Fluency-Building'"Carl V. Binder, Ph.D.

SummaryFluency is accurate, quick perforrnance. It is what we rec-

ognize in the work of experts: doing, saying, or thinking thecorrect things without hesitation. PT/MS Fluency-buildingrMtechnology is a systematic approach to instructional designand evaluation aimed at producing fluenry as efficiently as

possible.PTIMS Fluency-building technology is based on research

from a variety of fields in education and psychology. This re-view surveys some of the most important contributions to thatresearch and provides a brief history of precision teaching,the measurement-based instructional approach which gaverise to Fluency-building techniques.

Verbal learning and precision teaching research hasshown that when people attain fluency in skills or knowledgethey don't forget what they learn. In other words, fluency en-sures "retention" of skills and knowledge.

Research by human information processing theorists, hu-man factors engineers, and precision teachers has demonstrat-ed that when people attain fluent skills or knowledge theycan use what they learn for extended periods of time withoutfatigue, loss of attention, frustration, or clistractibility. Inother words, fluenry increases "endurance" or attention span.

Research in reading pc'rceptual-motor learning and preci-sion teaching has shown that when people attain fluent pre-skills or prerequisite knowledge they can easily become fluentin more complex or advanced skills or knowledge. When peo-ple do not learn to the point of fluency, they often cannot easi-ly use what they have learned. In other words, fluenry ensuresthe "application" of skills and knowledge.

Training without Fluency-building techniques may not becost effective. Fluency-building bridges the gap betweenlearning and truly useful performance.

Carl Binder founded Precision Teaching and ManagementSystems,Inc. in 1982 to develop Fluency-building technologyfor corporate training and development.

Fluency increases retention ofknowledge, lengthens attention span/

and ensures application of newlearning. Here are the roots of this

new approach, created by the authorat Boston-based PTIMS.

Fluency-building:ResearchBackground

IntroductionBehavioral fluency is the

combination of accuracy plusappropriate speed of perfor-mance which defines truemastery of any skill or hu-man information process.Fluency is the same as "auto-maticity" or "second-natureknowledge." It representsthe most easeful, efficient,and expert level of humanperformance and, as such, isthe most desirable outcomeof every training program orperformance intervention.

However, to a large extenttraining and educational re-search has ignored the timeor "speed" dimension of ex-pertise, with a few notableexceptions. In studies ofreading, Morse code, typing,and other so<alled "perfor-mance" tasks, both research-ers and practitioners stressthe importance of speed. Butin general, most curriculumand instructional design ef-forts for both children andadults ignore the time di-mension, and therefore gen-erally fail to produce fluen-cy, or true mastery.

Though largely ignored,

Fluency-building . Carl V. Binder O PTIMS,Inc. 1987 Page 1

there are clear results in var-ious traditions of academicand applied research whichindicate that speed (or pace)is an important dimension ofevery perforrnance or learn-ing outcome. This documentreviews a few reports ofthose results, both publishedand unpublished, whichhave contributed to our un-derstanding of fluency and tothe development of PTIMSFluengr-building technology.

Multiple SourcesOur Fluency-building tech-

nology is based on researchfrom different fields in psy-chology and education, in-cluding:

. Reading

. Operant conditioning

. Verbal learningr Perceptual-motor

learning. Human information

processing. Human factors. Precision teachingirior to the advent of pre-

cision teaching as an educa-tional technology in 1965, nosingle field provided a con-text for applying what isknown about fluenry in a sys-tematic way. In fact, as iscorunon in academe, re-searchers and practitionersin any one of these fields of-ten remain largely unawareof work conducted in the oth-ers.

As a discipline and field ofresearch, precision teachinghas repeatedly confirmedand extended what is knownabout aspects of humanlearning and performancestudied by researchers in

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder Page2

other fields. Precision teach-ing has also contributed arange of practical new devel-opments and research find-ings which provide a foun-dation for PTIMS Fluency-building technology.

Precision teaching is basedon daily measurement andcharting of performancespeed and accurary in indi-vidualized learning projects.It has given us a set of meas-urement tools for studpngthe effects of instructionalprocedures on behavioralfluenry in human learners.Thus, precision teaching hasintegrated and advanced ourunderstanding of fl uency,leading to the developmentof a practical technologybased on that understanding.

OverviewThe remainder of this re-

view falls into two sc.ctions:I. A survey of selected

research, organizedaccording to threecritical learning out-comes: retention, endu-rance, and applica-tion.

II. A brief history of pre-cision teaching re-search and develop-ment.

I: Retention,Endurance, andApplication

Training and managementef forts represent investmentsin human performance. In or-der to reap a reasonable re-turn on that invesfinent, wewould like to be able to en-sure at least three critical

learning outcomes, no matterwhat performance we seek tocreate or improve.

First, we want people toretain, or remember whatthey have learned. A com-mon result in both school ed-ucation and adult training isthat learners forget much ofwhat they have supposedlylearned. A 50Vo loss of infor-mation a few weeks aftertraining is not unusual (Bow-er and Orgel, 1984). A satis-factory return on training in-vestment demands betterretention than this.

fro* trainingprograms unable

to apply ushatthey haaelearned...

Second, we'd like traineesto emerge from training witha sufficient level of skill orknowledge to continue to per-form at acceptable levels forextended, useful periods oftime. We call this outcomeendurance. It is related to'?ttention span" and dis-tractibility. The common ex-perience is that until peoplereach a certain level of skillor knowledge mastery, theymay experience mental orphysical fatigue, or frustra-

[traditionally] a50To loss of

information a fewweeks after

training is notunusual,,,.

indiaiduals emerge

tion, after only short workperiods. In order to put newlearning to use, people mustemerge from training withsufficient endurance or resis-tance to distraction to usenew skills or informationwithout undue fatigue.

Third, for training to beworthwhile, people must beable to apply what theylearn. Typically, individu-als emerge from training pro-grarns with an "understand-ingl' or "comprehension" ofthe course content; but oftenthey cannot really applywhat they have learned tomore complex situations,problem-solving, etc. Any in-vestment in performancemust result in efficient application of skills.

Precision teachers havedefined performance crite-ria, sometimes known as"REAPS" (Retention-Endurance-Application Per-formance Standards), whichensure these critical out-comes (Haughton, 1980). Re-search supports the conclu-sion that performancecriteria in training programsmust include the time orspeed dimension, not merelyaccuracy or quality measures.Only by defining what wecall fluenry standards can weensure Retention, Endurance,and Application of newlearning.

RetentionHow well do you recall in-

formation about a given topic(e.g., features of a particularproduct), or remember how toperform a given skill (e.g.,

formatting a document in

Fluenry-building o Carl V. Binder Page 3

your word processor)? Youranswer depends to a large ex-tent on how well you learnedit in the first place and howmuch practice you've actual-ly done.

Studies of retention in ver-bal learning were among theearliest systematic researchin experimental psychology.Even before the turn of thecentury, laboratory psychol-ogists taught people arbi-trary associations betweenwords or nonsense syllablesand then tested to see howaccurately they could recallthe associations later. Thegeneral findings were thatpeople could retain more ofwhat they had learned with"overlearningi' or addedpractice, beyond the point of1007o accurac/.

However, because theyonly tested for accuracy (per-centage correct), these scien-tists were unable to directlymeasure performance im-provements beyond the pointof 100Vo correct--€venthough they knew that prac-tice beyond that point pro-duced greater retention.Charles Osgood (1945) con-ducted several verbal learn-ing studies in which he test-ed for speed as well asacorracy. He presented aprinted word or sllable andmeasured the time until theperson responded with theconect (or incorrect) word.With more sensitive timingdevices than his predeces-sors he was able to accurate-ly measure very short peri-ods of time between verbalstimuli and responses-fractions of a second. Hefound that with so-called

"overlearning" practice be-yond the point of 1007o acctr-rary, people increased thespeed with which they wereable to respond. Alreadyknowing that overlearningproduces better retention, hewas the first verbal learningresearcher able to say thatgreater retention is associat-ed with faster responding.

More recently, Bower andOrgel (1984) conducted re-search with students at

Students who metfluency criteria

could accuratelyrecall

nearly hoice asffiuch of the course

content as theothers.

Wayne State University.They compared teachingmethods which required stu-dents to meet both speed andaccuracy criteria with moreconventional methods requir-ing only accurate responding.Not surprisingly, this re-search showed that 5 weeksafter the end of the term,students who had met fluen-cy criteria could accuratelyrecall nearly twice as muchof the course content as theothers.

These results confirm whatis already our corrunon exper-ience. The skills or informa-tion which we retain best arethose which have becomefluent, automatic, able to beused quickly and withouthesitation.

EnduranceHow easily can you contin-

ue to perform a skill or useinformation for an extendedperiod of time without be'coming distracted, frustrat-ed, or fatigued? Again, theintuitively obvious answer isthat we are rnost comfortableand can maintain our atten-tion best with fluent skills orinformation

Think about your initialexperiences with accounting,playng a musical instru-ment, or perhaps using aword processor. When youmerely learn to do somethingconectly, before you haveattained appropriate speed,you are highly susceptible todistraction---casily takenaway from the task by theslightest intemrption. Infact, continuing to perform askill or to use informationwhich is not yet fluent canbecome downright unpleas-ant after an extended period.This is the dimension of en-durance, addressed by stud-ies in human informationprocessing and precisionteaching.

LaBerge and Samuels(1974) reported studies ofwhat they called "automa-ticity'' in reading---anothername for fluenry. They wereworking in the context of Hu-man Information Processingtheory, discussing their re-sults in the language of com-puter metaphors for thinkingand behavior. They hypo-thesized that when verbalassociations become "auto-matic," practiced to thepoint where the learner no

longer needs to think (or"pay attention") before re-sponding they should be'come higNy resistant to dis-traction while requiring lesstime for processing. Theyfound that after sufficientamounts of practice beyond

People couldrespond quicklyflnd accuratelywithaut beingdistracted or

unexpectedeoents.

the point of lffiVo accuracy,people could respond quicklyand accurately, without be-ing distracted or sloweddown by unexpected eventsarranged by the experimen-ters. They concluded that"training beyond the accura-cy criterion mustbe providedif the association is to occurwithout attention"-automatically (p. 307).

Related findings in HumanFactors Engineering suggestthat when the the environ-ment (e.9., slow computer operation) prevents peoplefrom working at an optimalpace, they experience frus-tration and fatigue (Spencer,1987). In other words, whenprocedures or other environ-mental factors impose a"ceiling" on performance,people experience enduranceproblems. Fluency researchindicates that when a lackof fluency in prerequisite

slowed doutn by

skills or knowledge imposesa ceiling on an individual'sperformance, this dysfl uenrymay cause a negative experience and distractibilig, sim-ilar to when external factorslimit performance levels(Binder, 1978).

Binder (1979) explored therelationship between fl uenryand distractibility in a ser-ies of laboratory and class-room studies. In one experi-ment, subjects learned to sayspecific numbers when presented with arbitrary print-ed Hebrew characters. Theythen performed "addition"problems by stating the"sums" of pairs of these He-brew characters as quickly aspossible. They wore audioheadphones as they per-formed the addition task,and sometimes heard a voiceelnng random digits as theyattempted to maintain thepace of "adding" the Hebrewcharacters. At first, whenthey had merely learned theassociations to the point of100% accuracy, the distract-ing auditory number-readingalmost completely disruptedthe addition, slowing itdown nearly to a stand still.As they continued to practicethe basic associations be.tween Hebrew charactersand numberg gaining fluency,they became capable of per-forming the addition task ata constant pace, despite dis-tracting input from theheadphones. In short, fluen-cy in the basic associationsproduced resistance to dis-traction during the more com-plex task. This finding con-forms to our everydayexperience. For example, we

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder Page4

can watch TV without dis-ruption while using fluentskills or information, but notwhen doing something thatis still new and difficult.

In dassroom studies, Bind-er (1980) measured the rela-tionship between fluency andthe ability to maintain agiven perforrnance level foran extended period of time.He found that students whocould perform simple mathskills relatively quickly andaccurately for short periodscould maintain their perfor-mance levels for longer peri-ods. On the other hand,those who performed accu-rately but with hesitationfor short periods experienceddifficulty, including nega-tive emotional states, whenrequired to continue workingfor long periods without in-terruption. The message isthat repeated short practiceperiods may be better thanlongones in the @inning ofany learning process. Withadded fluency comes in-creased endurance.

ApplicationEarly experiments in per-

ceptual-motor learning(e.g.,Gagne and Foster, 1949)demonstrated that whenlearners become fluent onparts of a task, they canmore easily become fluentwhen combining those partsinto more complex tasks.

Haughton (1972), one ofthe founders of precisionteaching, made a maior in-structional design break-through in field studies ofchildren's learning in theclassroom. He found that

simply knowing "how to do"a prerequisite or componentskill correctly or accuratelywas not sufficient prepara-tion for mastering more ad-vanced or complex skills. Forexample, students who wereunable to write answers tosimple arithmetic problemsas quickly and accurately astheir more competent peersdid not improve when teach-ers used a variety of rewardsystems or required extensivepractice on the arithmeticskills themselves. Whenteachers assessed more ele-

Fluency on productknowledge factsimproaed salespe$ortnance by

20Vo while cultingtraining time in

hatf .

mentary or "tool" skill+ suchas reading numbers and writ-ing digits, they found thatthe students could performthem accurately, but far lessquickly or fluently, thantheir peers. With addedpractice, these students wereable to attain fluency on theelementary skills with rela-tive ease, and then proceedto apply them to more com-plex problems.

Repetitions of this basicprocedure in a range of skillareas---€nsuring fl uency onprerequisites before expect-ing fluenry on advancedskills or information-hasproduced remarkable resultsfor thousands of students pre-

viously thought to have'learning problems." Binder(79791 taught severely re-tarded people to followwritten directions by provid-ing fluency practice on ele.mentary sight reading andspoken instruction- follow-ing. Pollard $97U taughtpreviously "unteachable"multiply handicapped stu-dents to perform a range ofself-care and work skills byproviding fluency practice oncomPonents before exPectin gfluenry on rnore advancedskills.

Daniels-Blakeslee (1985)

demonstrated that fluency intyping simple computer key-board patterns supported thedevelopment of fluency onmore complex keyboard oper-ations. Orgel (1984) showedthat fluenry on productknowledge facts could im-prove sales performance by207o while reducing trainingtime by half. Orgel (1984)

demonstrated that Universi-ty students could learn tosolve complex calculus prob-lems more easily when theyhad attained fluency on bas-ic formulas and rules.

Haughton (1982) devel-oped an analory based onchemistry to help communi-cate this relationship be-tween fluenry on componentskills or information and theapplication of components tomore complex tasks. He likened the components tochemical "elements" whichcombine to form 'tom-pounds." The idea is thatskill or knowledge elementscombine in ever-increasingcomplexity to form compoundskills or information. Fluen-

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder Page 5

cy in elements supports theircombination, or applicationbcompounds

All of these results conformto our common experience.Whenever you learn a com-plex skill or information pro-cess-whether using comput-er software, learning martialarts, playing a musical in-strument, or any other com-plex skill or information pro-cess-you'll do best if youmaster the elements first. Ifyou do not attain fluency onthe elements you'll face in-creasing difficulties whenapplying those elements inmore complex situations.

Thus, fluency bridges thegap between learning and ac-ceptable performance. It al-lows what we learn to be-come useful. In attaining auseful level of skill orknowledge, we increase thelikelihood that we will con-tinue to apply what we havelearned and consequentlymaintain the skill or knowl-edge over time.

II: A Brief History ofPrecision Teaching

Precision Teaching tracesits origins to the methods of"free operant conditioning"developed by Skinner (1938)

in the first half of this cen-tury. The key to his metho-dology, also called "an ex-perimental analysis ofbehavior," was the use ofrate or frequency measures ofbehavior. He used automat-ed laboratory equipment tocount and time behaviors.His standard measure of per-formance was response rate

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder Page 6

per minute.After years of laboratory

research with animals ofrumy species, Skinner andhis graduate student, O.R.Lindsley, opened a laborato-

ry at the Harvard MedicalSchool to study the behaviorof chronic psychotics, thefirst full-scale human oper-ant conditioning laboratoryin the world (Lindsley &Skinner, 1954). For over tenyears Lindsley conductedhundreds of experimentswith both psychotic and nor-mal human subiects, and pub-lished dozens of research ar-ticles in medical andpsychiatric journals. He de-veloped such refined meth-ods for monitoring and pre'dicting the rate of humanbehaviors that he could, forexample, measure the effectsof two aspirins on perfor-mance. He made contribu-tions to behavioral pharma-cology (the study of drugeffects on behavior), adver-tising research, the analysisof psychiatric symptoms,and many other fields andsub-fields-all based on re-sponse rate measures of be'havior.

In 1964 Lindsley left thepsychiatric field at Har-vard to apply rate measuresin special education class-rooms at the University ofKansas (Lindsley 19U,1972r.He trained graduate studentsand teachers to measure be-havior rates, or frequencies,in the classroomand to usedaily measurement andcharting as a tool for indi-vidualized educational deci-sion-making. He called thisnew endeavor "Precision

Teaching," and worked witha small number of colleaguesand students to disseminatethe method throughout thecountry. Haughton (1972),

one of Lindsley's first gradu-ate students, made hisbreakthrough discoveryabout fluenry and applica-tion of skills while workingwith teachers in Washing-ton, Oregon, and California.Trained in the tradition of"behavior modification" andoperant conditioning, thesepioneers originally believedthat rates of behavior, in-cluding such behavior asreading, writing, and arith'metic, could best be changedby altering their consequenc-es. Give ]ohnny a hug or apiece of candy when heworks faster. Give Mary agold star or a nickel whenshe increases her rate of cor-rectly spelling words. Whatthey did not yet realize isthat factors other than con-sequences (rewards and pun-ishments) affect changes inbehavior frequencies. Theydidn't yet understand thatchanges in the frequency-degree of proficiency--of oneskill or information processcould alter learning rates forother skills or information.

The big discovery, as out-lined in the first section ofthis review, was that therate at which a person canperform a given skill is lim-ited by the rate at which heor she can perform its compo-nents or prerequisites.

Moreover, it became clearthat we can identify fluencystandards, (or "aims")which define expert levels(or ranges) of performance for

each skill. With this dis-covery, the real power ofprecision teaching emerged.It became very important tomeasure fluenry (expert per-formance) in order to knowhow to teach or attain it. Byadding the time dimension totraditional criterion-referenced instructiory preci-sion teaching provided themeans for defining andachieving true mastery ofskills and information.

Teachers and therapiststhroughout North Americadevised orrriculum sequencesbased on the principle thatfluency at each step requiresfluency at each previous step(Starlin, 1972). Thousands ofstudents timed and chartedtheir own performance onhundreds of different skillson a daily basis. Adminis-trators and researchers de-veloped assessment tech-niques which couldsensitively predict students'success or failure, based ononly a few one-minute tim-ings of the performance of se-lected skills (Magliocca, Ri-naldi, Crew, & Kunzelmanry1977). Barrett (7979) showedthat only by monitoring per-formance speed, in additionto accuracy, was it possibleto measure differences be-tween normal professionaladults and severely retardedinstitutional residents on arange of simple pre-academic and prevocationalskills. There were large dif-ferences in speed of perfor-mance, but both normal andseverely retarded peoplewere able to perform with1007o accuracy. The implica-tions for assessing skills and

information, in general, wereprofound. The conclusion wasthat without attention tospeed, it would be impossibleto detect critical differencesin proficiency.

Having discovered thispowerful new set of tools andprinciples, teachers and ad-ministrators began to see re-markable improvements intheir students' learning ratesand performance levels. Per-haps the most thoroughstudy of instructional pro-grams based on fluenry prac-tice and daily measurementwas the Precision TeachingProject in Great Falls, Mon-tana (Beck, 7979). At theSacajawea School, studentsin all grades performedfluency practice and meas-urement each day for a totalof 20 to 30 minutes in a varie-ty of skill areas. At the endof 4 years their averageIowa Test of Basic SkillsAchievement scores had ri-sen between 20 and 40 percen-tile points as compared withthose at all the otherschools in the district. Themagnitude of this effect isunheard-of in the education-al literature. A Federalstudy validated these re-sults and a federally fundedtraining program introducedprecision teaching to teach-ers and administratorsthroughout the country.However, very few schoolsor school districts adoptedprecision teaching methodsas more than a passing trend.The message seemed to bethat the public educationsystem does not place a highpriority on results.

The bulk of this pioneering

work went unpublished sincemost of it occurred in class-rooms in the process of day-to-day teaching activities.For about 6 years, the Data-Sharing Newsletter (Binder,79n-$) served a communi-cation function for severalhundred precision teachersaround the world. The Jour-nal of Precision Teachingarose in 1980 and precisionteachers met at various na-tional and regional confer-ences. But mostly theyshared charted data, notwritten reports. Lindsleysometimes described preci-sion teaching as "puttingscience in the hands of thepractitioners," most of whomhad little interest in pub-lishing.

During the late 1970's,Lindsley and a few of hiscolleagues bega. seekingother areas to apply theprinciples of precision teach-ing. In part because the hu-man services and public edu-cation establishmentsseemed so unresponsive todemonstrated improvementsin learning and performance,a few precision teachers be-came interested in corporatetraining. Because the meas-urement system underlyrngprecision teaching applies toperformance of all kinds-not just in instructional set-tings-this move seemednatural and inevitable(Binder, 1980). Having al-ready extended precisionteaching into college andgraduate school dassrooms(e.g., Merbitz & Olander,1980; Bower & Orgel, 1981),precision teachers reasonedthat the next step might be

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder PageT

to teach adults in the work-place.

Binder, who had pub-lished the "Data-sharingNewsletter/' and studied orworked with Skinner, Lind-sley, Barrett and Haughtonover the course of a decade,

Unprecedentedimprooefirents in

learning andperforffiflnce are

possible...

PT|MS continuesto develop this

appranch...

Remarkable resultsafe our

expectntion forthe future.

had a broad overview of thefield and its various aspectsand applications. In 1982 hefounded Precision Teachingand Management Systems,Inc., to bring the methods ofprecision teaching, and arange of related performancetechnologies, into the corpo-rate environment.

The PT/MS Fluenry-building technology has beenan outgrowth of years of re-search and development,combining both precision-teaching and research fromother fields, some of whichwas reviewed in Section I.Aimed at producing fluentskills and knowledge as effi-ciently as possible, it uses

Haughton's 69m "LearningChannel Matrix" approachto curiculumdesign and abroad range of principlesfrom both laboratory andclassroom research.

Although the emphasis sofar has been on technicaltraining ("hard" skills andknowledge), the principlesof fluency apply equallywell to so-called "*ft"skills development. Beingable to "respond with feel-ing" without hesitation, forexample, is as amenable to aFluency-building approachas is a more easily definabletechnical skill. The chal-lenge is to find applicationsand markets in which thetechnology can be expandedand refined.

ConclusionThe guiding principle for

all fluency research and de-velopment is measurement.Fluency-building methodsevolve as we dirover newways to produce the desiredresult: fluency, or true mas-tery of skills and informa-tion, defined as accuracy (orquality) plus appropriatespeed (or pace) of perfor-mance. Not wedded to anytheory, this approach offersa context in which to im-prove all of our efforts toproduce productive, satisfiedleamers and performers inboth industry and in the edu-cational system.

We know from such sfudiesas the Precision TeachingProject (Beck, 1979) that un-precedented improvements inlearning and performance arepossible with the systematic

application of these princi-ples. PTIMS continues to de-velop this systematic ap-proach in the context ofbusiness and industry. Re-markable results are our ex-pectation for the future.

Dr. Carl Binder is Presi-dent of Precision Teachingand Management Systems,Inc. (PT/MS), of Newton,Massachusetts, a human per-formance consulting firm. Heis also President of the Mas-sachusetts Chapter of theNational Society for Perfor-rumce and lnstructionNSPD. He studied withB.F. Skinner at HarvardUniversity, was AssociateDirector of a university-affiliated human learningresearch lab for 10 years, andfounded PTIMS in7982.

PTIMS developsboth"high tech" and '1ow tech"solutions to learning and per-formance problems in a rangeof industries and organiza-tions, with measurable re-sults. call Dr. Binder at(677)332-2655, or write tohim at PT/MS,Inc., P.O. Boxl59,Nonanhrm, MA U195.

Fluenry-buildingrM andFluency CardsrM are trade-marks of Precision Teachingand Management Systems,Inc.

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder Page 8

Glossary

Aims: A term used by Haughton to describe fluency standards, count per minute performance lev-els (or ranges) which serve as goals for students using precision teaching to nunage their ownlearning.

Application: The ability to apply what one has leamed to learn or perform more complex oradvanced skills or information processes. Known as "transfer of training" in the traditionallearning literature.

Automaticity: A term used by Human Information Processing theorists to describe the level ofperformance at which attention is no longer required to perform, and distractibility is at a min-imum. Equivalent to fluenqy.

Behavioral fluency: The level of performance exhibited by experts which combines high accu-racy or correctness plus appropriate speed or pace. Supports retention, endurance, and applica-tion of skills or information.

Endurance: The ability to maintain a level of performance for an extended period of time, with-out distraction, fatigue, or negative emotional states. Related to what has traditionally beencalled "attention span." Associated with fluency.

Experimental Analysis of Behavior: The method, developed by B.F. Skinner, which uses re-sponse rate measures of behavior and single'subiect experimental design (rather than statisti-cal groups design) to study functional relations between the behavior of organisms and environ-mental events. The experimenter learns about behavior by systematically varyingenvironmental events and continuously measuring behavior to identify causal relationships.

Fluency-buildingrM technology: A systematic approach developed by Precision Teaching andManagement Systems, Inc. for measuring and producing behavioral fluenry.

Fluency CardsrM leaming materials: A trademark held by Precision Teaching and ManagementSystems, Inc., referring to a type of practice cards and the method for using them as one aspect ofits Fluency-building technology. Used according to a specific set of procedures with daily meas-urement and a fluency standard.

Fluenry standards: Count per minute performance levels (or ranges) which serve as goals forFluency-building activities, and which define behavioral fluency for a given exercise. Alsoknown as "aims." Human Factors (Engineering): The study how humans interact efficientlywith the environment. Related to ergonomics.

Human Information Processing Theory: A theoretical framework in psychology and educationwhich uses computer information processing models to represent human behavior and nervoussystem operations.

Information process: Any behavior involving what is conventionally called "information" suchas reading, thinking problem-solving, etc. An imprecise reference to covert verbal behavior.

Learning: A change in performance over time.

Operant conditioning: The process, defined and investigated by B.F. Skinner, whereby the prob-ability of behavior is governed by its consequences, e.9., reinforcements and punishments. Skin-ner used rate per minute of behavior as the measure of probability.

Perceptual-motor learning: Leaning, and the study of learning, which combines complex visualor auditory stimuli with motor responses.

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder lGlossaryJ Pageg

Performance: Count per unit time of behavior or accomplishments, e.g., words written per min-ute, dollars earned per month.

Precision Teaching: Use of count per minute measures and the Standard Celeration Chart for in-structional evaluation and decision-making. Originated by Ogden Lindsley in 1965 in collabora-tion with Beatrice Barrett, Eric Flaughton, Haroft Kunzelmain, Ann Duncan, et al.

Retention: Rememberin& or the ability to perform a skill or recall information at a later time.The opposite of forgetting.

Second-nature knowledge: Knowledge (or skill) which is so well- learned that it is virtuallyauto-matic, capable of being used without thinking or hesitation. The same as fluent knowledgeor skill.

True mastery: The level of performance (skill or knowledge) which defines a true expert. With-out specifying a time dimension (pace or speed of performance), in addition to accuracy or quali-ty, it is impossible to define true mastery.

Verbal learning: The study of learning "verbal" associations or series. One of the oldest branch-es of experimental psychology.

ReferencesBarrett, B.H. Communitization and the measured message of normal behavior. In R. york and E.Edgar (Eds.), Teaching the Severely Handicapped (Vol4.). Columbus, Ohio: Special press,1979. A classic discussion and demonstration of the sensitivity of time-basea snU assessment.

Beck, R. Report for the Office of Education ]oint Dissemination Review Panel. precision Teach-ing Project, Great Falls, Montana, 1979. Report of a four-year project in which daily fluengz ex-ercises and measurement produced 20 to 40 percentile improvements in Iowa Test of Basic 5kiilsAchievement scores in elementary rhool children.

Binder, C. (Ed.) Data-sharing Newsletter,1977-83. A newsletter for precision teaching practi-tioners and researchers around the world.

Binder, C. Four kinds of ceilings. Data-sharing Newsletter. Belmont, Massachusetts: BehaviorProsthesis l^aboratory, September, 1978. An article describing four types of ,,ceilings', or limita-tions which limit learning and performance: Measurement- defined, Teacher-imp5sed, Deficit-imposed, and Handicap produced.

Binder, C. Response rate measurement in a mediated transfer paradigm: teaching severely re-tarded students to read. Paper presented at a meeting of the Association for Behivior Analysis,Dearborn, Michigan, June, 7979.

Binder, C. Two studies involving continuous recording of associative skill. Harvard University,1979. Studies demonstrating that skill fluency increases resistance to disbaction.

Pi$"f C Charting applications: management, accounting, planning. Harvard University,1980. A discussion with examples. of using the standard -"iruru-"nLnd charting methods de-veloped by o.R' Lindsley for business minagement applications.

Binder, C' The effects of explicit timing and performance duration on academic performance fre-quency in elementary school children. Harvard University, 1980. A series of studies showingthat explicit timing ofperfo.rmance can by itself increase'performance levels, and that nueJcyincreases endurance, the ability to maintiin acceptable p"ifo.-utrce levels for extended periJasof time.

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder lReferencesl Page 10

Bower,8., & Orgel, R. To err is divine. Journal of Precision Teaching 198'1.,2(1),3-12. Report ofa precision teaching project with college students demonstrating the effectiveness of fluency ex-ercises for adult learners studying complex content (education and psychology). Bower, B. & Or-gel, R. The BehaviorTech Learning System: A training tool for modern times. Lawrence, Kansas:BehaviorTech, Inc., 1984. A follow-up to the 1981 study in which fluency exercises were shownto double retention, as compared to more traditional instructional procedures.

Daniels-Blakeslee, K. Reinforced practice of elements and performance of a 3-element sequence.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, May, 1985. Astudy (later accepted as a Master's thesis at Northeastern University) demonstrating the ef-fects of fluenry practice for keyboard elements on performance of keyboard sequences.

Gagne, R M. & Foster, H. Transfer of training from practice on components in a motor skill. |our-nal of Experimental Psychology,1949,39,47-6. Fluency on component skills supports fluenry oncomposite skills.

Haughtory E. Aims: Growing and Sharing. In |.8. |ordan & L.S. Robbins (Eds.), Let's Try DoingSomething Else Kind of Thing, Arlington, Virginia: CEC,'1.972.

Haughton, E. Channel Outcomes. Belleville, Ontario: The Hastings County Board of Education,1977. A curriculum analysis tool which provides a basis for designing fluenry exercises and as-sessments.

Haughton, E. Personal communication, 1980. Eric Haughton was the chief integrator of what wecurrently know about fluency and its relationships to retention, endurance, and application. Heinvented the acronym REAPS (Retention-Endurance-Application Performance Standards).

Haughton, E. Attempts to develop fluency in behavioral elements. Invited presentation (withC. Binder) at the Winter Precision Teaching Conference, Orlando, Florida. March, 1982.

LaBerge, D. & Samuels, S.]. Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.Cognitive Psychology , 6, 293- 323, 1.974. Discusses "automaticity'' and resistance to distractionin terms consistent with what precision teaching research has shown about fluency.

Lindsley, O.R., & Skinner, B.F. A method for the experimental analysis of the behavior of psy-chotic patients. American Psychologist, 9, 419420, 1954. A report of Skinner and Lindsley's firsthuman operant conditioning work using behavior rate measures.

Lindsley, O.R. Direct measurement and prosthesis of retarded behavior. ]ournal of Educa-tion,"l47, 62-81,1964. The first paper in which Lindsley applied the principles of laboratory be-havior analysis to educational problems---a precursor to precision teaching. Lindsley, O.R.From Skinner to Precision Teaching. In |.8. jordan & L.S. Robbins (Eds.), Let's Try Doing Some-thing Else Kind of Thing, Arlington, Virginia: CEC,1.972. Lindsley's story about bringing ratemeasures from the laboratory into the classroom.

Magliocca, L.A., Rinaldi, R.T., Crew,l.L., & Kunzelmann, H.P. Early identification of handicapped children through a frequenry sampling technique. Exceptional Children, May,1.977.One of the few published reports by Kunzelmann who pioneered the use of behavior frequencysampling for diagnostic skill assessment and prediction. His work demonstrated the remarka-ble sensitivity of time-based tests to differences in levels of expertise.

Merbitz, C.T., & Olander, C.P. Precision teaching in a university center. Journal of PrecisionTeaching, 1980, 1(1), 18-26. One of the largest university centers in which time'based practiceand evaluation forms the core of instructional strategy. (acksonville State Universiq/s Centerfor Individualized Instruction)

Orgel, R. Improved leaming and motivation in university calculus classes. Reported in The Be-

F1uenry-building o Carl V. Binder [References] Page 11

haviorTech Learning System: A training tool for modern times. Lawrence, Kansas: Behavior-Tech, Inc., 1984. Demonstrated rapid learning and more effective problem-solving as a result offluency exercises.

Orgel, R. BLS doubled the effectiveness of sales training. The BehaviorTech Learning System:A training tool for modern times. Lawrence, Kansas: BehaviorTech, Inc., 1984. Fluency exercisesin a sales training program which increased sales by 207o.

Osgood, C.E. Meaningful similarity and interference in learning. fournal of Experimental Psy-chology, 36(4),277-30'1,7946. The earliest verbal learning experiment in which response laten-cies (speed) were shown to improve with added practice beyond the point of 700Vo accuracy.

Pollard, J. Personal communication, 1978. Applications of fluency exercises with students previ-ously thought to be "unteachable" resulted in their learning a variety of vocational and self-management skills. A student of Binder, Pollard has developed among the most innovative andeffective applications of precision teaching for handicapped learners as well as for staff andmarurgers in organizations.

Skinner, B.F. The Behavior of Organisms New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1938. Skinne/sfirst book in which he described his method called "an experimental analysis of behavior"based on behavior rate measures.

Spencer, C. Speed! Speed! Speed! Personal Computing, |anuary 7987. A surrunary of findingsconcerning speed and the computer-user interface, indicating that when computer operations donot support fluent behavior, negative side-effects emerge.

Starlin, A. Sharing a message about curriculum with my teacher friends. In ].B. ]ordan & L.S.Robbins (Eds.), Lefs Try Doing Something Else Kind of Thing, Arlington, Virginia: CEC,1972. Areport on some of the first "curriculum ladders" developed by Ann and Clay Starlin, based onthe achievement of fluency at each step in the progression.

Fluency-building o Carl V. Binder lReferences] Page 12