Table 7. The home-base
school has supported the substantially separate ABA-based classrooms for 23 years. Classroom
sizes previously ranged from six students to eight students. However, across the last seven years
starting in 2016, students identified as needing ABA-based classroom support grew increasing
classroom sizes to ten students within a classroom. More recently, 2019, the increase of students
required the district to expand the elementry ABA-based classrooms across a second school. The
second school is referred to as the sister program. Within the sister program four additional
ABA-classrooms were opened.
Table 7
Participating Classroom Breakdown
Classroom Grades

Home Base School

Sister School

Pre-Kindergarten to
Kindergarten
First and Second
Grade
Second through
Fourth Grade
Third through Fifth
Grade

2

3

Number of
Classrooms
5

3

1

4

3

0

3

2

0

2

50
Thirty-five full-time paraprofessionals across the fourteen classrooms participated in the
study. The criteria to determine participant eligibility are: 1.) participants were employed to work
within the elementry substantially separated ABA-based classrooms, 2.) participants were
employed for less than 6 months within this district, or 3.) participants had not received ABA
professional development from the district in the past. All participants were fluent in English and
had a high school degree. Two had trade school experience, six had an associate degree, and
eleven had a bachelor’s degree. The mean age was 32 years old, ranging from 18 to 56 years.
Fifteen participants reported having prior ABA experience, with an average of nine years of
experience. The previous type and quality of staff development indicated by the participants was
not collected. This was the first ABA staff development within the participating district the
paraprofessionals received. A breakdown of participant demographics is reflected in Table 8.
Table 8
Participant Demographics
Gender
Females
Male

29
6

Race
Muslim
Black
Hispanic
White

1%
4%
46%
49%

Highest Degree
High School
Trade School
Associate
Bachelor’s

16
2
6
11

Prior ABA
Experience
Yes
No

15
16

Training Curriculum and Materials
Teaching critical knowledge competencies is often an initial objective of training to aid
paraprofessionals to understand concepts and methods which will advance the overall use of
ABA strategies effectively (Reid et al., 2003: Ricciardi, 2005). The three training modules
outlined in Table 9 in this study were pulled from a variety of studies pertaining to an adult day-

51
care healthcare setting and paraprofessional development using ABA-based interventions,
focusing on the overarching principles consistent with the instructional needs of an education
setting. In addition, the learning modules reflect the research-based competencies of the behavior
technicians task list seen in Table 10, developed by the Behavior Analysis Certification Board
(BACB, 2018). These competencies include primary tasks which are likely to be performed by
paraprofessionals in a substantially separated ABA-based classroom. The training sessions were
across three consecutive days, where one learning session with one module was presented each
day. Training sessions were presented at the start of the day lasting between two to three hours
per day. Pretests and posttests were each 30 minutes while the module content lasted between
two to three hours.
The three learning modules addressed ABA theory and its implementation. The first
module included defining behavior, positive and negative reinforcement, antecedent-behaviorconsequence contingency, observation, measurement, data collection, functional analysis,
interpreting data, consequence interventions, and antecedent interventions. The second module
included discrete trial training, incidental teaching, and task analysis. Lastly, the third module
consisted of prompt hierarchy for verbal and physical responses and fading prompt strategies.
Table 9
Learning Modules
Module
Module One
3 Hours

Content Area
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Define Behavior
Reinforcement – What is it?
Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence Contingent
Measurement – Why and when it is needed.
Data Collection and Interpreting the Data
What is a Function Behavior Analysis
Interventions – Antecedent – Consequence

52
Module Two
3 Hours
Module Three
2 Hours

•
•
•
•
•

Discrete Trial Training Procedure
Incidental Teaching or Natural Teaching
Task Analysis Procedure
Prompt Hierarchy - Verbal and Physical Responses
Fading Prompt Strategies – Visuals, positioning

Table 10
Learning Competencies
Italicized** topics were not part of the learning modules based on time restraints
Content Area
Measurement

Skill
•
•
•
•
•
•

Assessment

Skill Acquisition

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Prepare for data collection.
Implement continuous measurement procedures (e.g.,
frequency, duration).
Implement discontinuous measurement procedures (e.g., partial
& whole interval, momentary time sampling).**
Implement permanent-product recording procedures.
Enter data and update graphs.
Describe behavior and environment in observable and
measurable terms.
Conduct preference assessments. **
Assist with individualized assessment procedures (e.g.,
curriculum-based, developmental, social skills).
Assist with functional assessment procedures.
Identify the essential components of a written skill acquisition
plan.
Prepare for the session as required by the skill acquisition plan.
Use contingencies of reinforcement (e.g.,
conditioned/unconditioned reinforcement,
continuous/intermittent schedules).
Implement discrete-trial teaching procedures.
Implement naturalistic teaching procedures (e.g., incidental
teaching).
Implement task analyzed chaining procedures.
Implement discrimination training. **
Implement stimulus control transfer procedures. **
Implement prompt and prompt fading procedures.
Implement generalization and maintenance procedures.
Implement shaping procedures. **
Implement token economy procedures.

53
Behavior Reduction

•
•
•
•

Documentation and
Reporting

•
•
•
•
•
•

•
Professional Conduct
and Scope of Practice

•
•
•
•
•

Identify essential components of a written behavior reduction
plan.
Describe common functions of behavior.
Implement interventions based on modification of antecedents
such as motivating operations and discriminative stimuli. **
Implement differential reinforcement procedures (e.g., DRA,
DRO). **
Implement extinction procedures.
Implement crisis/emergency procedures according to protocol.
Effectively communicate with a supervisor in an ongoing
manner.
Actively seek clinical direction from supervisor in a timely
manner.
Report other variables that might affect the client in a timely
manner.
Generate objective session notes for service verification by
describing what occurred during the sessions, in accordance
with applicable legal, regulatory, and workplace requirements.
**
Comply with applicable legal, regulatory, and workplace data
collection, storage, transportation, and documentation
requirements.
Describe the BACB’s RBT supervision requirements and the
role of RBTs in the service-delivery system. **
Respond appropriately to feedback and maintain or improve
performance accordingly.
Communicate with stakeholders (e.g., family, caregivers, other
professionals) as authorized.
Maintain professional boundaries (e.g., avoid dual relationships,
conflicts of interest, social media contacts).
Maintain client dignity.
RBT task list (2nd edition)

Data Collection Procedure
Two assessment-of-knowledge, randomized test questionnaires were developed for each
module as a “paper and pencil” test (Appendices B-G). Each test consisted of ten multiple-choice
questions. One test was given before each module as a pretest to gather the learner’s knowledge
of the content area within the module. The second test was provided as a posttest directly
following the learning session. The posttest measures learned knowledge of the presented

54
module. The pretests and posttests were analyzed to decide the extent of knowledge gained upon
completing the group training session. None of the tests required participant names. At the top of
all tests, a set of questions were asked to identify corresponding tests without identifying the
participants. Questions asked about the participant’s first car, first pet’s name, number of cousins,
and the participant's favorite number. Participating paraprofessionals were encouraged to
complete as many questions as possible and repeat their responses for each test.
Training Procedure
Pretraining assessments, learning session, and post-training assessments were conducted
within one to five days prior to the start of the academic year. Prior to this study, the participating
paraprofessionals received a behavior-management course in which safety procedures using deescalation and physical management for student behaviors were taught. The course was created
by an independent Board Certified Behavior Analysist agency. The behavior-management course
was provided 10-20 days prior to the participation within this study. Therefore, participating
paraprofessionals were provided with similar ABA-based information which should be
considered as supplement training. The behavior-management course was provided as a district
train the trainer format, while this study was conducted by a Board Certified behavior Analyst
employed by the participating school district.
For this study, participating paraprofessionals were provided with the pretest (Appendix
B, D, F) before the training session. No specific module information was reviewed before the
pretest. Participants responded to ten four-item multiple-choice questions. To secure participant
identity and ensure a blind review, the participants placed their responses in a manila envelope.
Participants had 30 minutes to respond to the pretest questions. Upon gathering the pretest,
participants participated in a two to three hour learning session. The sessions were presented to

55
all participating paraprofessionals as a whole group format within an elementry café. Information
was presented as a slideshow. Content videos and modeling of the skills were incorporated into
the training session. Participant questions were based on the topic being reviewed. Directly
following the learning session, a posttest was provided. Questions from the pretest were
randomly configured onto the posttest (Appendix C, E, G). To ensure autonomy participants
followed the same format of placing their completed posttest into a manila envelope. In total
there were three sessions, each lasting between three to four hours.
Pre-Training Sessions
All participants attended the same training sessions. Each training session began with a
pretest (Appendix B, D, F) of the module content information. A selected senior
paraprofessional, one who previously received ABA-based education and is currently employed
within the home based elementary ABA-based classroom, provided the test to each of the
participating paraprofessionals. Participating paraprofessionals were provide 30 minutes to
complete the 10-multiple choice questions. Upon completion of the pretest, the participant placed
the test in a manila envelope. The senior paraprofessional ensured all test codes were completed
prior to having the participants place the test in the manila envelope. During the 30 minutes for
the pretest, the presenter remained in front of the participants so as to not observe any participant
test responses. Participants were then provided with a ten minute break prior to the start of the
training session. The pretest time was separate from the training session time.
Training Sessions
The duration of each learning session lasted for between two to three hours with a fiveto-ten-minute break every 40 minutes. The sessions were conducted in the cafeteria of the home
base elementary school. The training modules were a series of slideshow presentations.

56
Paraprofessionals were provided with a handout of all the slides. Slides consisted of a concept,
definition, explanation, or an example of each topic area in the module. Fill-in-the-blank
questions were incorporated in the slides, allowing for discussion. A trainer training module was
developed consisting of added examples and responses for the fill-ins. The participants were
encouraged to ask questions, supply examples per topic, and participate in group discussions.
Content videos and modeling of procedures were conducted by the trainer. All sessions were
completed by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst employed by the participating school district.
Post-Training Session
Directly following the training session, the participants completed a posttest (Appendix
C, E, G). The posttest consisted of the same set of pretest questions, albeit in randomized order.
Post-training sessions followed the pretest procedure. The selected senior paraprofessional
provided the posttest to each of the participating paraprofessionals. Participating
paraprofessionals were provide 30 minutes to complete the 10-multiple choice questions. Upon
completion of the posttest, the participant placed the test in a manila envelope. The senior
paraprofessional ensured all test codes were completed prior to having the participants place the
test in the manila envelope. During the 30 minutes for the posttest, the presenter remained in
front of the participants so as to not observe any participant test responses.
Data Analysis
Gathering pretest data from participating paraprofessionals allowed for matched-pairs
analyses of pretest and posttest data, in which each participating paraprofessional’s posttest could
be compared with their pretest. To allow for the assessments to be anonymous, a code was
created at the top of each assessment, where paraprofessionals responded to questions. Due to the
paraprofessional union contract, individual participant feedback was not an option. Therefore,

57
this study evaluated the effects of the group learning sessions. The use of a code allowed for
anonymously pairing assessments without the knowledge of who completed them.
Data from the pre-test and post-test was analyzed using a comparison analysis of variance
(ANOVA). An ANOVA is an analysis tool used in statistics that splits an observed aggregate
variability found inside a data set into two parts: systematic factors and random factors
(Rutherford, 2013; Shieh, 2020). The systematic factors have a statistical influence on the given
data set. Analysts use the ANOVA test to determine the influence of training on performance.
Limitations
This study was conducted in one urban, northeastern public school district across two
elementary schools, using a total of fourteen classrooms. The study only focused on specialeducation paraprofessionals assigned to the school district’s substantially separate ABA-based
program. Hence, the training findings that were found from this study specifically involve
elementary-employed special-education paraprofessionals in this school district’s ASD setting
only. Despite the use of carefully planned research procedures, findings from this study may not
be generalized due to the setting, sample size, or population. Second, the scope of
paraprofessionals was restricted to those newly hired for the upcoming school year. This specific
criterion is used to select participants, limiting the sampling size. While participants were new to
the school district, thirteen out of thirty-five participants indicated that they had prior education
and implementation of ABA procedures and interventions of varying years of experience.
Specifics of past training from previous employments were not collected.
Another limitation was the use of historical data. Campbell and Stanley's (1966) study on
quasi-experimental design showed that the use of historical data may be considered based on its
internal validity due to the inability to schedule when and with whom to conduct the experiment.

58
However, historical data does allow the researcher to analyze it, which may lead to an improved
experiment.
The purpose of this research was to understand newly hired paraprofessional knowledge
of applied behavior analysis practice in substantially separated ABA-based classroom. The
effects of knowledge gained were determined by analyzing the results of the pretest and posttest.
This analysis provided insight into future paraprofessional training, to focus on vital components
of ABA principles and interventions to support the needs of students with ASD in substantially
separated classrooms.
Summary
The study utilized a pretest/posttest quasi-experimental design to evaluate the
effectiveness of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)-based content for thirty-five first-year
paraprofessionals working in specialized classrooms with students in pre-kindergarten to fifth
grade across two elementary schools. The research involved historical data to assess the current
training's efficacy and included pretraining and post-training assessments conducted just before
the academic year. The focus was on professional development for special-education
paraprofessionals in an urban, northeastern public school district within substantially separate
ABA-based programs for students with ASD diagnosis. The findings are context-specific and
may not be generalized due to factors like the setting, sample size, and population. Although
participants were newly hired for the upcoming school year, some had prior ABA education from
previous employment, with specific details about this training not collected. Caution is advised
in applying the study's insights to other settings or populations.
In the upcoming chapter, the study will delve into an analysis of participants' responses
from both the pretest and posttest. The examination will focus on content areas to discern

59
instances where participants exhibited an increase in knowledge relative to their pretest
performance. Specific content areas will be scrutinized to identify and measure improvements in
participants' knowledge levels following the learning sessions. This method enables researchers
to pinpoint the effectiveness of the training by gauging enhancements in targeted knowledge
domains.

60
Chapter 4
Results
The focal aim of this study was to examine the intricacies of group training dynamics and
the assimilation of newly recruited paraprofessionals regarding ABA practices within
substantially separated ABA-based classrooms. This chapter commences with a concise
recapitulation of the research inquiries, seamlessly transitioning into the description of the
methodological framework employed for data collection and subsequent analysis. The
overarching goal of this chapter is to meticulously unveil and critically analyze the findings
extracted from the comprehensive process of data analysis.
Restatement of Research Purpose
Presently, there are no established federal guidelines or regulations specifying subject
matter or times pertaining to paraprofessionals receiving continuous professional development.
School districts must acknowledge the vital contribution that paraprofessionals make to the
education of students with special needs. Paraprofessionals must have meaningful professional
development opportunities. Without ongoing training, paraprofessionals may face challenging
situations where they are ill-equipped to adequately support students with special needs or fulfill
the responsibilities associated with their role.
This study focused on previously collected data from a past professional development
training for paraprofessionals supporting students in a significantly separated ABA-based
elementary classrooms, grades Pre-K–5.
Thirty-five full-time paraprofessionals across fourteen classrooms participated in past
professional development. The paraprofessionals were either recently recruited for the ABAbased program or had been working in the ABA-based program for less than six months. All

61
participants were proficient in English and had a high school diploma, with two having tradeschool experience, six with an associate degree, and eleven with a bachelor’s degree. The
average age of the participants was 32 years, ranging from 18 to 56 years. Fifteen participants
had previous ABA experience, but data pertaining to such experience was not collected. Table 11
outlines details on participating paraprofessionals.
Table 11
Participant Details
Number of
Participants

35

Number of
Classroom
the
Participants
Represent

14

Criteria for
Participant
Participation
1.) participants
were employed to
work within the
elementry
substantially
separated ABAbased classrooms,
2.) participants
were employed for
less than 6 months
within this district,
3.) participants had
not received ABA
professional
development from
the district in the
past

Participant
Highest Degree

Participant
Age Range

High School - 16
Trade School – 2
Associate - 6
Bachelor - 11

18-56

Number of
Participants
with Prior
Experience

15
Average 32

The past professional development was completed across three sessions, each session
lasted two to three hours, which started with a pretest moving into the power point training and
ending with a posttest. The two assessment-of-knowledge questionnaires for each of the three
training module, consisting of 10 multiple-choice questions. The assessment off knowledge

62

questionnaires were administered as "paper and pencil" assessments, with one given as a pretest
before the training session and the other as a posttest immediately afterward. Participants were
instructed to respond independently from each other.
During the pre-training sessions, participants took the pretest without prior review of the
module content. They had 30 minutes to complete the ten multiple-choice questions. When tests
were completed, the tests were placed in manila envelopes to ensure anonymity and a blind
review process. A senior paraprofessional, who ensured all test codes were completed,
administered the pretest. After the pretest, participants were given a 10-minute break before the
training session began.
The training sessions lasted between two to three hours, with short breaks every 40
minutes. Conducted in the elementry school cafeteria, the sessions included slideshow
presentations with handouts, content videos, and skills modeling. Slides featured fill-in-the-blank
questions to encourage discussion, and participants were prompted to ask questions and engage
in discussions. The training was led by an employee of the school district who holds a Board
Certified Behavior Analyst certification and twenty-five experience years within ABA. The
trainer has worked within the district for ten years supporting the ABA classrooms and has
experience in providing district one hour, one topic training, such as function of behavior, use of
visuals, to past paraprofessionals, teachers, parents, and administrators.
Immediately following the training, participants completed the posttest, which consisted
of the same questions as the pretest but randomized. They had 30 minutes to complete the test,
which was again placed in manila envelopes for anonymity. The senior paraprofessional ensured
all test codes were completed before collecting the tests. After the posttest, participants returned
to their classrooms to prepare for the first day of school. This process aimed to measure the

63

knowledge gained by paraprofessionals through the training sessions while ensuring anonymity
and reducing potential biases in test administration and evaluation.
The following research question guided this quantitative study: In a group training of
evidence-based practice, to what extent, if any, do paraprofessionals advance their knowledge of
applied behavior analysis?
Results
Pretest and posttest for each of the three modules were matched using the corresponding
code placed at the top of each test. Subsequently, packet numbers from 1 to 35 were assigned
once the matching was completed. Table 12 illustrates the number of correct responses on both
the pretest and posttest for every packet. The scores on this table range from 0, indicating no
correct responses, to 10, representing the highest number of correct responses.
Table 12
Packet Number Scores
Packet
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Module One
Module Two
Module Three
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Correct
Correct
Correct
Correct
Correct
Correct
Responses Responses Responses Responses Responses Responses
7
10
4
7
8
9
2
3
6
8
8
8
6
7
4
5
7
9
7
8
4
8
9
8
2
7
6
9
8
9
4
4
5
5
9
8
3
4
6
5
7
9
8
9
8
9
8
9
2
3
5
8
5
8
4
6
8
5
6
6
5
6
6
9
7
9
9
9
7
9
6
9
6
9
8
10
9
8
5
10
10
7
7
10
4
7
6
6
9
9

64
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

6
3
2
5
5
4
9
8
5
7
6
8
8
6
8
9
8
3
4
6

10
4
5
5
7
5
10
9
7
6
5
9
10
6
8
8
9
5
6
8

6
7
6
4
8
5
6
10
9
9
8
8
9
4
7
6
5
3
4
3

5
8
8
6
6
8
8
8
9
9
10
6
9
6
7
7
6
7
9
8

7
8
9
8
10
9
8
7
10
8
8
7
6
9
9
8
8
7
8
8

10
9
9
8
8
6
8
8
9
8
9
9
7
10
10
10
10
10
8
9

Statistical Method
Pretest-posttest designs are commonly employed in educational research for comparing
one or more groups as well as measuring changes resulting from experimental treatments (Kim
& Wilson, 2010). Pretesting serves multiple purposes: it establishes a baseline before an
intervention, enables stratification of subjects based on pretest scores (known as blocking),
provides a covariate in quasi-experimental designs, and helps tailor instructional materials to
students' current levels by identifying their existing knowledge or deficiencies. Some researchers
argue that pretests function as motivational tools or direct teaching aids (Gunasekera, 1997).
Generally, pretests can increase arousal or attention towards upcoming events such as treatments
and posttests (Sime & Boyce, 1969). By alerting subjects to relevant topics, pretests selectively
direct attention towards the areas of interest for the researchers. This heightened focus on the
intervention or posttest, whether general or specific. Pretesting is a starting point; essentially,

65
pretesting is recommended in education to understand what participants already know or where
they may need improvement. Then, posttests gauge alterations in dependent variables, offering
valuable insights into the development of knowledge following the intervention.
Figure 1
Growth Gain Design Flow

Pretest Y1

Presentation of Module T

Posttest
Y2

Y1 = pretest scores, T = experimental treatment, Y2 = posttest scores, and D = the difference
between pretest-posttest scores (calculated as Y2 − Y1 = D).
Module Analysis
In the context of educational and social science research, the reliability and validity of
gain scores are critical for accurately measuring changes in learning (Zimmerman & Williams,
1982). This method’s focus is very often on the description of systematic patterns within change,
such as the increase of knowledge after intervention. The analysis began by determining the total
number of accurate responses for both the pretest and posttest phases. This foundational step of
pairing and then identifying the difference between the tests served as a crucial starting point for
assessing the impact of the intervention across the different modules (Kelly & Monczunski,
2007). Using growth gain analysis provides estimates of the magnitude of the treatment effects,
rather than merely indicating their presence. This approach also directly facilitates many of the
pairwise comparisons, offering a more comprehensive analysis of the data (Glantz, et. al, 2016).
To measure changes in learning, one fundamental approach is to calculate the raw score
referred to as growth gain, defined as the absolute difference between post-test and pre-test

66
scores. This measure provides a straightforward metric for assessing learning outcomes.
Additionally, similar principles apply to the validity of gain scores (Zimmer & Williams, 1998).
When the conditions favor higher variance and reliability in post-test scores, the validity of gain
scores is likely enhanced. A comprehensive understanding of performance across the three
modules was calculated. The process involved calculating cumulative correct responses, which
entailed summing the total correct responses from both pretests and posttests within each
module. The subsequent step centered on calculating the variance by subtracting the correct
pretest responses from their respective correct posttest responses. This method was
systematically applied to each module, in succession.
The next step involved completing a variance analysis to identify any differences or
changes in the measured outcomes (Gravetter & Wallnau, 2017). Variance is a measurement of
the spread between numbers in a data set; in particular, it measures the degree of dispersion of
data around the sample’s mean. (Graziano & Raulin, 2013) The variances obtained were
instrumental in gauging the effectiveness of the intervention in each module (Table 13). Further,
the average of correct responses and the corresponding variance for each module were
calculated, facilitating a module-wise understanding of the impact, and allowing for a
comparative assessment across different stages of the study.
Table 13
Summary of Data
Module
One

Average
Correct
Responses

Variance

Total Percentage of
Correct Responses

Pretest

Total Points
Correct out of
350
Responses
194

5.543

4.785

55%

Posttest

244

6.971

4.617

70%

67

Difference

50 points gained

14% increase

Module
Two

Average
Correct
Responses
6.286

Variance

Total Percentage of
Correct Responses

Pretest

Total Points
Correct
Responses
221

3.798

63%

Posttest

276

7.886

2.311

79%

Difference

56 points gained

Module
Three

Average
Correct
Responses

Variance

Total Percentage of
Correct Responses

Pretest

Total Points
Correct out of
350
Responses
275

7.857

1.303

79%

Posttest

303

8.657

1.055

87%

Difference

16% increase

28 points gained

8% increase

Among the three modules, Module One exhibited the lowest pretest score, indicating a
lower baseline of understanding or performance level. In contrast, Module Two highlighted a
middle-range pretest score, suggesting a moderate starting point for participants in this module.
Finally, Module Three boasted the highest pretest score among the three, indicating a
comparatively stronger initial grasp or competence in the subject matter. These variations in
pretest scores across modules lay the foundation for further analysis and exploration of how each
module’s instructional strategies contributed to the observed differences in participant
performance.
All the modules increased their scores from pretest to posttest, implying a consistent and
overall advancement in performance or comprehension within each respective area of study. The
increased posttest scores demonstrate the positive impact of the interventions applied in the
modules, underscoring notable progress and success in the learning process.

68
To determine the means and standard deviations for each module, an analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was conducted. The mean served as a measure of central tendency for each area under
examination, and the standard deviations provided a definition to elucidate potential variations
within each distribution. An ANOVA is a statistical method for gauging the impact of an
independent variable (in this case, paraprofessional group ABA training) on dependent variables
(pretest-posttest). The determination of statistically significant relationships relied on an alpha
level of 0.05 or lower. Adherence to ANOVA assumptions was imperative, encompassing
independence, normal distribution, and homogeneity of variance. The independence assumption
was contingent on data collection methods, the normality assumption addressed the sampling
distribution of means, and the equal variance assumption pertained to variances within
populations (Gravetter & Wallnau, 2017).
This study’s data exemplifies statistical significance; as the p-value was below the
significance level of .05, the null hypothesis was rejected in the one-way ANOVA, indicating
ample evidence that the group means were not all equal. In other words, the three learning
modules did not result in identical average exam scores. ANOVA calculations can be seen in
table 14.
Table 14
ANOVA Calculations
Module
One
Between the
Participants
Within the
Participants
Module
Two

SS

df

MS

F

P-value

F crit

35.714

1

35.714

7.597

0.008

3.982

319.657

68

4.701

SS

df

MS

F

P-value

F crit

69

Between the
Participants
Within the
Participants

22.857

1

22.857

207.714

68

3.055

SS

df

Between the
Participants

11.200

Within the
Participants

80.171

Module
Three

7.483

0.008

3.982

MS

F

P-value

F crit

1

11.200

9.500

0.003

3.982

68

1.179

Note: SS = sum of squares (a critical measurement of the variability of a data set; the variance of
a set of scores and the square root of the variance is its standard deviation); df = degrees of
freedom (the number of independent pieces of information used to calculate in statistics,
calculated as the sample size minus the number of restrictions); MS = mean square (calculated as
SS / df); F = F-value (the overall value, calculated as MSBetween / MSWithin); p = the p-value
corresponding to the overall F-value; and F crit = the F critical value that corresponds to α = .05
Question Analysis
An analysis of the module questions spanning over the three modules was conducted to
discern the specific areas where the participants consistently provided correct responses. This
examination identified patterns of proficiency and pinpointed the topics or aspects within each
module that resonated effectively with the participants (Table 15). Scrutinizing the correct
responses enables gaining valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the modules,
facilitating targeted improvements and refinements. Such scrutinizing is essential for honing the
effectiveness of training materials and ensuring that paraprofessionals acquire a comprehensive
understanding of the key concepts embedded within the modules.

70

Table 15
Module Question Correct Responses
Module
One
Pretest
Posttest
Correct
Correct
Responses Responses
Question
1
Question
2
Question
3
Question
4
Question
5
Question
6
Question
7
Question
8
Question
9
Question
10

Module
Two
Pretest
Posttest
Correct
Correct
Responses
Responses

Module
Three
Pretest
Posttest
Correct
Correct
Responses
Responses

16

27

16

27

35

35

25

28

25

28

33

34

17

23

17

23

33

28

17

25

17

25

34

34

28

31

28

31

13

33

20

21

20

21

18

31

33

28

33

28

25

26

13

29

13

29

27

27

12

20

12

20

32

35

13

12

13

12

23

19

Module One
In Module One, the pretest scores ranged from 12 to 33. Question 7 (behavior) had the
highest correct responses, and Question 9 (function) had the least. The subsequent posttest scores
ranged from 12 to 31. The cumulative correct responses demonstrate an increase of fifty points,
highlighting an improvement particularly notable in Question 8 (function). This overall
observation across questions denoted 14% knowledge growth. However, the discernible decrease

71
in correct responses for Questions 7 and 10 prompted a nuanced inquiry, signaling potential
challenges with or misunderstandings of the questions.
Module Two
In Module Two, the pretest scores ranged from 12 to 33. The participants displayed
prowess in Question 7 (data collection) but struggled with Question 9 (graphing), which had the
fewest correct responses. The posttest ranged from 12 to 31. The collective correct responses
from the posttest demonstrate an increase of fifty-six points, emphasizing a notable improvement
and substantial 16% transformation. However, a reduction in correct responses for Question 7
(data collection) and 10 (baseline) hints at potential content perplexities, emphasizing the
imperative for targeted instructional adjustments.
Module Three
In Module Three, the pretest scores ranged from 13 to 35. This module exhibited the
highest number of correct responses on the pretest, with Question 1 seeing a perfect score. The
posttest ranged from 19 to 35. The combined posttest responses showed an increase of twentyeight points, underscoring a positive advancement, showing an 8% augmentation in knowledge
retention. Questions 1 and 9 on the posttest achieved perfect scores. Hence, questions 3 and 10
saw a decrease in correct responses.
The subtleties across the pretests and posttests encourage an investigation into factors
influencing participant comprehension and delineating areas for instructional enhancement. This
scrutiny serves as an invaluable compass for honing instructional strategies and effectively
addressing the multifaceted learning needs of participants in this scholarly pursuit.
The focal aim of this study was to examine the intricacies of group training dynamics and
the assimilation of newly recruited paraprofessionals regarding Applied Behavior Analysis

72

(ABA) practices within substantially separated ABA-based classrooms. Thirty-five full-time
paraprofessionals participated in the professional development training, which included pretests,
PowerPoint training sessions, and posttests to measure knowledge gained. The training,
conducted by an experienced Board Certified Behavior Analyst, included engaging discussions,
content videos, and skills modeling. The study's primary research question was to determine the
extent to which paraprofessionals advanced their knowledge of ABA through group training.
Pretest and posttest scores for each of the three modules were matched and analyzed, showing a
consistent increase in knowledge across all modules.
The analysis revealed significant improvements in knowledge, with each module
exhibiting notable growth. Module One showed a 14% increase in knowledge, Module Two
showed a 16% increase, and Module Three showed an 8% increase. An analysis of variance
(ANOVA) confirmed statistically significant differences in group means, suggesting the
effectiveness of the training. The findings demonstrated the positive impact of the training on
paraprofessionals' understanding of ABA practices, highlighting areas of strength and
pinpointing aspects needing further instructional improvement. This comprehensive analysis
underscores the importance of ongoing professional development for paraprofessionals to
support students with special needs effectively.
The next chapter will begin with a detailed discussion of the results, providing an
overview of each module and the specific questions that were part of the training assessment.
This discussion will not only summarize the findings but also interpret the implications of these
results in the context of paraprofessional training for ABA practices. By examining the
performance on each question and module, we will identify areas where participants showed

73
significant improvement as well as topics that may require additional focus in future training
sessions.
Furthermore, the chapter will explore the broader implications of the study, particularly
how the findings can enhance current training programs for paraprofessionals. By pinpointing
areas of strength and identifying gaps in knowledge, the study offers valuable insights that can be
used to refine and target professional development initiatives more effectively. The chapter will
conclude with recommendations based on the study's outcomes, providing actionable suggestions
for enhancing the training and support of paraprofessionals in ABA-based classrooms, thereby
ensuring they are well-equipped to meet the needs of students with special needs.

74
Chapter 5
Discussion
The current study evaluated the effectiveness of a group-training format with
paraprofessionals who support students in ABA-based, substantially separated classrooms. The
training curriculum focused on ABA knowledge competencies, ensuring a foundational
understanding of essential learning concepts and their applications in behavior-analytic settings.
In essence, the study measured participants’ knowledge regarding basic learning principles of
behavior, instructional strategies, and prompt/prompt-fading methods through pre- and posttraining tests.
The study’s reliability was a primary concern. Recognizing the potential impact of
participant history on the subject matter, measures were taken to control and account for external
events that could influence measurements. These measures involved establishing participant
criteria and having the participants independently complete both the pretest and posttest. The risk
of participant dropout was addressed through a detailed focus on time constraints, implementing
strategies to minimize dropout rates by including the training on scheduled district training days,
and ensuring a comprehensive dataset. Mindful participant selection was another crucial aspect,
aimed at mitigating selection bias by carefully choosing individuals for the training.
In adapting the training model to district constraints for accommodating district
professional development days, several aspects were tailored, such as the time of the day and
duration of each learning session. District orientations on mandatory 51A training and
confidentiality training were integrated into the afternoon portion following a morning ABA
training. Acknowledging the need for efficient and group-focused training, knowledge
competency sessions were spread over three mornings sessions where each session lasted

75
between two to three hours. Each session featured content modules for topic-specific training
sessions. To optimize the training’s effectiveness a, a single trainer employed within the district
provided the training sessions for professional development. The trainer was a certified behavior
analyst with over 25 years of experience in the field and has routinely conducted ABA training
across the district to paraprofessionals, teachers, district administration, and parents. The trainer
employed visually appealing Power Point slides, case illustrations, and interactive discussions
within a standardized presentation format. While the paraprofessionals’ perceptions of the
training were not objectively measured, anecdotal evidence suggested a positive reception,
aligning subjectively with their entry-level skills.
There was a positive trend in participant performance, revealing a noteworthy increase in
correct responses from the pretest to the posttest across the three modules. Module One
demonstrated a 14% increase in knowledge, Module Two showed a 16% increase, and Module
Three exhibited an 8% increase. This observation implies a substantial enhancement in the
participants’ comprehension and proficiency across the diverse areas covered within the
modules. Module One encompassed defining and providing examples of behavior,
reinforcement, antecedent-behavior-consequence contingency, measurement, data collection, and
the fundamental principles of functional behavior assessment. Module Two delved into discrete
trial training, incidental teaching, and task analysis, while Module Three inspected prompt
hierarchy and fading prompt strategies.
Module One demonstrated an increase in knowledge in eight out of ten questions,
indicating a successful learning outcome for the majority of the content covered. The clarity and
relevance of content was clearly presented and highly relevant to the participants’ roles and
responsibilities. When participants perceive the material as directly applicable to their work, they

76
are more motivated to learn and remember it. The module topics were on fundamental concepts
and straightforward information rather than complex, nuanced topics. This focus makes it easier
for participants to learn and retain the material. Additionally, due to Module One being presented
on the first of three days, participants typically approach the material with a heightened level of
interest and enthusiasm. Participants are free from fatigue or distraction that may accumulate
over subsequent days of training. This can enhance their ability to memorize and respond to
straightforward content.
Module Two, which showed the highest increase at 16%, may have had a greater
potential for growth due to reasons such as covered content that was less familiar to participants
initially, providing more room for learning and improvement referred to as content complexity.
The higher increase suggests that participants had more to gain in terms of new knowledge or
skills. Content complexity pertains to the cognitive demands implied by the language used in a
content standard which involves considerations such as the required prior knowledge, the
processing of concepts and skills, the sophistication, the number of components, and the
application of the content structure necessary to meet an expectation or achieve an outcome
(Kurdi, 2019).
In comparison, Module Three showed a smaller increase of 8%, which was lower
compared to the other modules. This modest growth can be primarily attributed to the high
number of correct responses observed in the pretest. When participants already possess a
substantial understanding of the material before the intervention, there is naturally less room for
improvement. Factors such as pre-existing knowledge or the ceiling effect could explain this
phenomenon. In summary, the high number of correct pretest responses for Module Three
indicates that participants were already knowledgeable about the material, limiting the scope for

77
noticeable improvement (Uttl, 2005). This underscores the importance of considering initial
knowledge levels when designing educational interventions and assessments to ensure that they
can effectively measure growth across different starting points (Uttl, 2005).
Table 16 below provides a visual representation of the correct responses per question for
both the pretest and posttest across the three modules. Of the ten questions in Module One, eight
demonstrated an increase of at least one additional correct response when comparing posttest
responses to pretest responses. However, questions seven and ten exhibited a decrease in the
number of correct responses in the posttest.
Analyzing Module One question seven pertained to identifying when a paraprofessional
should refer to a behavior intervention plan. Question ten addressed which behaviors could be
classified in specific categories such as action, medical, or communication. Despite these topics
being covered during the presentation, the decline in correct responses may be attributed to the
paraprofessionals' application of these questions to practical scenarios, which might have
introduced complexity (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). In contrast, other questions were more
straightforward, focusing on definitions. This disparity suggests that while theoretical knowledge
might have been effectively conveyed, the practical application of this knowledge posed a
greater challenge for the paraprofessionals.
Table 16
Total Correct Responses per Question

78

Module One

Module Two

Module Three

35

35

35

30

30

30

25

25

25

20

20

20

15

15

15

10

10

10

5

5

5

0

0

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Pretest Correct Responses

Pretest Correct Responses

Pretest Correct Responses

Posttest Correct Responses

Posttest Correct Responses

Posttest Correct Responses

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Within Module Two, eight of the ten questions show an increase in correct responses on
the posttest when compared to the pretest. The decrease in correct responses for question seven
can be attributed to the requirement for participants to apply task analysis techniques to their
existing knowledge in order to make a comparison. Task analysis involves breaking down
complex behaviors or tasks into smaller, manageable steps to understand how they are
performed. This application may have posed challenges, as it required participants to match
theoretical knowledge with real-world situations, potentially leading to inconsistencies in their
responses. Similarly, question ten experienced a decrease in correct responses because it
demanded participants to not only know how to identify specific behaviors but also to understand
how to effectively present and teach these skills. This dual requirement of knowledge application
(identification and instructional competence) could have contributed to the decline in correct
responses. Participants may have struggled to integrate both aspects seamlessly, especially
because the training emphasized theoretical understanding over practical application or if the
question's complexity exceeded their initial preparation.

79
Similarly to Module One and Two, Module Three also has a decrease of correct responses
in two question. Question three refers to classrooms having a schedule of the day posted within
the classroom. Perhaps the training about the use of visuals was not adequately covered in the
training module, or the choices for question three may have been ambiguous or closely related,
making it challenging for participants to select the correct response. Ambiguous options can lead
to confusion and incorrect answers even among participants who grasp the underlying concepts
(McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Last, question ten in Module Three also saw a decrease in correct
responses on the pretest. A few factors may have contributed to this decline in correct responses.
Participants may not have been able to understand the reasons and timing for prompting which
involves nuanced knowledge of behavioral principles and intervention strategies. Due to being
the third day of training, the presenter rushed the presentation of the context. Additionally,
participants may experience mental fatigue or a decline in attention, leading to mistakes or less
careful reading and answering of the question. When this occurs, Participants might rush through
the last question if they are running out of time or eager to finish the quiz. This haste can lead to
misunderstandings or less thoughtful responses.
Table 17
Content Questions with a Decrease in Correct Responses
Module

Module
One

Content Area
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Define Behavior
Reinforcement – What is it?
Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence
Contingent
Measurement – Why and when it is needed.
Data Collection and Interpreting the Data
What is a Function Behavior Analysis
Interventions – Antecedent - Consequence

Content Questions with a
Decrease of Correct
Responses
• When to refer to a
Behavior
Intervention Plan.
• Behavior can serve
as communication.

80
Module
Two

Module
Three

•
•
•

Discrete Trial Training Procedure
Incidental Teaching or Natural Teaching
Task Analysis Procedure

•

•

Prompt Hierarchy - Verbal and Physical
Responses
Fading Prompt Strategies (Visuals,
positioning)

•
•

•

•

When not to use a
task analysis.
When not to provide
reinforcement during
DTT.
When to use visuals.
Why we prompt
student.

Despite the overall growth observed in participant responses table 17 depicts where
participants showed a decrease of correct responses on the posttest when compared to the pretest.
The differences that have surfaced, especially in questions related to behaviors, task analysis, and
the timing for appropriate prompting. These variations highlight areas where participants may
benefit from additional focus, examples, and longer time for questions during the treatment
phase of future training endeavors. This analysis demonstrates the participants’ evolving
proficiency and guides recommendations for refining and tailoring future training programs to
optimize learning outcomes.
This study aligns with the findings of Brock and Carter (2013), indicating a consistent
pattern in the effectiveness of adequately trained paraprofessionals, particularly in their ability to
implement beneficial educational practices for students with ASD. Additionally, scholars
(Douglas et al., 2012, Fisher and Pleasants, 2012, Kim et al., 2016) emphasize the importance of
having evidence-based approaches to objectively assess paraprofessional skills and provide
targeted feedback for improvement. Without sufficient professional development resources,
including valid assessments and data-driven feedback, paraprofessionals may not develop the
necessary skills to effectively support teachers and cater to the needs of students with disabilities.

81
Implications
Studying paraprofessional training within an ABA-based classroom can have several
benefits and insights for the school district as well as for research in the field of ABA. In
educational settings, the effectiveness of paraprofessionals is crucial to ensuring the success of
students with diverse learning needs, particularly those receiving interventions grounded in
ABA. Understanding the impact of paraprofessional training goes beyond immediate classroom
outcomes; it extends to broader implications within the educational landscape and research
community. By delving into the training protocols, methods, and outcomes associated with
paraprofessionals in ABA-based classrooms, researchers can discover insights that inform not
only practice but also contribute to the ongoing evolution of evidence-based interventions and
educational policies. Thus, the study of paraprofessional training serves as a pivotal point where
practical implications intersect with the advancement of knowledge in the field of ABA.
ABA-based approaches are highly structured and individualized for each student
(Cooper, et al, 2017). Well-trained paraprofessionals can better implement EBP to increase
student academic and functional skills. Trained paraprofessionals are also able to identify
challenging behaviors, implement developed behavior interventions, and provide reinforcement
to increase prosocial behaviors.
Investing in comprehensive training for paraprofessionals may initially require resources,
but it can lead to long-term cost savings for school districts. Trained paraprofessionals are likely
to be more effective in their roles, reducing the need for additional interventions or specialized
services. Paraprofessionals who receive thorough training are more likely to feel confident and
competent in their roles, which can lead to higher job satisfaction and reduced turnover rates.
This stability can benefit the school district by fostering continuity in support for students and

82
reducing the need for frequent recruitment and training of inexperienced staff. Further, providing
adequate training for paraprofessionals ensures that school districts follow legal requirements,
such as those outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and failure to provide
appropriate training may result in legal challenges or complaints from parents or advocacy
groups.
ABA-based classrooms often require collaboration among various stakeholders,
including teachers, therapists, administrators, and families. Training paraprofessionals effectively
can facilitate smoother collaboration and communication within school districts, leading to more
coordinated support for students. ABA approaches rely heavily on data collection and analysis to
inform instructional decisions and behavior-management strategies. Well-trained
paraprofessionals can contribute to this process by accurately collecting and documenting
relevant data, which can ultimately improve the effectiveness of interventions and support
services.
Demonstrating a commitment to providing high-quality training for paraprofessionals
reflects positively on school districts and can enhance their reputation within their community.
This reflection and enhancement can be particularly important for attracting and retaining
families with students with special needs. By prioritizing high-quality training for
paraprofessionals in schools is paramount. These dedicated professionals are pivotal in
supporting both teachers and students, thus enhancing the overall educational experience.
Equipping them with effective training ensures they have the necessary skills to assist students
with diverse needs, fostering inclusive learning environments. Moreover, investing in quality
training facilitates their professional development, boosting job satisfaction and retention rates.

83

Ultimately, such investment leads to improved student outcomes and cultivates a more
supportive educational ecosystem.
In tandem with this commitment to training, effective organizations embrace best
practices to cultivate top talent. To retain sought-after employees, these organizations prioritize
positive workplace cultures, competitive compensation, and opportunities for professional
growth and longevity of the paraprofessional’s employment to the district.
The results of this study contribute to the development of best practices for training
paraprofessionals who work with students with diverse learning needs, particularly those
receiving ABA-based interventions. By providing empirical evidence of the effectiveness of
specific training interventions or strategies, research in this area can promote the adoption of
evidence-based practices within educational settings, which can lead to improvements in the
quality of support provided to students with ASD and other learning needs, enhancing their
educational outcomes.
Studies in this area can help fill gaps in the existing literature regarding the role of
paraprofessionals in implementing ABA interventions and supporting students with ASD or other
developmental disabilities. By addressing these gaps, researchers can contribute to a more
comprehensive understanding of effective instructional practices and support systems. Such
research may inform policy decisions related to the training and deployment of paraprofessionals
in educational settings. Further, policymakers can use evidence from studies in this area to
develop guidelines, standards, and regulations that promote high-quality training and support for
paraprofessionals working with students with diverse needs.
Ultimately, both researching paraprofessional training within ABA-based classrooms and
acquiring foundational knowledge before working with students with ASD in substantially

84
separated classrooms present multifaceted benefits. These benefits include informing best
practices, identifying effective strategies, filling knowledge gaps, enhancing professional
development, supporting evidence-based practice, informing policy and practice, promoting
collaboration, and fostering interdisciplinary research in education and applied behavior analysis.
Prioritizing such endeavors not only deepens understanding of individual needs and improves
classroom management but also cultivates cultural sensitivity and creates opportunities for
professional growth. In the end, these efforts contribute to a more inclusive and supportive
learning environment, ensuring that all students receive the support they need to thrive
academically and socially.
Conclusion
Currently, schools heavily rely on paraprofessionals to support students at risk or with
disabilities, yet research and practices regarding the professional development training of these
individuals lag behind. This dissertation delves into the imperative requirement for bolstered
training and support systems tailored for paraprofessionals engaged in special education services
within Massachusetts, particularly in light of the escalating populace of students with disabilities.
Despite their pivotal contributions, paraprofessionals often encounter gaps in their preparation
concerning evidence-based instructional methodologies, potentially impeding their efficacy in
aiding students with significant needs.
The study undertook an assessment of the efficacy of group training for newly recruited
paraprofessionals in substantially separated ABA-based classrooms, with a focus on elementary
classrooms spanning from pre-kindergarten to fifth grade, across two schools. Thirty-five fulltime paraprofessionals, encompassing both fresh recruits and those with less than six months of
experience in the ABA-based program, participated in the research endeavor. Analysis of the

85

data underscored a substantial enhancement in posttest scores across all modules, indicative of a
consistent progress in both performance and comprehension among the participants.
A meticulous scrutiny of specific module questions revealed areas of proficiency and
highlighted topics that resonated effectively with the paraprofessionals. Noteworthy was the 14%
knowledge growth in Module One, a 16% transformation in Module Two, and an 8% increase in
knowledge retention in Module Three. Particularly remarkable were the perfect accuracy rates
achieved in Question ten of Module Three on both pretest and posttest. However, challenges
encountered with data-related questions alluded to potential content complexities necessitating
instructional refinements.
Given the escalating prevalence of ASD, this research underscores the urgency of
equipping educational personnel, including paraprofessionals, with a heightened understanding
of ABA principles and evidence-based practices. Crucially, the study accentuates the pressing
necessity for comprehensive training of paraprofessionals to ensure their proficiency in
supporting students with ASD in substantially separated ABA-based classrooms. The integration
of specialized, evidence-based interventions emerges as imperative to address the distinctive
needs of these students, thereby fostering their academic and developmental achievements. By
prioritizing ongoing professional development and targeted support mechanisms, educational
institutions can bolster the capacity of paraprofessionals to facilitate meaningful progress and
inclusive educational experiences for students with ASD.
Implications for Future Research
The results of this study provide valuable insight into the possibilities of future
professional development. For example, schools should prioritize including paraprofessionals in
as many school paraprofessional development as possible because their involvement enhances

86
overall educational effectiveness, fosters a cohesive team dynamic, and ensures alignment with
the school's educational objectives. This approach additionally offers a cost-effective means of
incrementally building the skills of paraprofessionals while tailoring their training to address
specific school-based needs. Doing so not only acknowledges the crucial role played by
paraprofessionals in the school but also demonstrates respect for their contributions, likely
resulting in increased effectiveness and motivation among these valuable staff members.
Next, to foster effective collaboration and information exchange between teachers and
paraprofessionals, school schedules must be structured to accommodate regular meetings. These
meetings serve as crucial platforms for discussing student performance, sharing insights,
providing ongoing professional development, and coordinating efforts to provide optimal
support.
Additionally, school districts must create a well-defined job description to serve as a
roadmap for paraprofessionals, outlining the specific tasks and responsibilities expected of them.
Such a roadmap not only helps in avoiding misunderstandings but also provides a foundation for
assessing performance and identifying areas for improvement.
Finally, future research endeavors should explore critical areas of training requirements
and evaluate the effectiveness of existing training structures or programs tailored for
paraprofessionals. School districts should contemplate employing specialized special-education
trainers, particularly those well-versed in ABA and autism. By incorporating a dedicated trainer
with expertise in ABA and autism, investigating the specialized district format and delivery
mechanisms, overcoming barriers to training provision, and assessing the impact on the
proficiency of paraprofessionals can be undertaken. This comprehensive exploration serves as

87
the foundation for tailoring a model of training that can be adapted for broader application across
educational settings.
Furthermore, the focused research should be directed toward specific skills identified as
high-priority training needs. These skills may include positive behavior support interventions,
natural environment teaching, and prompting techniques. The prioritization of research in these
domains may inform interventions that enhance the educational experiences of students with
ASD, empowering educators to adeptly address behavioral, academic, and communication needs
in the children they serve.
When individuals feel respected and appreciated, they are more likely to perform at their
best. Therefore, promoting the effectiveness of paraprofessionals in schools aligns with the
collective interests of the entire school community. By investing in their professional
development, schools can enhance the skills and capabilities of paraprofessionals, ultimately
contributing to a more supportive and successful learning environment for all students.

88
References
Alberto P. A, Troutman A. C. (2008). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (8th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
Austin, K. M. (2013). Training needs of paraprofessionals supporting students with autism
spectrum disorders (Order No. 3561526). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (1369849422).
Azad, G. F., Locke, J., Downey, M. M., Xie, M., & Mandell, D. S. (2015). One-to-one assistant
engagement in autism support classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education,
38(4), 337–346. doi.org/10.1177/0888406415603208
Baer, D.M., Wolf, M.M., & Risley, T.R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior
analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91-97.
Baer, M.D., Wolf, M.M. & Riley, T.S., (1967). Some current dimensions of applied behavior
analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91-97.
Bailey, J. S., & Burch, M. R. (2005). Ethics for behavior analysts: A practical guide to the
behavior analyst certification board guidelines for responsible conduct. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Bambara, L. M., & Kern, L. (Eds.). (2005). Individualized supports for students with problem
behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans. New York, NY: The Guildford Press.
Barnhill, G. P., Polloway, E. A., & Sumutka, B, M. (2011). A survey of personnel preparation
practices in autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 26(2), 75–86. doi:10.1177/1088357610378292

89
Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2018). RBT task list (2nd ed.). Littleton, CO: Author.
https://www.bacb.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/RBT-2nd-Edition-TaskList_181214.pdf
Bethune, K.S., & Kiser, A. (2017). Doing more with less. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36,
25–30.
Bingham M.A., Spooner F., & Browder, D. (2007). Training paraeducators in promoting the use
of augmentative and alternative communication by students with severe disabilities.
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42(3), 339– 352.
Breton, W. (2010). Special education paraprofessionals: Perceptions of preservice, preparation,
supervision, and ongoing developmental training. International Journal of Special
Education, 25, 34–45.
Brock, M. E., & Carter, E. W. (2013). A systematic review of paraprofessional-delivered
educational practices to improve outcomes for students with intellectual and
developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities,
38(4), 211–221. doi:10.1177/154079691303800401
Brock, M. E., & Carter, E. W. (2015). Effects of a professional development package to prepare
special education paraprofessionals to implement evidence-based practice The Journal of
Special Education, 49(1), 39–51. doi:10.1177/0022466913501882
Brock, M., & Carter, E. (2016). Efficacy of teachers training paraprofessionals to implement peer
support arrangements. Exceptional Children, 82(3), 354-371.
10.1177/0014402915585564

90
Buchman, S. M., & Weiss, M. J. (2006). Applied behavior analysis and autism: An introduction.
Ewing, NH: The New Jersey Center for Outreach and Services for the Autism
Community.
Buschbacher, P. W., & Fox, L. (2003). Understanding and intervening with the challenging
behavior of young children with autism spectrum disorder. Language Speech and
Hearing Services in Schools, 34(3), 217. doi:10.1044/0161- 1461
Campbell, D.T. & Stanley, J.C. (1966). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for
Research. Chicago: McNally, 84.
Capizzi A. M., & Da Fonte, M. A. (2012). Supporting paraeducators through a collaborative
classroom support plan. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(6).
Carlson, E., Daley, T., Bitterman, A., Riley, J., Keller, B., Jenkins, F., & Markowitz, J. (2008).
Changes in the characteristics, services, and performance of preschoolers with disabilities
from 2003-04 to 2004-05.
Carter, E., O’Rourke, L., Sisco, L. G., & Pelsve, D. (2009). Knowledge, responsibilities, and
training needs of paraeducators in elementary and secondary schools. Remedial and
Special Education, 30(6), 344–359. https://doi/10.1177/0741932508324399
Causton-Theoharis, J. N., & Malmgren, K. W. (2005). Increasing peer interactions for students
with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. Exceptional children, 71(4), 431444.
Celiberti, D., Buchanan, S., Bleecker, F., Kreiss, D., & Rosenfeld, D. (2008). The road less
traveled: Charting a clear course for autism treatment. In Autism: Basic Information (PP.
1-21). Ewing, NJ: The New Jersey Center for Outreach & Services for the Autism
Community (COSAC)

91
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007). Autism spectrum disorders Overview.
[Electronic version]. Available online at http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/overview.htm
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Latest ADDM Data Releases. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/new-data.html
Chasson, G. S., Harris, G. E., & Neely, W. J. (2007). Cost comparison of early intensive
behavioral intervention and special education for children with autism. Journal of Child
and Family Studies, 16, 401-413.
Chebli, S.S., Martin, V. & Lanovaz, M.J. (2016). Prevalence of stereotypy in individuals with
developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Revised Journal of Autism
Developmental Disorders, 3, 107–118.
Chopra, R. V., Sandoval-Lucero, E., & French, N. K. (2011). Effective supervision of
paraeducators: Multiple benefits and outcomes. National Teacher Education, 4(2), 15–26.
Collins, B. C., Evans, A., Creech-Galloway, C., Karl, J., & Miller, A. (2007). Comparison of the
acquisition and maintenance of teaching functional and core content sight words in
special and general education settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 22(4), 220–233.
Conroy, M. A., Sutherland, K. S., Algina, J. J., Wilson, R. E., Martinez, J. R., & Whalon, K. J.
(2015). Measuring teacher implementation of the BEST in Class intervention program
and corollary child outcomes Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 23(3), 144–
155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426614532949
Cook B. G., Cook S. C. (2011). Thinking and communicating clearly about evidence-based
practices in special education. Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Research.
Retrieved from http://www.cecdr.org/

92
Cook, B. G., & Odom, S. L. (2013). Evidence-Based Practices and Implementation Science in
Special Education. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 135-144
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900201
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2017). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.
Council for Exceptional Children: Standards for Evidence-Based Practices in Special Education.
(2014). TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46(6), 206 – 212.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914531389
Creswell. J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Fifth edition. Los Angeles, SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L. W., & McLaughlin, M. W. (2011). Policies that support professional
development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 81–92.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., Gardner, M., & Espinoza, D. (2017). Effective teacher
professional development. Learning Policy Institute. May. Retrieved from Effective
Teacher Professional Development (research brief) (ed.gov)
Dawson G, Jones EJ, Merkle K, Venema K, Lowy R, Faja S, et al. (2012). Early behavioral
intervention is associated with normalized brain activity in young children with autism. J
Am Acad Child Adolescent Psychiatry. 51:1150–1159.
Dominick, K. C., Davis, N. O., Lainhart, J., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Folstein, S. (2007). Atypical
behaviors in children with autism and children with a history of language impairment.

93
Research in developmental disabilities, 28(2), 145–162. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2006.02.003
Douglas, S. N., Light, J. C., & McNaughton, D. B. (2012). Teaching paraeducators to support the
communication of young children with complex communication needs. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 33, 91–101. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0271121412467074
Downing, J. E., Ryndak, D. L., & Clark, D. (2000). Paraeducators in inclusive classrooms, their
own perceptions. Remedial and Special Education, 21(3) 171– 181. doi:
10.1177/074193250002100308
Doyle, M.B. (2002). Paraprofessionals as members of the team. Supporting students with
behavioral difficulties. In K. L. Lane, F. M. Gresham, & T. E. O’Shaugnessy (Eds.),
Interventions for children with of at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Dyer, K. (2013). Antecedent-behavior-consequence (ABC) analysis. In F. R. Volkmar
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of autism spectrum disorders (pp. 175–180). New York, NY:
Springer.
Eapen V, Crnčec R, Walter A. Exploring Links between Genotypes, Phenotypes, and Clinical
Predictors of Response to Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention in Autism Spectrum
Disorder. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Sep 11;7:567. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00567.
PMID: 24062668; PMCID: PMC3769633.
Eikeseth, S., Tristram, S., Jahr, E., & Eldevik, S. (2007). Outcome for children with autism who
began intensive behavioral treatment between ages 4 and 7: A comparison controlled
study. Behavior Modification, 31(3), 264-278.

94
Emerson, E. (1995). Challenging behaviours: Analysis and intervention in people with learning
disabilities. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
ESSA Requirements for Title I Paraprofessionals Frequently Asked Questions. (2015). Retrieved
from http://www.state.nj.us/education/title1/hqs/pp/ppfaq.shtml
Etscheidt, S. (2005). Paraprofessional services for students with disabilities: A legal analysis of
issues. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(2), 60–80.
Farmer, C. A., & Aman, M. G. (2011). Aggressive behavior in a sample of children with autism
spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(1), 317– 323. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RASD.2010.04.014.
Fenske, E. C., Zalenski, S., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (1985). Age at intervention and
treatment outcome for autistic children in a comprehensive intervention program.
Analysis & Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5(1–2), 49–58. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0270-4684(85)80005-7
Fisher, M., & Pleasants, S. L. (2012). Roles, responsibilities, and concerns of paraeducators:
Findings from a statewide survey Remedial and Special Education, 35(5), 287–297.
Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. B. (2007). Effectiveness of direct instruction for teaching statement
inference, use of facts, and analogies to students with developmental
disabilities and reading delays. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities,
22(4), 244–251.
Fox, L., & Smith, B. J. (2007). Issue brief: Promoting social, emotional and behavioral outcomes
of young children served under IDEA. Tampa, FL: Technical Assistance Center on Social
Emotional Intervention for Young Children.

95
Forster, E. M., & Holbrook, M. C. (2005). Implications of paraprofessional supports for students
with visual impairments. Review, 36(4), 155+.
French, N. K. (2001). Supervising paraprofessionals: A survey of teacher practices. Journal of
Special Education, 35(1), 41. doi:10.1177/002246690103500105
French, N. K., & Pickett, A. L. (1997). Paraeducators in Special Education: Issues for TeacherEducators Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(1), 61–73.
Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2010). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (6th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Gamrat, C., Zimmerman, H. T., Dudek, J., & Peck, K. (2014). Personalized workplace learning:
An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher professional development
program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1136– 1148.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12200
Giangreco, M., & Broer, S. M. (2005) Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive
schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and Other
Developmental Disabilities 20, 10-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10883576050200010201
Giangreco, M. F., & Broer, S. M. (2007). School-based screening to determine overreliance on
paraprofessionals. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 149–158.
Giangreco, M. F., Broer, S. M., & Edelman, S. W. (2002). Schoolwide planning to improve
paraeducators supports: A pilot study. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 21(1), 3–15.
Giangreco, M. F., Broer, S. M., & Suter, J. C. (2011). Guidelines for selecting alternatives to
overreliance on paraprofessionals: Field-testing in inclusion oriented schools. Remedial
and Special Education, 32(1), 22–38. doi:10.1177/0741932509355951

96
Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S. W., Broer, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional
support of students with disabilities: literature from the past decade Exceptional Children,
68, 45–63.
Giangreco, M., Suter, J., & Doyle, M. (2010). Paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: A review of
the recent research. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20:4, 41–57.
Giles, E. (2010). Paraprofessionals’ perceptions of training and efficacy. A phenomenological
study. Saarbrucken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.
Glantz, S., Slinker, B., & Neilands, T.B.. (2016). Primer of applied regression & analysis of
variance. 3e. McGraw-Hill Education. https://accessmedicine-mhmedical-com.proxysru.klnpa.org/content.aspx?bookid=2117&sectionid=157967387
Glasberg, B. A. (2006). Functional behavior assessment for people with autism: Making sense of
seemingly senseless behavior. Woodbine House.
Graner, P.S., Ault, M.M., Mellard, D., Gingerich, R. A., & Woods, K. (2018). Effective
professional learning for adults, Part 1: Principles of Adult Learning and Effective
Practices The University of Kansas Center for Research and Learning, 26:4.
Grazizno, A. M. & Raulin, M. L. (2013). Research methods: a process of inquiry. (8e). Pearson.
Greer, D. R., & Ross, D. E. (2008). Verbal behavior analysis: Inducing and expanding new
verbal capabilities in children with language delays. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
Grindle CF, Hastings RP, Saville M, Hughes JC, Huxley K, Kovshoff H, et al. (2012). Outcomes
of a behavioral education model for children with autism in a mainstream school
setting. Behavior Modif. 36:298–319.

97
Gunasekera, T. W. (1997). Effects of pretest sensitization associated with cooperative learning
strategies on the achievement level of adult mathematics students. Dissertation
AbstractsInternational,58(03), 718A.
Guskey, T. R., & McTighe, J. (2016). Pre-assessment: Promises and cautions. Educational
Leadership, 73(7), 38–43.
Hagiwara, T. (2002). Academic assessment of children and youth with Asperger syndrome,
pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified, and high functioning autism.
Assessment for Effective Intervention, 27, 89–100.
Hailikari, M. S. C., Katajavori, N., & Lindblom-Ylanne, S. (2008). The relevance of prior
knowledge in learning and instructional design American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 72(5) 1-8.
Hall, L. J., Stadnik-Grundon, G. S., Pope, C., & Romero, A. B. (2010). Training
paraprofessionals to use behavioral strategies when educating learners with autism
spectrum disorders across environments. Behavioral Interventions. doi:10.1002/bin.294
Herzog, T. (2011). Evidence-based practices in public school programs for young students with
Autism Spectrum Disorder. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:142389652
Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Strain, P. S., Todd, A. W., & Reed, H. K. (2002). Problem behavior
interventions for young children with autism: A research synthesis. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 32, 423–446.
Hughes, M. T., & Valle-Riestra, D. M. (2008). Responsibilities, preparedness, and job
satisfaction of paraprofessionals: working with young children with disabilities
International. Journal of Early Years Education, 16, 163–173.
Hyman, S.L., Levy, S.E., Myers, S.M., & AAP Council on Children with Disabilities, Section on

98

developmental and behavioral pediatrics. (2020). Identification, evaluation, and
management of children with autism spectrum disorder. Pediatrics, 145(1), e20193447.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004).Washington, DC: US Department of
Education. Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2017, May 2). Sec. 300.8 (3) (1) - Individuals With
Disabilities Education Act. Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.
https://sites.ed.gov/idea/regs/b/a/300.8/c/1
Iovannone, R., Dunlap, G., Huber, H. & Kinead, D. (2003). Effective educational Practices for
students with autism spectrum disorders. [Electronic version]. Focus on Autism and
Other Developmental disabilities, 18, 3, 150-165.
Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Green, G. (1998). Cost-benefit estimates for early intensive
behavioral intervention for young children with autism: General model and single state
case. Behavioral Interventions, 13, 201–226.
Johnson, J. W., McDonnell, J., Holzwarth, V. N., & Hunter, K. (2004). The efficacy of embedded
instruction for students with developmental disabilities enrolled in general education
classes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(4), 214– 227.
Jones, C. R., Ratcliff, N. J., Sheehan, H., & Hunt, G. H. (2012). An analysis of teachers’ and
paraeducators’ responsibilities with implications for professional development. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 40, 19–24.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed., Rev.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

99
Kahal, A. (2008). Initial training in evidence based interventions for paraprofessionals working
with children with autism spectrum disorders in elementary schools. ProQuest. Retrieved
March 13, 2017.
Katsiyannis, A., Hodge, J., & Lanford, A. (2000). Paraprofessionals: Legal and practice
considerations. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 297–304.
Kim, S., Koegel, R., and Koegel, L. (2016). Training paraprofessionals to target socialization in
students with ASD: credibility of implementation and social validity. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 19(2), 102-114.
Kim, S. E. & Wilson, L. V. (2010). Evaluating pretest effects in pre-post studies. Sage, 70(5),
744-759.
Koegel, R. L. & Covert, A. (1972). The relationship of self-stimulation to learning in autistic
children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 381–387.
Koegel, L., Robinson, S., & Koegel, R. (2009). Empirically supported intervention practices for
autism spectrum disorders in school and community settings: Issues and practices.
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09632-2_7.
Kraemer, B. R., Cook, C. R., Browning-Wright, D., Mayer, G. R., & Wallace, M. D. (2008).
Effects of training on the use of the behavior support plan quality evaluation guide with
autism educators. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(3), 179–189.
doi:10.1177/1098300708318796

100

Kurdi, M.Z. (2019). Measuring content complexity of technical texts: machine learning
experiments. Artificial Intelligence in Education. 148-152. DOI:10.1007/978-3-03023207-8_28
Likins, M. (2003). NCLB implications for paraprofessionals. Principal Leadership, 3(5), 10–14.
Retrieved from https://www.principals.org/portals/0/content/46785.pdf
Locke, J., Beyda’s, R. S., Marcus, S., Stahmer, A., Aarons, G. A., Lyon, A. R., Cannuscio, C.,
Barg, F., Dorsey, S., Mandell, D. S. (2016). A mixed methods study of individual and
organizational factors that affect implementation of interventions for children with autism
in public schools. Implementation Science, 11(1), 135. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0501-8
Lovaas, O.I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in
young autistic children. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology,55(1):3–9.
doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.55.1.3.
Lovaas, O.I., Koegel, R.L., Simmons, J.Q., & Long, J.S. (1973). Some generalizations and
follow-up measures for autistic children in behavior therapy. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 6, 131-166.
Maag, J. W.(2004). Behavior management. From theoretical implications to practical
applications. (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
Maggin, D. M., Fallon, L. M., Sanetti, L. M. H., & Ruberto, L. M. (2012). Training
paraeducators to implement a group contingency protocol: Direct and collateral effects.
Behavioral Disorders, 38(1), 18-37.
Mainzer, R., & Horvath, M. (2001). Issues in preparing and licensing special educators. Council
for Exceptional Children. Arlington, VA.

101
Matson, J. (2009). Applied behavior analysis for children with autism spectrum disorders. DOI:
10.1007/978-1-4419-0088-3
Matson, J., Mahan, S., Hess, J., Fodstad, J., & Neal, D. (2010). Progression of challenging
behaviors in children and adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorders as measured by
the Autism Spectrum Disorders-Problem Behaviors for Children (ASD-PBC). Research
in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4, 400–404. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2009.10.010.
Mason, R. A., Gunersel, A. B., Irvin, D. W., Willis, H. P., Gregori, E., An, Z. G., and Ingram, P.
B. (2021) From the Frontlines: Perceptions of Paraprofessionals’ Roles and
Responsibilities Teacher Education and Special Education, 44(2), 97-116.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406419896627
May Institute. (2015). The National Standards Project of the National Autism Center. National
Autism Center. https://www.mayinstitute.org/national-autism-center/index.html :~:text=In 2009, the National Autism Center completed a,that effectively target the core
symptoms of ASD.
McEwan, E.K. & McEwan, P.J. (2003). Making sense of research; what’s good, what’s not and
how to tell the difference. Sage.
Mills v. Board of Education of Dist. of Columbia, 348 F. Supp. 866 (D.D.C 1972)
Minondo, S., Meyer, L., & Xin, J. (2001). The role and responsibilities of teaching assistants in
inclusive education: What’s appropriate?. The Journal of The Association for Persons
with Severe Handicaps, 26, 114–119. doi:10.2511/rpsd.26.2.114.
Minshawi, N., Hurwitz, S., Fodstad, J., Biebl, S., Morris, D., & Mcdougle, C. (2014). The
association between self-injurious behaviors and autism spectrum disorders. Psychology
Research and Behavior Management, 125. doi:10.2147/prbm.s44635

102
Moody, F.B. (1967). Teacher aide: A description and analysis of a new staff position in selected
Pennsylvania Public Schools (Doctoral Dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University).
Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text database. (Publication No. AAT
6803553).
Moshoyannis, T., Pickett, A. L., & Granick, L. (1999). The evolving roles and education/training
needs of paraprofessionals and teachers in the New York City Public Schools: Results of
survey research and focus groups. New York: Paraprofessional Academy, Center for
Advanced Study in Education, Graduate School: City University of New York.
Murdick, N. L., Gartin, B. C., & Crabtree, T. L. (2002). Special education law. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
National Autism Center. (2009). National standards project: Findings and conclusions:
Addressing the need for evidence-based practice guidelines for autism spectrum
disorders. Randolph, MA: Author.
National Autism Center. (2015). National standards project: Findings and conclusions:
Addressing the need for evidence-based practice guidelines for autism spectrum
disorders. Randolph, MA: Author.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2021). Students with Disabilities. Condition of
Education. US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved
January 10, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgg.
National Research Council. Educating children with autism Washington, DC: National Academy
Press, 2001.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 USC. 6301 § 2122 et seq. (2002). Retrieved from
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html

103
Passaro, P., Pickett, A. L., Latham, G., & HongBo,W. (1994). The training and support needs of
paraprofessionals in rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 13, 3–9.
Patterson, K. B. (2006). Roles and responsibilities of paraprofessionals: In their own words.
Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 2(5), 1–13. Retrieved from
http://www.cec.sped.org/Publications/CEC-Journals/TEACHING-Exceptional-Children
Pickett, A. L. (1994). Paraprofessionals in the education workforce. Washington, DC: National
Education Association.
Pickett A. L. (1999). Strengthening and supporting teacher/provider-paraeducator teams:
Guidelines for paraeducator roles, supervision, and preparation. New York, New York:
City University of New York, National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals in
Education and Related Services.
Pickett, A. L., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2003). The employment and preparation of
paraeducators: The state-of-the-art-2003. National Resource Center for Paraeducators.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED474398.pdfSkinnerBF. Two types of conditioned reflex:
a reply to Konorski and Miller. J. Gen. Psychol. 1937;16:272–79.
Pickett, A. L., Vasa, S., & Steckelberg, A. (1993). Using paraeducators effectively in the
classroom. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Foundation. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 369 732).
Pindiprolu, S. S., Peterson, S. M., & Berglof, H. (2007). School personnel’s professional
development needs and skill level with functional behavior assessments in ten
Midwestern states in the United States: Analysis and issues. The Journal of the
International Association of Special Education, 8, 33–42.

104
Preston, Z. B. (2015). Challenging behaviors: Perceived training needs of special education
paraprofessionals (Doctoral dissertation, Brandman University, 2015). Ann Arbor, MI:
ProQuest LLC.
Quilty, K.M. (2007). Teaching paraprofessionals how to write and implement social stories for
students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 182–189.
Reid, D. H. (2017). Competency-based staff training. In Applied behavior analysis advanced
guidebook: A manual for professional practice (pp. 21–41). London, UK: Academic
Press.
Reid, D.H., Rotholz, D.A., Parsons, M.P., Morris, L., Braswell, B.A., Green, C.W., & Schell,
R.M. ( 2003). Training human service supervisors in aspects of PBS: Evaluation of a
statewide, performance-based program. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 5,
35-46.
Riggs, C. G., & Mueller, P. H. (2001). Employment and utilization of paraeducators in inclusive
settings. The Journal of Special Education, 35, 54–62.
Rispoli, M., Neely, L., Lang, R., & Ganz, J. (2011). Training paraprofessionals to implemented
interventions for people autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Developmental
Neurorehabilitation, 14(6), 378–388.
Rodriquez, T. N. (2010). Paraprofessional preparation and supervision in special education
(Doctoral dissertation). University of California, Riverside, CA.
Rogan, P., & Held, M. (1999). Paraprofessionals in job coach roles. The Journal of the
Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 272–279.
Roth, M. E., Gillis, J., & DiGennaro Reed, F. D. (2014). A meta-analysis of behavioral
interventions for adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of

105
Behavioral Education [10530819], 23(2), 258–286. doi:10.1007/s10864-013- 9189-x
ACF
Rutherford, A., (2013). ANOVA and ANCOVA: a GLM approach. 2 edition Wiley ISBN: 978-1118-49168-3
Sack-Min, J. (2008). The cost of autism. American School Board Journal, 196(3), 18-23.
Scheuermann, B., Webber, J., Boutot, E., & Goodwin, M. (2013). Problems with personnel
preparation in autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism & Other Developmental
Disabilities, 18(3), 197–206.
Serna, R.W., Lobo, H.E., Fleming, C.K., Fleming, R. K., Curtin, C., Foran, M.M., and Hamad,
C. D. (2015). Innovations in behavioral intervention preparation for paraprofessionals
working with children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education
Technology. March; 30(1): 1-12.
Shieh, G. (2020). Power Analysis and Sample Size Planning in ANCOVA Designs.
Psychometrika. Mar;85(1):101-120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-019-09692-3.
Shyman, E. (2010). Identifying predictors of emotional exhaustion among special education
paraeducators: A preliminary investigation. Psychology in Schools, 4(8), 828–841.
doi:10.102/pits.20507
Sime, M. E., & Boyce, G. C. (1969). Overt response, knowledge of results and learning.
Programmed Learning and Educational Technology,6(1), 12-19.
Slocum, T.A., Detrich, R., Wilczynski, S.M. et al. The Evidence-Based Practice of Applied
Behavior Analysis. BEHAV ANALYST 37, 41–56 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614014-0005-2

106
Smith, Tristram & Eikeseth, Svein & Klevstrand, Morten & Lovaas, O. (1997). Intensive
behavioral treatment for preschoolers with severe mental retardation and pervasive
developmental disorder. American Journal of Mental Retardation: AJMR, 102, 238–49.
doi:10.1352/0895-8017(1997)1022.0. CO;2.
Stahl, B. J., & Lorenz, G. (1995). Views on Paraprofessionals. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota
Department of Children, Families, and Learning.
Stahmer AC, Pellecchia M. Moving towards a more ecologically valid model of parentimplemented interventions in autism. Autism. 2015 Apr;19(3):259-61. doi:
10.1177/1362361314566739. PMID: 25950033.
Sturmey, P. (2015). Reducing restraint and restrictive behavior management practices. Springer.
Manhattan, NYC.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide
positive behavior support. School Psychology, 35, 245–259.
Summers, J. A., Houlding, C. M., & Reitzel, J.-A. M. (2004). Behavior management services for
children with autism/pdd: program description and patterns of referral. Focus on Autism
and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19(2), 95–101. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190020401
Suter, J. C., & Giangreco, M. F. (2009). Numbers that count: Exploring special education and
paraprofessional service delivery in inclusion-oriented schools. Journal of Special
Education, 43(2), 81–93. doi:10.1177/0022466907313353
Tompkins, R. H., Ratcliff, N., Jones, C., Vaden, S. R., Hunt, G., & Sheehan, H. C. (2012). The
myth of the foolproof script: Can paraprofessionals effectively improve kindergarten
student achievement using a scripted phonics program? Early Years: An International

107
Journal of Research and Development, 32(3), 313-323.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2011.651712
Tureck, K., Matson, J. L., Cervantes, P., & Konst, M. J. (2014). An examination of the
relationship between autism spectrum disorder, intellectual functioning, and comorbid
symptoms in children. Research in developmental disabilities, 35(7), 1766–1772.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.02.013
Tureck, K., Matson, J. L., May, A., & Turygin, N. (2012). Externalizing and tantrum behaviors in
children with ASD and ADHD compared to children with ADHD. Developmental
Neurorehabilitation, 16(1), 52–57. doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.719245
U.S. Department of Education (2010). Thirty-five Years of Progress in Educating Children With
Disabilities Through IDEA, Washington, D.C. :Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
U.S. Department of Education (1997). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments
of 1997, 20 USC section 1412 et seq.
U.S. Department of Education. (2020). 42nd Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation
of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Statistics of State
School Systems. (2017). Table 213.10: Staff employed in public elementary and
secondary school systems, by type of assignment: Selected years, 1949–50 through fall
2015. In U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Ed.),
Digest of Education Statistics (2016 ed.). Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/current_tables.asp

108
Uttl B. Measurements of individual differences: Lessons from memory assessment in research
and clinical practice. Psychological Science. 2005;16(6):460–467.
Wallace, T., Shin, J., Bartholomay, T., & Stahl, B.J. (2001). Knowledge and skills for teachers
supervising the work of paraprofessionals. Exceptional Children, 67, 520–533.
Walker, V. L., & Snell, M. E. (2017). Teaching paraprofessionals to implement function-based
interventions. Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 32(2), 114–123.
doi:10.1177/1088357616673561
Wasburn-Moses, L., Chun, E., & Kaldenberg, E. (2013). Paraprofessional roles in an adolescent
reading program: Lessons learned. American Secondary Education, 41(3), 34–49.
Watkins, A. M. (2015). The design of a training program for paraprofessionals working with
students with autism in an urban school district (Order No. 3719524).
Webster, R., & Blatchford, P. (2015). Worlds apart? The nature and quality of the educational
experiences of pupils with a statement for special educational needs in mainstream
primary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 41, 324– 342.
Werts, M. G., Zigmond, N., & Leeper, D. C. (2001). Paraprofessional proximity and academic
engagement: Students with disabilities in primary aged classrooms. Education and
Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 424–440.
Wright, P., & Wright, P. (2021). The history of special education law in the United States.
Wrightslaw. Retrieved from https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/art/history.spec.ed.law.htm
Yell, M. L., & Drasgow, E. (2000). Litigating a free appropriate public education: The Lovaas
hearings and cases. Journal of Special Education, 33(4), 205-214.
Zimmerman, D. W. & Williams, R. H. (1982). On the high predictive potential of change and
growth measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 961-968.

109
Zimmerman, D. W. & Williams, R. H. (1998). Reliability of gain scores under realistic
assumptions about properties of pre-test and post-test scores. British journal of
mathematical & statistical psychology, 51(2), 343-351.

110
Appendix A: Research Permission Form

111
Appendix B:
Behavior, Reinforcement, Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence, Measurement, Data
Collection, and Functional Behavior Analysis
Quiz 1 Pretest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
**When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope.
1. Which group only has behaviors?
a. Kick, Smell, Walk
b. Angry, Pinch, Happy
c. Mad, Listen, Think
d. Walk, Stomp, Mad
2. Reinforcement occurs _________ the behavior.
a. Sometimes
b. After
c. During
d. Never
3. The goal of positive or negative reinforcement should be to _________ desired behavior.
a. Stop
b. Increase
c. Decrease
d. Prolonged
4. Reinforcement can be _______, _______, or ________.
a. Comments, Smiles, Nothing
b. Food, Verbal, Comments
c. Nothing, Toys, or both
d. Verbal, Tangible, Both

112
5. What type of data collection counts each occurrence of a displayed behavior?
a. Latency
b. Interval
c. Frequency
d. Duration

6. Antecedent strategies occur before an undesired behavior. Which is not an antecedent
strategy?
a. Using a visual schedule
b. Using behavior momentum
c. Withholding attention
d. Completing a preference assessment
7. Whenever you are questioning how to respond, always follow the __________________.
a. Withholding Attention
b. Provide Reinforcement
c. Behavior Support Plan
d. Task Analysis
8. When concluding why a student displays behaviors, you first need to rule out
___________.
a. Attention Concerns
b. Boredom Concerns
c. Cognitive Level
d. Medical Concerns
9. There are four _________ to why a person engages in a behavior.
a. Functions
b. Games
c. Control
d. Ideas
10. Behavior is a form of _________________.
a. Action
b. Communication
c. Medical
d. None of the above

113
Appendix C:
Behavior, Reinforcement, Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence, Measurement, Data
Collection, and Functional Behavior Analysis
Quiz 1: Posttest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
**When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope.
11. Reinforcement occurs _________ the behavior.
a. Sometimes
b. After
c. During
d. Never
12. Whenever you are questioning how to respond, always follow the __________________.
a. Withholding Attention
b. Provide Reinforcement
c. Behavior Support Plan
13. Task Analysis Reinforcement can be _______, _______, or ________.
a. Comments, Smiles, Nothing
b. Food, Verbal, Comments
c. Nothing, Toys, or both
d. Verbal, Tangible, Both
14. There are four _________ to why a person engages in a behavior.
a. Functions
b. Games
c. Control
d. Ideas

114
15. The goal of positive or negative reinforcement should be to _________ desired behavior.
a. Stop
b. Increase
c. Decrease
d. Watch

16. Which group only has behaviors?
a. Kick, Smell, Walk
b. Angry, Pinch, Happy
c. Mad, Listen, Think
d. Walk, Stomp, Mad
17. Behavior is a form of _________________.
a. Action
b. Communication
c. Medical
d. None of the above
18. Antecedent strategies occur before an undesired behavior. Which is not an antecedent
strategy?
a. Using a visual schedule
b. Using behavior momentum
c. Withholding attention
d. Completing a preference assessment
19. Prolonged: What type of data collection counts each occurrence of a displayed behavior?
a. Latency
b. Interval
c. Frequency
d. Duration
20. When concluding why a student displays behaviors, you first need to rule out
___________.
a. Attention Concerns
b. Boredom Concerns
c. Cognitive Level
d. Medical Concerns

115
Appendix D:
Discrete Trial Training, Incidental Teaching, and Task Analysis
Quiz 2: Pretest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
** When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope
1. Discrete trial training provides direct _________________.
a. Love
b. Responses
c. Instruction
d. Behaviors
2. Prior to starting DTT, first you must _________________________.
a. Talk with the teacher about any hunger concerns
b. Talk to the student to the bathroom
c. Gather and prepare materials
d. Have the student sit for three minutes
3. During DTT, when you provide the directive (SD) to the student, you need to ensure
__________.
a. The room is quiet by removing all the other students
b. The student is quiet and watches others play games
c. You gave the student multiple reminders to sit
d. The student is attending to you
4. During DTT, when you provide the directive (SD) to the student, you
______________________.
a. Should talk loudly and ask a question?
b. Should use clear and concise statements
c. Should use lengthy and detailed statements
d. You should provide multiple examples of why the student should look at you

116
5. During baseline we do not provide ______________, but during teaching sessions we
must provide ______________.
a. Attention, reinforcement
b. Reinforcement, attention
c. Attention, attention
d. Reinforcement, reinforcement

6. Naturalistic teaching is another term for __________________ teaching.
a. Discrete Trial Training
b. Applied Behavior Analysis
c. Incidental Teaching
d. Trained Learning
7. Both DTT and incidental teaching are __________________ and we collect
_________________.
a. Whimsical, observation
b. Only with large groups, data
c. Planned, data
d. More than 10 students, observation
8. A task analysis can be referred to as a __________________ because all parts of the task
are broken down.
a. Bill
b. Recipe
c. Novel
d. Comic Strip
9. We at COACh graph the student’s _________________ on a task analysis.
a. Incorrect
b. Challenges
c. Number of needed prompts
d. Independence
10. What skill would not be taught using task analysis?
a. Going to the bathroom
b. Brushing teeth
c. Getting dressed
d. Naming flashcards

117
Appendix E:
Discrete Trial Training, Incidental Teaching, and Task Analysis
Quiz 2: Posttest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
**When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope.
11. We at COACh graph the student’s _________________ on a task analysis.
a. Incorrect
b. Challenges
c. Number of needed prompts
d. Independence
12. A task analysis can be referred to as a __________________ because all parts of the task
are broken down.
a. Bill
b. Recipe
c. Novel
d. Comic Strip
13. During DTT, when you provide the directive (SD) to the student, you need to ensure
__________.
a. The room is quiet by removing all the other students
b. The student is quiet and watches others play games
c. You gave the student multiple reminders to sit
d. The student is attending to you
14. During DTT, when you provide the directive (SD) to the student, you
______________________.
a. Should talk loudly and ask a question?
b. Should use clear and concise statements
c. Should use lengthy and detailed statements
d. You should provide multiple examples of why the student should look at you

118

15. Discrete trial training provides direct _________________.
a. Love
b. Responses
c. Instruction
d. Behaviors
16. Prior to starting DTT, first you must _________________________.
a. Talk with the teacher about any hunger concerns
b. Talk to the student to the bathroom
c. Gather and prepare materials
d. Have the student sit for three minutes
17. Naturalistic teaching is another term for __________________ teaching.
a. Discrete Trial Training
b. Applied Behavior Analysis
c. Incidental Teaching
d. Trained Learning
18. Both DTT and incidental teaching are __________________ and we collect
_________________.
a. Whimsical, observation
b. Only with large groups, data
c. Planned, data
d. More than 10 students, observation
19. What skill would not be taught using task analysis?
a. Going to the bathroom
b. Brushing teeth
c. Getting dressed
d. Naming flashcards
20. During baseline we do not provide ______________, but during teaching sessions we
must provide ______________.
a. Attention, reinforcement
b. Reinforcement, attention
c. Attention, attention
d. Reinforcement, reinforcement

119
Appendix F:
Prompt Hierarchy and Fading Prompt Strategies
Quiz 3: Pretest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
**When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope.
1. What students might have prompts provided to them?
a. No one needs extra support
b. All- at some point everyone needs some support
c. Only students with education plans
d. Only students grade pre-K to fifth grade
2. Prompts are to help the student gain _______________ and have ____________
responses.
a. Information, silent
b. Items, correct
c. Attention, incorrect
d. Information, correct
3. Prompts can be _____________, ________________, and _______________.
a. Verbal, loud, clear
b. Physical, verbal, repeated
c. Repeated, clear, loud
d. Verbal, physical, spatial
4. As the student gains correct responses, prompts should ______________________.
a. Fade
b. Remain
c. Immediately stopped
d. Increased

120

5. Visual supports are a way of making auditory information ________________.
a. Have meaning
b. Understand
c. Informed
d. All of the above
6. What is not considered a visual support is a physical prompt.
a. Arrangement of the environment with written and pictures on the items
(clock/desk/table)
b. Gestures – pointing
c. Classroom schedules
d. Making a sign for the class with expected school behaviors
7. All classrooms should have ________________________ displayed in the room.
a. Classroom schedule
b. Only written classroom rules
c. Student artwork
d. Teacher schedule
8. When we use visual supports, we should ____________________________.
a. Never talk
b. Make the student tell us what the visual means
c. Pair our language with the visual
d. Never use visuals
9. The simplest schedule visual to use is a _____________ - _________________ board.
a. Never, Later
b. First, Then
c. Then, Yesterday
d. Now, First
10. When should visuals be use.
a. Bathroom only
b. Half
c. Only for DTT
d. All day

121
Appendix G:
Prompt Hierarchy and Fading Prompt Strategies
Quiz 3: Posttest
Date: _______________________
CODE:
Your first car make/model. ________________________________
Your first pet name. ______________________________________
Number of cousins you have _________________ or your favorite number. _______________
**Do not write your name on the quiz.
**When you are finished, please place it in the manila envelope.
11. When should visuals be use.
a. Bathroom only
b. Half
c. Only for DTT
d. All day
12. What students might have prompts provided to them?
a. No one needs extra support
b. All- at some point everyone needs some support
c. Only students with education plans
d. Only students grade pre-K to fifth grade
13. All classrooms should have ________________________ displayed in the room.
a. Classroom schedule
b. Only written classroom rules
c. Student artwork
d. Teacher schedule
14. When we use visual supports, we should __________________________.
a. Never talk
b. Make the student tell us what the visual means
c. Pair our language with the visual
d. Never use visuals

122
15. Prompts can be _____________, ________________, and _______________.
a. Verbal, loud, clear
b. Physical, verbal, repeated
c. Repeated, clear, loud
d. Verbal, physical, spatial
16. Never use visuals. As the student gains correct responses, prompts should
______________________.
a. Fade
b. Remain
c. Immediately stopped
d. Increased
17. The simplest schedule visual to use is a _____________ - _________________ board.
a. Never, Later
b. First, Then
c. Then, Yesterday
d. Now, First
18. Visual supports are a way of making auditory information ________________.
a. Have meaning
b. Understand
c. Informed
d. All of the above
19. What is not considered a visual support is a physical prompt.
a. Arrangement of the environment with written and pictures on the items
(clock/desk/table)
b. Gestures – pointing
c. Classroom schedules
d. Making a sign for the class with expected school behaviors
20. Prompts are to help the student gain _______________ and have ____________
responses.
a. Information, silent
b. Items, correct
c. Attention, incorrect
d. Information, correct