Exploring Issues of Generalization and Maintenance in Training Instructional Aides in a Public School Setting

In today’s climate, with the ever-increasing demand for competent behavior analytic services, it is necessary for behavior analysts to work across a variety of settings, including home, school, and community, overseeing instructional aide staff as the frontline providers of applied behavior analysis (ABA) services. It is common practice for ABA practitioners to provide the supervision and training to parents, caregivers, and direct-care staff, who may have limited knowledge and experience within the field of ABA. In 2013, the Behavior Analysis Certification Board (BACB^®) initiated an effort to establish standards for the training of instructional aides and direct-care staff in the delivery of instructional and treatment services based on the principles of ABA. This new standard and credential is known as a Registered Behavior Technician? (RBT^®). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the training process outlined by the BACB, focusing specifically on the generalizability and long-term maintenance of newly acquired skills taught through a competency-based approach, to novel opportunities for implementation. Training was conducted through two methods: in vivo training with clients versus role-play with peers. Both these types of staff training approaches are commonly used instructional practices in the field of ABA.     

Bioethics as politics: the limits of moral expertise

The increasing reliance upon, and perhaps the growing public and professional skepticism about, the special expertise of bioethicists suggests the need to consider the limits of moral expertise. For all the talk about method in bioethics, we, bioethicists, are still rather far off the mark in understanding what we are doing, even when we may be going about what we are doing fairly well. Quite often, what is most fundamentally at stake, but equally often insufficiently acknowledged, are inherently political, essentially contested visions of the most compelling and attractive forms of life for individuals and social organization. The current situation in bioethics parallels similar debates in eighteenth-century jurisprudence, especially Jeremy Bentham's withering critique of the prevalent forms of judicial argument and his own, equally unsuccessful, attempt to develop a decision-making procedure in ethics that would operate on a plane above politics. The risk, both then and now, is that we will fail to appreciate the wide range of reasonable disagreement that will remain past the point of extended reflection and discussion.