*.+n"-

Decenber 1969

Precision Teaching Techniques

Cc1"1ege of EducaEion

Universlty of 0regon

Title: Eval-uating Your Orsn Teaehing Performance by Direet Recording

Author: Ilarie Gaasholt

Address; Departmenc of Speelal- Education

College of Education

Unlversity of Oregon

Eugene, Oregon

Presented at: No fonnal presentation

Submitted to: Exceptional Children

l20L Sixteenth SEreet, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20035

,

!

!

€

z

]

ACKNOWLEDGMEI{TS

Generous thanks are extended to Dr, Eric Haughton fcr eneourage-

ment gutdance as a Precision Teaching Trainer, and for hls liberal- help

with the analysis and editoral asslstance whlch made this p{iper possitrJ-e.

Additional thanks are offered to the Engineered Learning ProJect

Staff: Dr. HilL Walker Director and Nancy Buckley Psychologlst for

giving the necessary freedo:n to conduct these stucies: and to Mary

Hendy for her help and support as teaching colleague and friend.

!4preclation is also extended to Dr. Tou LovLtt for his tinely

edltorial conrnents; to Martin l,Ieachtler for his generous he1"p 1n making

the figures; and to my husband, Oystein, for his encouragement' patlence'

and hel-pful suggestions.

Flnally, to the twenty-five studeuts wtro provided me with Joy and

constant stimulation to keep searching for urore effectlve teaehing pro-

cedures, I extend my gratitude.

EVALUATING YOUR OWN TEACHING PERFOIiMANCE BY DIRECT RECORDIIIG

ABSTP.za'CT

The use of a practical and precise method of evaluatlng teaching

skills through Precision Teaching technf"ques is presented. Daily Direct

recording and eharEing of teacher an<i pupil perfornance rates were used

as a measure of effectlveness in relationship to pupil performance rates.

Specific topics were: (1) differential changes in teacher behavior in

regards to individuals and groups of children; (2) teacher accuracy in

planning and following*through on a plan:red lesson; (3) personal recordlng

of teacher comnents during a tutorial session, (4) using teacher cursive

rorlting rate as a guide for setEing a realistic competency Ieve1 for stu-

dent curslve writing rates; (5) anaLyziag differences between sEudent per-

fornance rates before or after reaching a profieiency level in the areas

of writing and arithmetic; (6) and student charting.

Running:head

Using Direct Recording

The Englneered Learning Project was a U S O E Grant /i Mattson 468

Grant # OEc -4-6-061308-0571 (607) revlsion /15

Parent-teacher conferences and report cards requLre the teacher to

look at and carefully evaluate pupl1 progress. These appraisals are

often inadequate because the observatlons are too short, the tests are

less than perfect, the goals undefined, and the j-nferenees unverified,

(Zlumerman l-969). Lack of tlnerheavy class loads and inadequate mater-

laIs are belleved to be some of the reasons why we have been forced to

accept less precise measuring techniques and evaluations.

Precislon teaching (Llndsley, L964) offers to solve this problem

of evaluation by providing technl-ques that accurately and objectively

measure prrpil progress, It helps the teacher to pinpoinE educatl-onal

goals and to track, through objectlve neasures, the puplLrs movement, in

relationsh.i"p to that goaI. Thus precision teaching is not a teaching

proceCure, but rather a means of tracking the lea"rnlng process, and

evaluating parttcular teaching techniqtres.

As lmportant, clear1y, as a measure of pupLl perfornance is a measure

of teacher performance. Yet, in splte of the obvious fact that the two

are intiinately t.ied together, serious efforts to evaluate the performance

of the teacher are rarely made. The focus J.s singularly on the pupil --

reflectlng the concept thaE if the pupil doesnrt learn, ltts his fault.

The purpose of this paper Ls to show how the use of preclsion tea-

ching not only offers accurate measure of pupil progress, but also quite

naturally brings into the picture teacher perfornmnce. To put it more

precisely, the purpoce of this paper ls to show (1) that teacher evaluation

is an important part of the instructional process, and (2) that preci-

sion teaching effortlessly takes this into consideration by specifying

speciflc teaeher tasks ln relationshlp to pupll performance.

Gaasholt: Using Dl.reet Recording

2

Precision Teaching

Precj.sLon Eeaching is a system using daily ciirect recordJ_ng of a

plnpoinEed movemcnt and is tha means by whtch teachers ca_n efficiently and

economically evaluafe both thair instructional suc.cess and pupil success.

ThLs irnmediate feedback is of vltal importance to teacher, pupil, parent,

and admini-strator, howerzerr in this paper I will deal mainly wiEh teacher

uses.

The baslc steps of precision teaching are:

Pinpolnt a behavior to count.I

2 Get a dail-y reccrd of the rate of thj-s movement;the rate (nunber cnf responses o?er elapsed tine)e.ir::rt ti:e rate cn a six. c),cic l:el::..vicr char"l .

computeand

If necessary, change the performance rate in the deslreddirectlon (either up or donn on the chart).

4. Then try and try again untLL the deslred change ls achieved.

Daily chart paper

Perfornnance rates are charted on an equal propor:tion six cycle

chart. This standarciized chart greatly facilitares communication sj_nce

it was specifically designed for use in charting broacl ranges of bei:avlor.

This is benefleial when tlro very dlfferent behaviors are belng charted.

One teacher may be working wittr a 1ow rate behavior sueh as a teltper

tantrum and only counting one movement per day, whii.e another teaeher

may be acceleratiag oral reading rate and counting two hundred words per

rainr-rte, yel both teachers ean use identical chart paper and lmmediately

understand each project. The horizontal axis is divldcd i:rto one hun-

<ired and forty consecutive days. The vertical axis is in rate of move-

meats per mtr-nute and the units range from .001 fo 1000 over six lcgaritirmic

cveles. Special conventions have been devised to ensure entries cn the

3

l

Gaasholt: Using Dlrect Reeording

3

chart will be conslstent for unLformity and clarity.

Is Des Er.prion

Later in this article a lesson plan will be descrl-bed on the be-

havior formula, but a brief explanatlon seems appropriate here. The

fs description (Lindslelr, L964, revi-sed, 1969), includes all major com-

poneneEs in the individualts envl-ronaent which could affeet hls behavLor.

To illustrate, the forrm.rla would l"ook like this.

Program P::ogram - i'tovement - Arrangeaenf - ArrangedEvent Event

A brief descriptlon of each compcnent of the Is description of

t}:e fornula ts as follor.rs :

P{qgqam. The overall environmental settlng such as tine sche-dules, calendar aad setting.

Program Event. Those events which exist in the settlng whichcould ellcit the desired behavior,

3 Movement Cycle. The plnpointed behavior being counted.

4. Arrangement. The numerical- ratio between the movement and thearranged event.

5. &ggrea-*Eygg!. Those events whLch occur onI-y after the nove-ment cyele and are contingent upon a particular arrangement.

!s-q*q!--Eg9,iqies--t e esblse

The use of precision teaching tools--L"e., direct recording, six

cyele charE, ant Is descrtption, gives tlle teach*r j-mraediate and pre-

cise feed.back regarding Lnstructional procedures. By analyzing the con-

tinuous records of pupil behavior, the teaeher ean see whl-ch tnstruttione,

I

2

Gaasholt: Uslng Direct Recording

4

materials, and arranged-events are actually working with the ehildren.

This uni.que circular feedbaek between teacher and pupil ultimately re-

sul-ts in teacher behavior being directed back to the pupll.

Performanee rates for evaluation puposes have been used i.n the

pupil schools for sever:il years (Cox & Caldwell-, 1965; I{aughton, L96B;

Johnson, 1967; Koenig" L967; Starlln, A. L959; Starlin, L969).

Gqqgfal_ProcedUres

The purpose of this paper is to describe how preclslon teaching

procedures helped me evaluate my teaching while taklng direct records

of prrpil performanee. Unfortunately each proJect is not a success story,

but rather a deseriptJon of horv data alerted me to effectlve and non-

effective instructioaal procedures.

rrhlful].,en-nd-elg1gg

Six or sev3n children were referred to Englneered Learning Project

(ELP) experlnental classroom every eight r+eeks. The students were con-

sidered of average or above average intelligence, but were behavior

problems "n thelr respective classrooms. A total of tweaty-five child-

ren (24 boys and I girL) ln grades three through sevens received in-

struclion during the 1968-69 school year. The boys were not at grade

1g'7r.1 in one or more subjects, as tested by the Gates-MeKillop Reading

T.est, Stanford Diagnostlc Arithmetie Test and clally performance rates.

The teaching sltuatlon descrtbed here u,es unique (I.;alker & Brrckley,

1968). The Englneered Learning Project r,ras cperated by the Unlversity of

Oregon Speclal Educatlon Department and was located in an annex of a

Gaasholt: Using Dlrect Recording

5

regul-ar public school. The priuary goal of the project was to alter the

devlant behavior of each student as defi-ned by their regular classroom

teachers. Within this prima.ry focus of the project, rny baslc instruc-

tj.onal goals were: (a) to plnpoint each childrs deficlt. areas, €.8.r

doesntt know short vowel E, cannot cat:.y to tens place with a medlal

zpro, doesnrt form ctrrslve letters correctly, etc.; (b) and to teach

these skills as efficiently and effectively as possible r^rhile also scre-

eni-ng for materi.als and mot.ivators usable in the regular classroom.

The acadenics were my responsibil-ity, but were expected to fit withln the

planned envLronment of the project.

Data Col:lggttog

Dlrect observatj-on of the academic behavj.or was made by the tea-

cher aicle, mysel-f, and the students. The students recorded their start

and stop tirues q,hile I or the teacher aide recorded and charted the rate

on the six-cycle chart paper.

Since the children would only be present in the classroom for eigl:t

weeks, immed{ate dall-y feedback r^/as necessary for effective cLassroom

planning. The followlng teacher questlons were typlcal. Should Robert

advanee to three-plaee multipllcation, or does he need additionaL in-

structr.orr and practice on basie facts and two-piace multipllcatlon

problems? Will l'{ark read better j-f I say, "Good," for every three sen-

tences he reads correctly? Am I glving equal- instruction time and effort

to each child? I obviousl-y could not use two weeks to find the ansrvers,

hcwever, with dlrect recor<llng and charting, strong indLcatlons could be

seen in two or three days. This ls where precision teaching and the use

of data became cruclal and essential to my teaching.

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recording

Definitions

For ease in reading this paper it is necessary to define the

follorving t,erms;

Best fit U-ne: An estimated straight f-ine is drawn thror:gh the

data polnts of one phase, or sectlon of data. An equal number of data

points are on either slde of the assigned line. This provides a plc-

ture of each phase directional trend or tendency whieh qrould not be as

apparent with day by day data points.

Trend: After the best flt llne has been drawn a cllreetional ten-

dency of data can be seen. Thls directlon can be either acceleratlng

(--*.' ), deceleratlng ( - ), or maintaining (*' ).

Rate of Chaqge - Times, DivlCed by: This telLs the aaount of

change between two points on the chart. A distance cofllParison is made

between the two data points immediately before and after an alteratic'n

in the project plan has been made.

6

Gaasirolt: Using Dlrect Recorrli.ng

FUNCTION OF DATA

Personal lleasurement

Contact rvith pul:ils

It ls usually acsumed that help and encouragement by teachers w111

accelerate pupil performance' yet we don't know 1f aLl children need

or want the same anount of he1-p or interaction with teaehers. I was

eurious to know how often the teacher alde or rnyself went to each

chitd's desk and had vocal lnteraction wLth him.

Insert FLgure 1 about here

A sheet of paper r.ras taped on each chttd's desk. At flrst rve

only counted hcw many times qle went over to the chll-dts desk and act-

sqaal irJvl..d tr{+}, h{a- wa eoon dlscovered how to gather much more

infOfmation by s-lm1>13' raor6;,anie{*o, ot'- --!vrrl.ltrE, b-ytrt6a- Tlrc fi.nal

tabulation sheet was divlded lnto student initiated (raising of hand)

or teacher inltiated communicatlon, with subdivisions for arithmeti.c

(A), reading (n), language (L), and other (o), wtth the total rate in

the far rtght column. In addltion we color coded our respective tallies

Ehereby making it possible to compare tnteraction patterns between our-

sel-ves and specific students.

Insert figures 2 and 3 about here

The summary figures for graups I and I1 show the ranges and mLddl-es

of teacher - pupil interaction. The wide range of lnteraction for the

first group ts very evident when flgure 2 i.s compared to the lnteraction

7

fiaa*:h,s3i: L1af":*gl }i.r'ect F'ecerrdilfi

F3,g" :" t?ae3r.1ry r:cor'"1:i.*g ehrret f,or h**h ntui-lent*r te*ctttr f-ni.[.I.*fied vaca3. 5.ir'ts.rr**tfc:n"

wilffiffi[_.r $qfg#ffiitffigf*ffi $B

"6HffiT

iNA

IMffi

$TU

ffi'MB

$T [N

$?8,&T

IffiroT

ffidh$h{ffi R gfq$ffi'f$uT

g0NT

ffiTA

g.T

CIT

AL

SA

Tg$

A6E

[B

Tt

sA

RL

&,

lNtT

$ffitor.$$ffiA

TE

$"40N"

-e'..F-l

TU

E$"

F,ffi4n

l,VH

D.

---+ffit

TffiA

"FffiS

,

ffir:'eqF*iq

FfR

I.ffi

I

Ge**he}i::'iiLr;., i:,_:"lr:i'fierc:rll" ;,:;

.?13. ? 6rsr:p 3 " Rar:g;e anrl ml",ldlee cf vuea.l. 3nt?rac$f-t:t.lrctn:een tencirere r*::d nevern stlrd.errla d"-rr!ng i.nd$-tlldrrejii:-.clrl'rr:t{.cn. The ra::ge of dadl'3r i-ateract{.r-rn i.* lnrgefiI1r^':. r:,t ;:s. l S n -Xer*r !:"l.Js. rstes \iei':' i.r,ti:&r+'e3t * tLtclili'i. "-;,

r l!ai.!i?r;3{l:?"6 Ue*i&;}{l -,;E l 8E1E.X, at{iT:}}rjJ?3tl, t$i(rI5 ptt?}eBrsl BT rroTtJBralrir ;(11ep ;o BEUBi: .)i,lg, ''&i!!xr,[,.*r.ri1 iir?-:efrpT&lip1l1 S;1*i;p 8';uslrrtnil \.eAe$ Fus fjxaqtra1 Ua.jr{rcttr

i!"J:r1?Bra;&? ?a.?oa ;3o ssIFpIu FUE a$3.8E . $- dno;e ilsig{

i.r. r:p;u reg :, )c,:."; U '- "xTCr'!. ; .] (o{etr:;}g

#t;BfL91ri.ji\fj

I

S,&

W# ffi V

'r$f,fi HT

Wffi B

f,,B S

SreS

&fl?$

##a ffi,$

&$

#t,ee*fik/w

s},{-.r?

,..d.elqi\"d$-)"#arG

r

&*4rqffiF6?*r{

,ffiffiffi""{'?"

*-'tfn*p#3*E-

$"rlst(//1c,

*wrrBd{"?

gI-,P,!::bffi&

-S

"**-.ilo

gYt

*w

EE

iti$ n

*'*l Hn$

i trlbli{l4 S

tE

iiaPlibiffie

tIa'f'"rt jj

l,

*$T$ritE

.s.llII

*trxdItIJ

IINil1iG

eiflIilaE

c'.:iIFxfiit

*$

ft:ori:d

€tfa G

@

.*-.@

@

ffi e:s

@

@a9

@

ffi i&

.ig @

G

E.E

@

d.@

@

ffi

k@,

4ry6

:. :t,".1-1.,4 fll: cTif\H

lrtL-.-,l-y, w

.i ll*:l tI'B

f i#\l..!'.:J

T'1"T

:fl?fT[!!:iI

ea;P

L \,!*l rqd 4 ,S

' r$

$]s :t#$ treJ,fi#${,$iifV

*'Ar.3 H

:iSW

$Jy}d$,{.$.&

f$frfliif# .H H

HE

rr*lYffi&

$s"

iilI,

tl "a+

l{li:..r-1.

HtX

ri*ru*+

id

c

Buf{E''.ii'-/ +

#flpB

iJ ,1i? ),'U

;F'td'

I

G*r,shall!.g : L',et*g $$.r,s,*t F"*a:-*rrltng

F$.9. 3: Gr*r,1p ?. Rar:ge e*d rn*dC.l,ee eS v*se3. Eflt,eraf,tf.on be**vcnn 8sele,?ier,ga*ci e*.ri atuder:l.ls d*rtng i:d3r*-lilnX. i.$strucf,i*:s. fi:.a r*.n6c cfd*$,ly tnterac89*a f.a or',a3.3. bs* r$*a1 Lat*re*tlcix cat*E eeee eeh}.e.

":ri::ji;;;,':\L ljiu; $"i{ird.&t} a $#,}lJ 1;;fi"l["$ T"#tat]1.;Hffi ;,ffi[;i f#llirif$,inGf;l }

fr

ii";/ffi

.rrsr}/:: \',r;.-.ii

e?fa

€J

n9.)t

ti. .)

L-7

0ito!*n.,|$ {*.-',r'g

i@

fl,.--,i

R\ rIi,.tx

{l-.}

{uso f,i:5 *'$ciih ..r,':\ato"

". -':-l

f*4fi r-* ti.,.\' : ".fr sl,"

,, '.,. ;"

;'..': {q:e i. i+ij :,, rais 6-..+

,'4'h ,';;Y 4' N'b f -an- 16._ nrl tgJ [.',6

I n ':iiB,A ;'rI 54d'; -':ii:r,i 4 )3t1r. \}' Ga!^

l, irA

=:3L !

er"?J 'f.€f e)t,,

ti+.,f5t tt*l1"$, \-'r'.4

.,;}tB.x^ !-::,"i'c5Lr' .:raif aI t- .p

*# *jcor,* fllrtr"+r f ,.N'::,.rY '=PAq* U47hi. $c;6q

ti

'4

E-^ -.

clw$n..i.

dib

4,.&*4.

.ry$:$

ftfis.-

HB

B

fi

.-. .. -:ea:tr,,#f) q-

Cir./,:'

e'-.a';

fi.eEY---i. rr!

',*.{*sf>"

@a,..,'*- ia

*-;&**<:.::f'., :s

@.:i, r',

' -'!he{cr.n dq\r'-.s 6" d7

{,:}lE'56r#4]::.1;.: ;*tfss./ l6h<r:s 6194* rL?$ffiw

b.*,'.ht*Ii",E'lrr* S'?dr8 #'h{rB trJ,Z

,'.#ffip{,?b.

+EB{!\l.T

@&/i-l*trts !!-,S

tta qN##i:'.-,hilr5ilt&,,f

ffi

#.rt"?+-_i,i .;1il *i\,

r.-q

4l;rlI

$ks

$U

nhE

fi$

$

I

B

b

ci)il'{j

F{(b

nvfi5

/- _1

{J,}$i;nh*-s

4.'3

!d,*h

$'*

"tt'J

ii'"-)

H#-1\unfGfu

s

cas.i"-hi:''i-\-ir'

/3,1'"-v

Gaasholt: Using DLrect Recording

8

rate of group 2 ln ftgure 3. As teachers we were able to see on the

second day of recordLng that one child was asking for and receiving

a higher rate (times 8) of teaeher attention than the other six stu-

dents. fiIhen the pattern stlll persisted on the fourth day, we made

a d.ecis:ion to alter the excessive questlon-asking behavior of tirat

pupll. Direct. recording shor'red us that out alteratlon plan was workLng,

and if the nornal pattern of question - asking had not nalntained, we

would have know lt immedlately.

On }.londay of the thlrd week, the opposite pattern began to develop.

We notieed that one chlld was rarely recelvLng any teacher attention.

A clnser look at the tabulation sheet showed us that we were not auto-

natically going to thLs childrs desk at the same rate as we normally

di.d wtth the other students. Instead, almost al-L teacher-pupi1 inter-

action r'?as a result of thls student asking us to come to his desk. We

interpreted thls to mean that the child would probably like more atten-

tion than he was recelving. We consclousl-y tried to glve equai. ttme to

this child, but during the fifth week of recording our previous pattern.

had reccurred. These data indicated that we were not consistent across

puplls and a ner'r plan had to be establlshed tf equal Lnteraction for

thls pupil was desired" Unfortunately, the chlldren were returning to

their regular classrooms and a new plan was not carried out.

Figure 2 shows the overall best fit Ilne for grcup I. It indicates

a deceleratlng (dlvide by L.4) trend of interaction, wl.th the middl-e

number of eontacts being 6 every 100 mlnutes, or about once every fif-

teen mLnutes. The data for group II ln figure 3 show a nuch different

pi-cture. During the first, week new chlldren were replacing those stu-

dents returnlng to Ehelr regular elassrooms and the overall range of

,

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recordirig

sccres was small and consistent. One day the rate of interactlon ior

one chlld was two contacts every ten rnlnutes, but this was stlIl a lornrer

rate than those of group I. The best fit tine shows a gradual overall

acceleratlng trend of contacts (times 1.L) with the mlddle number of

eontacts being once every ten minutes.

Discussion of contact data

Thls simple procedure of recording vocal lnteractlon between tea-

chers and stuCents allowed us to evaluate and compare our contact pat-

terns between students or grouPs of students. tr'ihen the second group of

children $Ient to their regular classes we had data and graphic descrip-

tions of our behavlor with the students. The next step in a complete

and refined analysis would be to correlate teacher contact with pupil

performance. Although we dldntt do this, such an analysis would have

furthered our understanding and helped us lmprove our plannlng.

Two specific facts concernlng our teachlng behavior tnrere clearly

evident. (1) Our total contact rates were lnfluenced by groups of

c.hildren and (2) our indivldual rates varled greatly between ehlld'ren'

Ifor example, I consistently contacte-d Peter at a hlgher rate, while the

teaeher alde had a higher rate wlth Brad.

Evaluating Instruc tlonal Techniques

Teacher use of a plan

By plannl.ng on an IS descrlptlon teacher behavlors occuring before

and after the rnoveu.ent, such as instruction or verbal praiser can be

measured independently for aecuracy or effectiveness. Different curri-

9

Gaasholt: Usi-ng Direct Recording

cuLum r.aterials can also be evaluated when the teacher eompares the

student performance rates while using different materiaLs. (Gaasho1t,

L969; Starl.i-n, L969" (b) ) .

Is description of a reading lesson

The Is description has two sldes: one descrlblng acceleration and

the other deceLeration. I will explain Markrs reading sesslon as planned

on the Is descripEion. The Prograrn for Mark shows that he had reading

activltles between 9:30 and l-0:10 A.l"I.

insert flgure 4 about here

tlis oral- readlng rate was samp led for two minutes. The Program Evenfs

designed for ellcttlng Mark's readLng were; (a) the book "Smashup",

and, (b) verbal comments such as, "Remember to look at the ends of the

words, and try not to repeat, so many passages today.t' The Movement

cycl-e belng rated and charted was oral words read correctly. The

Arraggems]rt, or ratio between the movement cycle and the arranged event'

r.ras 3:1. The first number refers to the moveaent cycle and the second

number rep resents the Arranged events. Itark trad to read three correct

$entences before I said one, ttcoodio'. The Arranged event was "Good!".

The decel-eration portion of Markts Is descrlptlon qlas identical

to the acceleratlon slde except for the movement cycJ"e and arranged-

event. Lneorrect words were counted, rated and charred as the Eove-

ment, but no arranged event was planned.

l0

Geasholt: Uelng Dlrcct Record{ng

Flg. il: A readl.ng lcseon plaaned or an I8 Descrlptloa. Thl.a ahoua(I) ttnea of day, (2) lcngth of data eamplc, (3) lnstrucrlonoaad uatertals usad to ellclt the behavlor, (4) ttra beherrlorbelnB countedl (5) tlre ratlon of noveueats to aubcequent erent,aail (6) a deeerlptloo of Gvaot or ltem shlch oay occur lf themte r€achod the requlred anoust.

*J.3dLu,tt*i"[tui*tlF

jii i l* H it JliT

' r 1;' !:t

.. :i,i+.:r

}G.. t,,1':I.ttti

Fiii:.f-,V

a-.4r'.\Jf q4x:!? ,P

-t'n': I -

rL!.-t ti

i.,;.\.G:r

J U

r u

ArlU

$ : Iq:- o.i.r?'t:t: UY

i:.::t'P

ft;*S

fiiir';: [l'Ei;?

&tsH

Hg,*? *Y

*tfi

*'fl* '

I

"}f!;ifiS

&

Ff

., 4 &

irr,ft F

. Fe

Ef,r t *i s

tr, 'ar r .': tj,'i

sgg"B

$&fiiit'ti:lr.;?3#

$.&ff :;; :': il ti.{fi i I U

;}

*. qdE

f?$,e.

INS

?E*9fJfii,eii€

T*rii4It

ktr 4,.d1-'a'*,'El'*,'..],i,:I

ii'r', c....Ftr

IEftFH

Eii

}BTNr,"

f" ff ,**,Y 9!;.1,1 3 li'.G

P*,,'q,flfiR

sAL

I{i, ot- r E

c.::: (6 ; f 'r+ri

:l aE

i,

Hfi

nits)B

!t

!rEE!:?,:tI6r

Ahf;7,3i

fi it.n' n E

1" i: :tit,li

t;iJ."t,i

fi":C. fiffiffi;f&

,.d

* i nnf;,q.1,:ff[ E,{;;qiy

i - ..' d1t'.

tr;,ilr'i.* Ti+

;t fi?

Gaasholt: Using Di-rect Reeording

Follor,r i.ltg__q_.tqaqhqLp 1an

Consistency ln follor'zing an arrangement is vltal, yet, when a slu-

dent and teaeher work cLosely together, it is often difficirlt for the

teacher to maintain the arrangement due to excitement ln the project

or the teacherts desire to he1p. I deel-ded to monitor rny responses

r+hich forned the program and arranged events far Mark. If I said,

"Good" afte-r three correct sentences I counted one correct response for

nyself. If I forgot to say "Good", cr said "Good" regardless of the

iruu:.ber or quality of }farkrs movernent cycle, I counted one incorrect

resposse. The number of correct responses were dependent upon lularkts

reading rate, therefore I was baslcalS-y concerned vrith my error rate.

I want-ed to know how accurate I was in follorrLng ary plan.

Insert flgure 5 abr>ut here

Figure 5 shows my error rate of presenting Mark wlrlr arranged events.

Ttre nlCdle rate of noncontingent responding to Mark was 2.5 (2!4 errors

per mlnute) during the first five days. There is a sEeady don'l{ne lo

error rate, probably due to self-recording, untll my middle error rate

for the last five days was zeto.

Diseussion of teacirer data following a p1-an

Recording my responses gave excellent feedback for future lesson

plans. The particular arrangement of three seotences to one "gcod"

m;ry 6rr" been inapproprlate when consJ-dering certaifl factors. First,

saying ttgood", may have served as an interruptlon and tnterference to

t1

S$,9.5r

Oaaslio3H: L?s{fi.S Dl.rect ll.eeordlr.g

?eo*h.*r note of d,ncarre*t "GflSon6aB

tr a pl.ar$e'il e*r*:ge:1*,*,s€,$rCur!.ng e taSo"rLal re*d{ng cras$${on. 't sceniy d,*e3.f**r :in te"q,:bereraorrl fc'sa 3.0 par mliru*e tfue f.LEat 5 delys *o 0.S ci:.e ?.e,"c,c $daya.

t

Arry#LY$ S$G e$"{ffie$r'$#r{[} UVffif,jYS[]r:rf# F4iF'lg $"FATU lli.s:, Y) li-tA {d"Su@ .: dis

,:adcnt!+..?

t+""t-SqF

&E

J-

ts\it'-j

*tr}tr\ 'u" &..rffi m

&ai:-': t;., ! +r: td.t e:{i*ois'"4r1]

{} -t"'B4emGi -__-1l i\r'J

p+:1 a?m

briffiiF(:r dr,)B -U

$B$.{# fl: ffitE\$;-",@

s- 4b r"rl*

ffi i,i E'.s.- : ds$ij .,8,9--*--" (ff +iFfi,ffi (r',r GilTrd rr &i'-i

*" d-3 **I€,:] Ft&6',1 Git T-p'E-r.I U &;-rqs

#LdH+r

J,*{ru*#

*-r8{&{j-#'%

s*.

ffia'%"i,* at:

ttd

fi m**€{.'o'#d;B

*Fe"*c$ii

fl e<SU

a..p

*$

tat4afsc!

$

$f;il

& 'l& S'.!-Eafr4t t,* + *'is,:

(3

[.iSd'.l

*&Af'* "-H-B

ffi*-}(;'3f rCr& f li|j;)g*

sT? 4){}c:a'"t

r*[j",i?

,*L ,"f]3

S,.} (}Jl";i3q#9"u&r':'--rFa @-\ f\df$ Ldrv6, ^L\6;J

I'i3/S& +'lg)'

P"

r''-r

Gaasholt, I,tsing Dire.ct, liecr:rding

L2

iiarl..'s reading rate. Secondly, it r^ras dlfficult to keep track of

three correct sentences " By making the arranged ev*nt contin;rent,

r:pci: i'iarir?s.overaLl daily reading rate at the end of the two minute

time sanp'l e, t'oth factors of lnterrupting }iarkrs readlng, and the

teacherts difficult taslc of keepinB track of the ongoing arrangement

could be avoided. The possible arrangement would be 90:1 - e.g.,

90 correct words to 1 tugoodt'. I\ilrrety worcls seems reasonabl.e slnce

the data indtcates fhat }{ark had read 95 eorrecr r+ords per minute

on several occasions and had a middle rate of 85 r.rords per minute.

This information tel1s me that I'lark can read at a hlgher rate and

shoul.d be encouraged ro do so. Direct recordlng of my performance

helped pinpoi.nt tiris flar.r i"n nry lesson plan and hopefully improved

my future planning of arranged events.

As:=umed l-n: t-ructional helps

The next teacher behavior is difficult to explain and oceurs mcrst

frequently durlng tutorial sessions. I designate the following as

some instrrretional helps: (a) running a finger under the sentences

j-n an attempt to tncrease reading rate; (b) saylng, "Think hard," or,

"Idhatrs the beginni.ng sound?" (c) pointing to a final consonant if

you doubt he looked et lt; (cl) and actually telling the rvord. I T{as

alrare of gf ing these assumed helps hut I diCnrt knovr lf my helpsl

rvere improvin65 or retarding Brian's reading rate ?

insert f,igures 6 & 7 about here

P!.9. 6:

Gs..a*l;;1.1; llsSn6 E{r:eet l:i'neor,.'.f:iirg

Fete e€ ,,a,ittfllctfl-:aaL rtr.e3.grot! givca ec a oilrdeat d?i.r!.n8a f.utor{a3. readf,r*6 oa*ef.en. }.hen aBudene re.s,JloB reg€B{mnreseo (t.fg. 7} $'natrreEr,cs "!relpg" desreaee.

I

,t

{fiE'@!t.9.r.:*"ta!l'*-a-q-

1: frrr_9"

ul#3t !

r-B[?t'^*

'.o*a,,*+

\i:i7L:lilD

":"'.F

ir. r (;q!

,fo* r,H

{i:J ':

,3

.u {F

#il

i*Hffir

E

I5SW

1 &

o&

'}P fuiJ

lL-- it'lq.

r""--{dt.jsLaE?rr'

$###

? t\n, fl

,,1'. ,

c tJ

$Li,sd

-rq.f * ti

\'/tr

t"*qB,y.. ^

*F44a$

Cie a;:1

EtiI#qLi:

T'ffi &

fi F

$ ffi ffi o' ffi . hfl 4t;t} # FtT

ffi t'{

rBffi #T

ffi{# ffi '* [}*1, ffir&;3i "

E:fl # L}-

ffi$ ApgtH

L as,#.sE7

."t *L dtt *fi6=

'r!ca G

#ft G

@rrg

6iar{Irrp G!?trr[ir

&,;sa

?

.S1$

*(;,r tJ

6trpp,*:nY

r",-

ftflieou/\E

tu,

,flit*,

*ffi

dI&sa

$*

4ffi S

# gri

nffiG

SU

#ffi ffiSS

$Vffi S

&$"=

ffi $I St#.ffi #r#-Y

S

fl!t/qlf.\f.u\-.f

lir l' it {*

d.dr'34ffi

9i.&, 7 t

*,**.aiiri3-t: ii':9ng Strect tle**::r3*srg

$tu#*t"..q ot-*[ r*r*3r3 rnte c"'hi'l+ r*eefvtr'*g L*egr$cttaatt:i.v',iir*t ; ili:xit t";r-t te1f,'?:' ;l::'

t!&

4,&F

{ grs

It*€#fri$dS

{Y ?${

as.#P

AA

LYS

$ f\f\aY

.r'tg

.ffi8

$o

p,vs{

S"{'

JwjALF

;a . a

48Ut;-i m.u*

[.ro{f} 33ffiffi

E

w?*,

'ffi;J

";l ffi* D

"+ 8sJ

oE::rrq

6S

[fu] Etu

{}

o'FH

-f,sesw

*E

E

@dt#

6.

Tffi&

$${ffiffi ** m" E

*$rS#ffi["B

T0f,S

&-*A

ru Affi ffi X

q,* $d. ffi d-t AS

hfi t"I H

irp$esrffifrffi -* m

ffi\i&ru ffiffis" ffi

gi5 AP

ffit!- rsffis

/\dfr'U

4w.$ffi[/.,\

qJ -{04#

6ri3 E

# g#{}

$EJ*#ffiS

S$ V

ffi ' GS

I'LHH

ffiAm

ffi&Y

$

lEa#

r8*

.ffirt €-fsiei

'il'E

mtID

Gaasholt: Uslng Direct Recording

L3

Figure 6 shows the rate of teacher heLps. The best flt line is

s1"ow1y decelerating (dlvfde by 1.1) with a mlddle rate of one help per

minute. In comparison, Bryants reading rate is accelerating (times

1.1), r,rlth a middle rate of 14 correct words per minute. As teacher

heLps decrease, pupil reading rate increases.

The last five days are partlcularly interesting. Bryan selected

another book anC his reading rate acceLerated to a middl-e of 45 r.rords

per minute, a times 2 change from the prevlous week. Simultaneously,

the teacher help rate decelerated to one every tr,ro minutes, a divided

bv 2"

I)isc,.rssion of helo data

Anal.yzing my comaents and actions showed me that some helps

("come on") were program events, and some helps (pointlng to the word)

trere arranged events. I said t'corae on" to elicit the behavior of

reading and I pointed to a word if Br1'3n mi-spronounced or skipped it.

Both helps were conEingent upon Bryanrs behavior and rrere a <lescriptiern

of how his reading rate manipulated my behavior. I was maintaining

an arranged event r,sithout planning, since on the Is description I

had planned to ignore mistakes. Also, the added program events lrere

not lndicated on the pLan. I had made a plan, then not accurately

follortred it. This informatlon concerning my behavior would have been

-lost without direct recordlng.

Gaashr:lt: Using Direct Recording

L4

Defining Proflciency Levels trIith Dl-rect. Record.ing

As inore and more academlc data are gathered, and anaLyzed, the

need fcr carefully defined proficitrncy levels beeomes apparent. Pre-

cision teachers are asking each other many questions r,.rhose anstrers

are not inelr-rd.ed ln raethods guidelines or Eeacher manuaLs. Should

the student be able to do basic facts (add, subtract, multipl-y, and

divide) at 10, 30, or 60 per minute before advancing to more difficul-t

probl-erns? Itri"ll acqul-sition of ner,v material vary rlhen different pro-

ficiency level-s are used? Hor.r can elassroom data telI us when a child

is most llke!-y to succeed at a new task?

After studylng ghe performance rates of the 25 chil-dren in the

ELP classroom and other cLasses (Johnson, J. L969; Starlin, A. L969)

a relationshlp between basic facts rates and solving regular arith-

metlc problems was establlshed. A comparison between the rates of

two students r,rhil-e doing basic facts and multJ.pLication problems

may mclie this relationshlp clearer.

Usins orofi. c1-en level.s for bastc facts

The program ever:t* for baslc facts was a ditto sheet containing

sl"xty p::oblems all involving either one or tr^1o moveilents. One lf,.ove-

ment equal-s one written numeral-e.8., 2 X 3 = 6, rvhereas a tr.ro move-

ment problem eq"rals two written nurnerals*e"9., 6 X I = 54. Five

dlfferent,dittcs containing a mlxed arrangement of the same sixty

basic facts were used dai1y. The child Cld not receive che sarae clitto

two days ln succession. The purpose of sraitching the papers rras Eo

*Jirl Tapp 6svsloped these i,rorlc s,heets.

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recording

r5

avr-,id positLonal rnemorisatiDn. The five dlttcrs contaiaing the t'r.sic

facts C - 5 r+ere ide-ntified b,v XA, )G, XC, XD, XE, arrd the five diftos

conta.inj.ng the basic fr.cts 6 - 9 rvere identifi-ed bv XAA, XBB, XCC,

XllD, )'-"1!1 . All- of the problems were irr eqtiat{on fo::r-e.9., 6 X 3 -

BoLh students slarted rvith multi1:lication facts 0 - 5 (XA).

In fi',gure B R+berl;?s best fit line for the 0 - 5 basj-e facts accele::*

ated (t:i"mes 1".6) during the firgt 17 daysr r.vith a ruidille rete of 7

corrcct per rnlnut:e. The vcrtical line indicates wl:ere Robert starteC

the nore diff j-cult basic fact sheet (XAA) . There is a 1arge s'rep-

dcr.in in hl-s ccrrect rate, hoirel,er a steady acceleratlon rate (times

l-.6) continues over the next four wceks.

Insert figures B and 9 abcuE hare

Figure 9 shorss Samrs best fit ll.ne while worhJ-ng the 0 - 5 baslc

facts (>la;. It is also accelerating (times L,2), buL his niddl-e cor-

rect rar;e Ls 2A per mLnute as compared to 7 per minute f crr Robert "

Sam is correctly completi-ng nearty three tLmes as tlany problems per

ninute as Robert. Note the eff*ct of the new prc'Bram event (XAA) on

Sain's rate. No decrease in rate is appare:rt: in fact, the besE fit

line contlnues to accelerate sligiitly (ti-r,ies 1.1) and the middl-e rate

for the more difficult facts i.s 30 per mi-nute.

Discr:sslon of basic facts data

Robert had not reached a sta.ble pert-orrnancee nor r+as 7 correct

probl-ems trer minute near a proficiency leve1. Using this informatio::

I should have let Robert reach a profici.ency LeveL for hasic facts

0 - 5 before int.roducing the new program event. Since obert ltras

'pa3t:9g-'*iis $i1,8 **31iF*T$eE tT1l??S;iip @g{iex xrp't$r i"'e6"dB}l{}ir? '*Ud"s ii.i;nr] ]iii*]

5o$*i&f*{i5;;t?,r B &'t]fi.gt8 se-"t,?, 3}*;iiss (}l,L& .'doJis'[ cla*55*s.! S s f.iiril(:iltltr Efdj$ii G:is j,ji us'e] s*';:iii t:i1"r.:ii tg.rcq

so "d8s8.e ,rCIg.Be []B? 3-]0;s.36]t 6ra$ S"lOilB SaSrl] t 633sq;Jttr :E 's$il

Sragila*teXX aoe,ETg Sutreg t?Tsx{fs'*S

\s

trpff

ffi d.-.!**u \"j:ttr/ oor*

G.,,_1.4,,

a -"t

U{X

f,ftii. >

e' il(} s"*ffi$ ffi*

Fri;I'j

o{[tL/

(*-l} Ll,$0p ]*e

t*'1&r4l:iiw&+.i)'ri

[.tu$af {9'd-/

cl*,i t-3'irrP &E \ta'r'" o*]\? ,\'/,.

rli J

6i*

(}

%-.q, **k

u*.s''sn=lYfaAAUded.q,-*}4

h *i#*

;c

\&

{rffied--. i*,r*'+-f3"T;Iff::;'*

*Js*

g.{E-,,.-t, ;ae,&d@ra-!il

h

$3€ffi

fi

{,tJ

.-,.,-:\\..-Li.d{r-$

{i}ets

ffi?tt

q?

(i'

S* g:rqrp Po** rri (B

ffig HH[*i fi ' a*

fi,frxHea; ) s qi-"_11 4ny g

ni T* r:;: (:*o{inlii .' u

rX [n t',i$r8 ?;.3 L;;T

HiH Hffiatm6-, ;.t q{9' 7:t;o[,-'l o ,"-l'1 L"s[* l** fu

r*"-*-$&$**,f

HI.i"$1;r $ $li'i$ iiili$*,$

S.illul;,';3 H [l h**,,'ij

r*-t *.*l,:"--i; (o-"'

fi*',,a

Ll*tp'ffi,

dJ'+E,f

$

H

fi

$

sfiI

frti

"4,f. el tf't$lq-h*,rQt,

.$Jea jla pt$rrie 8 s'3

o?e$oT{i3iip sf"s:fB J,r;.i.,1}0 oT'rx$& flitl;a:-{CI1*u'}'e ,{iT'.sr3T'[erpr.!? illqs?s e;iu sE:lfi €a'Ji.:l.ri)3 'Itl&sT ;iruisaia6;i

*sr,d t] Sri;;qaee; iii$Jr6 $as # tr.s?383'i:t'ii1':,?eu *t:su{t

&lO E;i}3ltjt fiOI,AA PflA 33ir.3$..:;l Oili',} eJ;"JqS S;CSki? srsr'fiS 16 'Er.x

6'*6irtro*eg a$6s$G Srycg ;*Tcl.{#fficB

o#I0af

sAV

ffi HW

ffiS$B

TV

0 SA

!S$H

SS

$?S

so! G

8 ss

G&

,/tHl.# tht

e)

."i!

jJI

jjt,tI]

{t

ei,6 #3s'=},rY

e'Lr' e#

**.e80;T

a,

-;3-fl9*\

JF1# #3gqLd

&fchtEl

FB

t \f,

d-S

6f\

ffick e'f{'

erip"*,,$ {Tr{E

*4tgt

ffittEs[sdB

;EE

D (kD

ar

mr

&#il

6GO

u*eueee

lS$,*

arE

:--3

o

IfrCIi

I'o r

03 #s. o*eBo .d.-\tu

$,6-g WV

Xs8s-0 Y

]{

ffiffiffii llB*dw

$tr$'93ffiH

egw$ - 3.*H

&0H

dgT

#H$W

W#'lff - S

ES

V$dW

ffi$$0-a.$€sl"B

ts$4 "H -

HH

P€8W

bgS

i"*w

&#0r

d$s€H

r

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recordlng

L6

learolng the basic multipl-icatlon facts a reasonable drop ln rate

would be expected when he started working on the new set of facts

6 - 9, but a gradual acceleratlon could then be predicted until he

reacireC the profJ.ciency 1evel for facts 6 - 9.

It is obvious from this data that I had not set definlte pro-

flciency J-evels. I was arvare of the need, but at this time had not

analyzed the data sufficiently. I wae.n't sure what an appropriate

proficiency l.evel- should be. One r,ray r"re have found for teachers to

set a quick proflciency Ievel is to have the children rvrite nunrbers

for one minute. If the numhers are formed correctl-y and the child

r'rorked effectively, that number writing rate is a possible pro-

ficiency l-eve1 or aim. For example, basic facis rates rnay be set

Just below the r,rritten number rate, since the goal- is complete

mastery; however, solving complex problems may produce a sLlght1y lor,ve-r

performance rate.

Using basic fact data wi th regular problems

obviously it takes longer to work nruLtiple-dlgit problems than

writing one or two digit basic facts. Many more dlgits or movement

cycles per problem are i-nvolved. For exarnple, the problem 608 X 2

has five movements r+hen you count all r.rritten nunibers and the process

of earrying to the tenrs place. The problem 326 X 43 has l-7 r+ritten

moveme:rts. If equal credit for performance rate ou more dlfficult

prcblems is given, aL1 movements must be counted. A1-so, when all move-

ments are counted, data lndicate (Johnson, li. L966; Gaasholt, L969)

that a fatrlv conslstent dlgit per minute rate ls maintained whether

Gaasirolt: Using Direct Recording

L7

doing cornpl"ex problems or basic facts. If there is a relatlonship be-

tl,reen basic fact rate and rate of mo",rements while working mutr-tiplic-

ation probLems, Robert and Samts data sh.ould shor,r different pi-ctures.

I'{ult j lication rablems

The number of movements per problems r{ere counted and charted for

Sam and Robertts mul-tiplication problems. The program events for each

student are indicated on the charts ln figures 10 and 1l-. Robertrs

rate of cornpleting nuLtiplication problears was accelerating but he

was not at a proficiency l-eve1, nor was his performance stable. Trlhen-

ever a new program event for a nultiplication probtrem was presented,

the rate made a sizeable step-down causing Robert to repeatedly

lose ground"

Sam had reached a proficieney 1-evel in basie facts and the data

on multiplicatlon probiens ls much different from Robertrs. When a

net,r program event r^ras presented small step-dor"7n occurs, but not as

drasticr.lly as for Robert. Learning a new and more lengthy process

made less of a rate change for Sam than for Robert. This same pattern

prevailed across students.

;-------l*------l-- Gb---,--*

Insert fLgures l-0 and 11 about here

Di-s cussinn of Lnf.ul-tiplicat ion proble:n elata

San and lLobertrs data indicate how irnportant teacher behavior

is rvhen plannl"ng a skill sequence. Robert had six program event

changes for the multiplication probLems r,shile Sao had only titree. I

r'ras making twice as many ctranges in Robert,rs pl-an ruhen in fact the

' 6aAii"n;i?€?iirri GBe'[ {l}* *t'ti!i ": .q

ex*i} eT liras$Tm asd -s3uii*'i*ll:-li o'l'ttl pirB fli'a*?:i $'(;sai";:i'l'rTti'

-TSEaiE aTilBq "* io"ii da'*sgep3*aei pcrlr'u'i;e $** su't tx'rirtislg lCI't ''S"$s

i.lll55;;;*ag 33'$;1$& $uit6 !'Etsql$ci.g$

tt

@::t

rE:a,

;i. d

LIJI$_-<

gtrrri1{*"i

gs-,g

s! '1;g"

'{ trt.y' *.r

ttrI;r (i'*(1T

e.i,.*

4:;.[#ffi

o 3-il

" 'J ii1.E

L, i Ll*{}

est[".- ;*f\

se{rlLdlcn

d--d6"

d@

rp &iiil

d- o--o

e* ";;-* kgF

a "q*is6hl,

e;;

J*'

"$:

@;

tf\{,-\,f}E

t;*l .\r\/

$$stF+

f \.+Y

deta.f rl,C

[ q"j!

g4 !fficjqG

)+

,f <*--

t' dr,

S$

4.r5e $.+

. do a,

d-, trr

gi,f .-'n

P-.t- i

g .Jedut*,tf9a\

q-

ffiffi?$ss

,E.s

@

@

.g.freG

Etlffi

Il{!HI,&af;r"\d

*ew 4.torr

f,ga

tfn**&

'**,rfrn\

r..S.U

"qlm

w"

GE

G

i-5-&

r:.5.g:(D

G

&E

P

e

.eit

*fF.lA

f ii.;ffift *" H" $'t"&

ltiGf*T

#f-$fl'f A

f\$S.ffi ffi [? ** $ti" rit&

la$ f"i *' ililP

fixffiTH

Gffi "* $tfrjffiffirqT

ffiffiffi"S,

g$ A[][lt&

["" 8ss#

Rft*

6'r# \e

d

r; .-,

\d,'D

li *$

6* 8#

[#0$U

ffiffiffi ffiS$V

ffi ffisfsLffiNfl]A

ffi ffiAY

S

fn'Eie! dftrg\J

t ftiP\

i 6q"tI4#

gF;)

4g

Eil3

;

. 'ae3E'xBtse?0csrcTqsed Agt418',ra1 o.scf,B $T Barls@ ;s&d aBuaua,*m 6!I{ SEl, s-a*u}

*ofa*rfte"i;B1r& c6srq Eo Ia&PT ,(auegolSoed paqleea ffili uug iII.'8"5fi

EaEpacaeg SoarSG Sugsg ttIeqessg

#a,Bf,B

,'! ",1\*9'?

A

*4,*?TII

l1I

*$siI

JItt

JtIIitJ

q.tb

*Q,i',#ffi H

V'ff t+

I**Bri3 ;j&

3 eS$ffi{}*ftS

tr*$ ,-3S

fi i

#*1{oatt.7L/ d,

,- S'S

$ *tr $Hsttr $J.3

S'fiiii:"T

ii!il;,'.:i * Hri:, j"3-*tdd

-tfi',ii:$b'iu'.i "1.i3 * tj jili-#'ft3Y

;;*a'r-:.O

"':+

,.'.f -,rtr!

361 s{61

ir,r?fJ't A

i', ',**1., ,'u',i $ 4 1,1 *"$ #$ *" {3-l,J i,-u J u' t"r..i.

'{s+

drct gl'w

;

ffi

- ,c+

( -X-

4 ."?-'d;r

-

,s i t.l.,'f,r'J

.EW

qgJEItI!iIf,\T

Titr

Et!kg(&

(:.

tr,* $'

&$t.,r9

.iAJuq

r:*:r

$.tlH

#'&'#

u'Iijr}_ jtltr

\; *'

",'il ,r'

1

)- tr \! .; '\-

i5 ,11*

ile lt

!:,1 { '

{., .'.i

,.f':\ ae..f\ I

{.}'u;},:;'3

frb6'

rr,5

*-I

ffir"-dIB

qe

[*: f,]{.}

l'*.-,,4

%" *-X

{.":11 **&

-.j, tJ

r, 't g-L

lcEr. -,i,, &

?5

" *.;.i

ijj {}ffia

'l ir*d

, j H

fri Ert

;i,3 ffi',*-n (0*.ln

diru*s

\p{*p "!b

*4 {;r,3 rpF

,__i

I:5t'".,

ffi^**-

tI

,rl :l

r "-t.1,,,

s a'*"

n.&.

Bl{*$ ?

f,t flA

'" S\r'' d-'

'6

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recording

l"B

data lndicares he shoul-d have had fewer changes. The deslre for

Ro'bert to acquire as many nerv skll-ls as posslble before returning to

tt:e regular cLassroon may explain my lnstructionaL behavior, yet, by

changing program events so quiekly, r,rithout stabillzing Robert's per-

formance data, I r,ras onl-y el:poslnE Robert to new processes not nec-

essarily assuring a carty-through of the skil"ls to the regular class.

Uslng thls lnformation, it. seems obl'ious that the same proElralll

events should be conti-nued untll the student reaches profieiency"

Trlhen basic facts are stable, and at a high rate, you can build pro-

blems using the previotrsly i.earned basic facts without marked per-

formance rate changes. Knowledge of proficiency levels are essen-

tial" anC there ls muclr to be studled eoncerning the area of lnter-

action of proficiency rates over the range of simple to complex

program events (Haughton " L969).

?upi1 Ch.arting and Proflciency Levels

The purpose of this project i,ras two-fold: (1) What is a reason-

able proficieney level for cursive writing rate, and (2) would personal

charting by students accelerate thelr r*riting rates? The foll-owing

data show how these tr^ro eLements are related to one a.nother.

Desc'rj-pf,j-on of the activity

Soine of the students had been practiclng ruriting for three r+eelts.

0n the fourth week it r+as explained to thenn that l ruasntt sure rvhere

to set a reasonable writing goal; therefore we r^rould try to dlscover

one togettrer. Slnce it tias a group project everyone would have the

sa.me task, lncluding the taacher. A different mln:eographed sheet

Gaasholt: Using Dlrect Recording

L9

coneaining patagraphs of cursive vrrltlng r,ras dLstributed each day

along with penmanship paper and pencil, At the signal "go" we \q?rote

as quiekly and as neatly as posslbl-e for one nlinute. Then everyone

corrected his own paper by clrcLing any incorrectly formed letters.

A brief dl-scussion concerning the formation of letters occasionally

followed correctlon.

Estabilshlng a rvriting proficlency level

Figure l-2 shor+s my correct r.rritlng rare. The rate is stabl-e and

no acceleration ls observable. Sturlles by Kunzelman (1969) have sug-

gested that pupil rates are generally a divl.de by tr"ro of adult

performance. Using this information and my r.rriting rate, a student.

proficiency level for ruriting cursive letters may falL betrnreen 45 to

55 correct l-etters per mlnute.

Insert figure 12 about here

Student charti-ng

Not all of the children had reached the assumed proficiency

level, but I stllL vranted to see if personal chartlng by the students

would accelerat,e thelr r.rrlting rate. On the tweLfth day every child

was given their correct and error charts and tr:ld how to chart the

rate for that day. The vertical line on figure l-3 lndicates where

puptl charting began.

Insert figure L3 about here

The group summary coiitains the dail"y middle rates for each

stu.dent. Durlng the before phase the middle rate r^ras 23 correct

.sT"$f.e"[ dar:qEa?Jiogd gm*ir*Ao SmSeA,pu *ul3 epp$ s, sre Peir;ic 6SclaeaBeT SeTs"iixp tril8,&$.re! sailli}"Epts $o El,3er BEBs.n'ss CITtt'6t'6 v lal 's841

Sugpaeae"g $B@.ITS 8slefl ratoi{ss[ryi

';.J'!;ius$

ffi-,tVift ffi ryffi $U

ffi T1#S

-Tsl; li,3:irl.,? fi 1$

#st ss

#s #h

ff;T)

riiif*f,fi\q'.,

"4ffin 7.\ 4h!Gr'iu(J

$="

*"&.$

,*(d.i$'.#(9

i'lu

f\"uiYb,

fl;'af,.,rI&.,.r

ol:. iJ

tg.t\+':

{G

"FI *

:

s'fr; 6;s{$fl-m

ll F

s. .d;{#

6&'tr&

$P

*o*d:3r.r.:s

!{1. \ ,

5i'?ct,,rg

d+4i- :

dftrl f -:

1{U,lD

Ye, r

t*$ (; j*'

rry *ie.i,'qe_.

Bri

&."

0t; rq:,1

c*i,

{ 1116

tl#,T

iltd

!ts

t4s

@!

c!!#l!,

qs.!a

re qffi5,

cgEE

ir

sssa J-w[3'l gg

:

fft#34$V-W

* " H

$ * ffi *B

A'S

tir$0d &

&"3#$ttff$,f,'ffi *

ffiX$#$fii;rffi&

i aing

sFp

dt,fa!€$'{+

'E

Hs$

'GE

I

'caatls 8eT*$si* J?s'q$ 3s

Sur+ir$r '6r:uooaarl ua$a4 3ll:pn?'B rg:l$a flEaJ'E FiIs a'['t'$aq siJS'Dl

egp1r1,',il ; f 'gup, ui nip*a *- o ql ri'*lltlSrrop 6aur'ino drrar.'E e gei; tfit '8Is

6uypao't+g Sroi&TG Ealg*g l:;'6CIq$€se

I:

t

.pssw$ll$iss sf S$tr*.n.g$r EBBeEE&d stsJit ooafisq'f*asp dfeqgtryeeargr 0$ugBrr&a{6ssa dggeripea$ ef cas'tr 359-gur*{ $$$ '$&s&&*tosdia*a durar.u" ao gra,u'r"dseCI'prygoad greqauea $ffiI eeq Ssaqss 31;T 'BTd

'EqrEpcecEB tses3{tr EclgeA sSIsqEsBC

$s#

U

*I

E

s$B

fr6:;ia::: I-*.;:l:'o";.:i:*:r:&, -'+

si .i:;t

*:* Lg$544"

1,) #t-4

Aafr

-r_lq d;

o^! rE

ffi,dr

Stf

.s,u gE

:::iT

'i"^i*1 r#

* sdf,9

,..,,tr Ee3

ce

r-tl r's"o

*,..-:lta,,: {&

,J6?r':@91.11!i*%.-l {i,

ffit#iF

6gid

*

.*ffiq-#^,fh\d$* *qr'&

,

cBrrm

s ?E:ilm

IIC

Tffi&

frF9ffiffi *=

ffio $t&B

-$ffir{.T#$i3

FJ! &

Fd &

'ffi ffi"ffi '* m, ffi e-frS

$* ffi tft'F

ffiGE

ffiffiffi * ffiffiffi,.ffiffiT fitffiffi.&

$gi Ed*bY

$Sliffi,ffi

*fttr-Yq--W

ffi#\8e\d,'S

Bffi 4h*

@s

ffi,,$ ffie,$

g#ffi

SL$'ffiS

H.,$S

$ Vffi

$]*E E

,mF

E ffi"{$i"q &

l;iiYffi

06i-sfiiti*R

.ds-ffi

$4#

GG

,jrs c3sdtr

"sg

Gaasholt; Uslng Direct Recording

2L

Discusglon of I'Jritirrg Data

This informatlon srrggests that (1) r.rhen a ehlld has reached a

proficiency 1eve1-, as ln ltarkts case, new tasks and program events

are less 1l"keLy lo cause a decrease in rate, and charcing may aetuall.y

increase the rate; (2) when the behavior is in the acqulsition stage,

as inl?.obertrs case, new program events may slor,r dor^m acceleraticn.

The student should reach a stable and competent rate before the teaeiler

intraduces new program events.

Acqr"ris:ition of stuient charcing

Thirty-three minutes of instruction !ilas used to teach six chil-

dren how to chart their orrn writing rates. On the elghth day, which

was the last day of school, five of the six children were successfuJl"y

ploEting their correct and error perfomance rates. Considering tho

effect chartlng had on lndividual vrriting rates, and the instructlon

tlme invoLved, we obviousLy need a more practical approa-ch to teaching

children hcr+ to ehart.

Other studies (Starl.i.n, L969 (a)) have used student charting as

an accelerating arranged-event. l,lhen charting rras an arranged event

the studeng gor:l-d on]-y chart if hls rate had lncreased. Mark and

Robert charted irregardless of thei"r r+ritlng rate, therefore chart-

ing became a progran event. Two factors, pr:oficiency lr]r*lr and .

arranged events, should be considered before setting up studcnt chart-

i.ng procedures.

CarefuJ-I7 defining proficiency, €.9., tLf,ty Letters per minute,

and all-owing the chiLdren to achieve that aim before introducing

I

Gaasholt: UsLng Direct B.ecordtng

22

student eharting seems to be a better instructional plan than tlr.e

one I used. This approach also aLlorcs the teacher to incorporate

peer tutorl-ng as an arranged event.

DlSCUSSION

By thorough study cf preelse information concerni-ng performance

rates rre can also i:np :ve and strengthen our teachlng skll-l-s. The

performance data presented in this paper expJ-ores and demonstrates

several- ways that direct recording, chartlng and analyzLng helped me

lnstrtr.ct children. speelfically:

Different chlldren cause a noticeable change in teacher behavior.

Thls Ls true across groups of children or betr^reen indl-vidual children

and teachers. Direct recording immediately clarlfies these trends

and rneasures the effectiveness of attenPted alEerations of teaeher

or pupil- behavior. Teachers should be abl-e to tel-L parents and ad-

ministrators interactlcn data objectively and aceuratelyi 1.e.,

"my rniddle rate of contact wlth BiLl is 14 ti-mes a day which is nore

attention than I can glve him without ignoring other children. The

middLe rate of contacts for the rest of the students is f; per d*y.

Cantt r.re obtaln speclal materials and some si-x grade students to

aid with tutorial sessions?tr Thls preclse inforrnation pinpoints the

need, then recording can evaluate lf the speeial maierlaLs or six

grade students did incleed alter the performance rate of Bill and the

teacher.

Itrhat a teacher plans and what ehe does are often qulte dif;ferent.

By planning on an Is descrlpticn, then recording ]ouf, o*rn performanc:

rate as you fol"low the pLan, possible strengths or'rleaknesses become

2

$###

gfD.-.n

x 't .4'\:i{

F&

fif,$E

**.JG

'G

i,s$

dj,

t1fi&(i&

piirEtft-€

il:"

ril)€;toET

MF

-u$,*@t'ip

H,

s?5.,1!.

illtt*'tis-!rlrrs.#

Jilq..$

4;"

W.l'

Fttp

$-5$w

,r$

(}

d""f%g:r*

ffi G

-i

G

@48ffi* .;eE

6\.t"t

*#u,-fl(i{ */f*

er,*qp-\ilo* 'r

.,ftSS

$.q,**;{.tEqt'u"*

frf€;

ry"[]n In,q ffri] * F

8.8i:;,F

F(eq,j!'rf,$*t

S 5's{d0g gi

L-l 5

$lse I S$}S

r/\! g d E

i}.+t i

fst,er f'{'fr#X ffi '*., 8#" tr'tA

.S

['$ S ffi'

bffi$ryST

-ffiffiff: * {iffi{.},UP

$V {ffi $T

"Uffiffif.,$T

$}E

"$ E*S

,Y 6'$ffiP

i\*"\*#

E

Fr+

,:\!n\rr"-*f I

Pb

i8-4

$.,,a

ffi4S

#0

ffi,# gffiff

$fl.q ffiCffi;$S

$ \reffi ffiA

{*H$*i []*,ffi m

,fiY$

drh,::-;.g- '!,

$tr#$,4s

Gaasholt: Using Direct Recording

20

letters per minute vrith an accelerating best fit Line (times 1.6).

After student charting r.ras lnitiated the best fit 1'rne decel-erated

(divided by 3.4). Even though rhe rniddLe rare is sllghtly higher

after student charting, the dafa suggest that charting may have

hinrlereC the rate of cursive r,rrlting.

Relati-onshJ.p of prof iclencl' leve1 and charting

A f116ther analysis of the relationship of proficiency leveL and

charttng is posslble rvhen the rates of indlvldual students are com-

pared. Figure l-4 shor^rs I'farkrs middl-e rate for the first e1-even days

'rras 53, well rnrithln the assumed prof lciency leve1 of 45 to 55 Letters

Insert figure 14 about l''.ere

per minute. After he began to chart, his rniddLe rate contlnued to

risc to 60 per minute and the overall best ftt Line was a times 1.1".

It coulrl be interpreted that charting for tlark heLped accelerate his

writing rate. Compare this to P.obertts chart in figrrre L5" The

Insert ftgure L5 about here

middle rate for the f irst eleven days l-s 17, f ar belor,r prof iclency

level, but the best fit li.ne sho'nrs rapid acceleration (times 1.9).

It couLd be predicted that his rate rvr:uld increase at. a steady rato

lf the instructlonal plan remained constant. Upcn lnitlatlon of

student charting Robertrs best fit line decelerates sharply (divide

by 2.4) fron the precllcted acceleration rate, lndicatiug that Learn-

lng to chart h:ndered acceleration of Robertrs r,rriting rate. The

net effect of learninB to chart was a divide by 4.3 of his r^rriting

rate.

' fr u"r:a;r'.p g;:,t *sxtf&"s0fii@ q::*1');{trt8&Er: &} fier$fi'$3{i$B CrlB,ii (lit'! tr''}13 t0:ii}}}..qiT

is&$sssi[ Sa,$eE;r,Ea ;is Et*&sE Sa*;ryeggee*; peqa!r*: &"ii{ qatl6 3i}E 'E?d[

I

liq]EtaoeeB a&s8?s Eepg !sTsq$$$$

.l

#sHfi"q8\&

Y 'i,

O

sAY

$ Hw

ffifl,$HT

-tr# SX

AtS

Sffi#$ s:$

##g #B

S

S

(;prit@

?qi{;l

$-,*|l

ffie .fs iE

€ii{,}tJ

&,n

'1e,.s,.''t.

.,e'j

P" r

qr. rre:il i$

B

F';'

fl,ms,dffi

f '

s6J I-.!r:o

$T&

! s"ts

#*E

&

S'

ffi l.'ta;i&

#:

l':s u

*4 1:l

6rE i:*..r

l{tn-_

[. :'"r.1: '

6f\!:!

s9b

S'S

SB

,P.,figq gf,

$'uHl'-3 }3U

tr:,U "* E

iff,l,*ik!S

"B,# it$l$lflS

" S

d *,ti i$St$i.ii,

14,j

P.fl.:,3 fl l.,.qr:),f?$4fi,q otl "o ir.!F

1ft! t "'ir rt treU

''-€*::u",Ju,E

$ U u 6

l'J -* t'jg**Ji'li, *,,.J",';a

$ffi'

titc

q.!:ia*C €tr*lii3

&e:I r:'at (5ilgfiil

.:;-s^fl$

*o*uff5i*

'1r*s*

In

*&;e

$wflrr!t.rr d

qP$

?

rql.'-.i'- $

Gaasholt: Uslng Direct Recording

23

evident. Not every entry on the plan needs to be recorded, but those

areas you think might be hcLding the student baek should be explored.

3. Both rqrlting and arithnetic projects strongly suggest that reaching

a proflciency level before alterLng errents is necessary for optlmum

growth. These data suggest that the lower the relative rate of per-

formance on a specific academic task, the greater the arnount of

change when accel-eraticn is started.

4, Low rate acadernlc areas can be easil-y identlfled by the teacher and

then given top prlority. A chll-d not functioning at a proficiency

1evel on four place multlplication problems should not have to

struggle r,rith such tasks when dat-a teIl us that once he reaches a

prof icicncy 1-evel on baslc multiplication f acts, neril program events

wil-1 not have a decelerating effect upon his perfornance. In fact,

acceleration of performance rates in baslc f,acts, as measured in this

study, will indeed increase the acquisition of subsequent academic

skl-11-s.

5. Personal charting by pupils ls encouraged since both teacher and

pupil will benefit. Taking into consideration the presented data,

the most practical procedure appears to be: (a) have the child reeC

a proficiency l-evel, then (b) set up an lnstructional chal-n of peer

tutors. Specific steps may be:

(1) lnstruct one chl1d to ehart when he reaches a proiiciencyleveI Ln a target area. l'trot all sf-rrdents need to work onthe sarne target behavior hor'retrer a fu1l class project lseasier for the teacher stnce the time sampie can remainconstant and the chi.l..dren enjoy a group aim.

Gaashoit: Usi.ng Direct Record:i-ng

24

(2) Vlhen a second ehil-d reaches profieiency the teacher canhelp the flrst child instruct the next child in chartingskills. Teacher help may not be necessary if the firstchild has conslstentl-y and accurateLy eharted his own per-formance rate.

(3) The second child can subsequently teach charting to thethird student rvhen profLciency Level in tlre target area isreached. Thls pattern can continue until- all children arecharting their or,rn correet and error performance rates onthe six-cycle behavior chart.

(4) Since acquisltlon rate of ehartlng wilJ" depend upon gradeand inCj-vlduaL children, the flrst children to chart can beteacher helpers until aL1 children are chartlng their ownwork. Being a teacher helper is usual-ly an excellentarranged event,

Being an effective teacher is not easy. Accelerating, poLlsh-

ing and holding pupll performance is our business and responsibility.

How we manage our instructlonal setting determines the future of each

pupil. Speclfic management areas are: (i) accelerate pupll per-

formance, (2) make pinpoints of goals, (3) make an IS descripticn to

plan for the goal, (4) follow the plan, (5) keep daily di"rect records

of pupil and teacher performance, (6) charr the data, and (7) respond

to the data. These procedures of Precislon Teaching provide the

teacher rvith a more functl-onal and senslt.ive measure of classroom

performance than other tradttional methods. As managers of a very

preeious comrodity--human beings--r.re should insist upon rational de-

cisions based upon the most precise informatlon a..railable.

Teachers are very busy people and the demands are often unhear-

able, but a common lament heard in the faculty Ls, frif I'd only knor^rn

sooner thls ruouldnf t have happenedl" Yes, rdthout data things of ten

Iook clearer tn hindsight, hor,rever it is ah+ays better to practlce

?

GaashoLt: Using llj.rect Recording

25

foresight and wlth Preelsion TeachLng procedures you will know sooner.

l'lany details and facts overlooked due to heavy schedules will become

apparent. By knowlng daiLy about performance rre are {n a better

posltion to predict, thus avolding fallure. Through carefuL inter-

pretatlon and evaluatlon of the relatlonship between pupll perform-

ance and specific teaching acts, we begln to reach our goaL as an

effective teacher.

GaashoJ-t: Uslng DirecL Recordlng

nrli-iERENCES:

Ca-l<ivel-l, T.E. and Cox, L. Fourth grade chil-dren tabulate, mark-scoie, andgraph thei-r daily arithmetic performances. Unpublished uanuscript,University of Kansas, 1966.

Joheson, Joan, Personal Communieetion. L969.

Jchnson, Nancy. Unpubl-ished data, University of Kansas Medical Center,Kansas Clty, Kansas, L966. (a)

Johnson, l'lancy. A cornparlson of arlthmetic performance of students

*.

A

ident:Lfled as average and bel-or,r averageEiiucatLon. 1967 (b)

. Kansas Studies ln

Keenig, C.H. Precisi.on teachlng r.rith emotional-Iy disturbed puplls.L'r:publtshed masterts thesis, Unlversity of Kansas, L967.

Itunzelman, II. Speech at Preetsj"on Teaching l{orkshop, Eugene, Oregon, L969.

Lind-.ley, O.R. Dlrect measurement and prosthesis of retarded behavior.R.evised editlon, Un.iversity of Oregon Currleulum Bulletin, Vol-. 25Eugene, Oregon 1969.

Starlia, Ann. The use of performance rates to seguence addition facts.llduca'i: lonal Technolo . In p::ess " 1969.

,

S Larlin,

Sir.r1in,

Starlin,

Ann.

c.

c.

Personal Communication. L969 .

Ppers and peecision. Educational Techno 1osy. In press. (a)

Eval.uating progress towards reading proficiency. Ie?Ii.3.g=-Ed. by Berbara Bateman. In press" (b)Ili"sorciers.

Ci.arlin, C. and StarJ-in, A. The first 1-5 days of school: Institutingpreei.slon teaching in the eLementary cJ"assroom. tlnpublished manuscript,UnLversity of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon. L969

3;'n--nerman, C. Class::oom academic feedback and elementary adrninistratora:rd staff behavior" Unprrbllshed doctorrs dl-ssertatLon, IJniversity ofOregon, Eugene., Oregon. L969 .

Ga.asholt, Itlarie. Comparlson of rea<lJ-ng rates bettreen teacher asslgnedbooks anC student selected books. Data putrltshed Ln Behavior Bank,P.O. 3937, I(ansas City, Kansas, g66LO, L969.

Iiaught.on, E. Counti-ng on yourself: Precislon teaching rational ,Ag.In Robert BradfieLd (ed.) rearlings. In press.