Evaluation of a Self-Instructional Package for Training ABA Service Providers to Conduct the Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities -Revised
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities-Revised (ABLA-R) is an assessment tool used by applied behavior analysis (ABA) service providers for determining the learning ability of clients with intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorder ASD. In this study, we combined an ABLA-R self-instructional manual (DeWiele et al., 2014) with video modeling and evaluated the effectiveness of the training package for teaching ABA service providers to administer the ABLA-R to the experimenter who role-played a child with ASD and to a child with ASD. We evaluated the training package using a single-subject, modified concurrent multiple-baseline (MB) design across a pair of participants, replicated across three other pairs of participants, plus a modified nonconcurrent MB design across a pair of participants, replicated across one other pair. Participants demonstrated a significant increase in the accuracy with which they administered the ABLA-R to an experimenter from baseline to post-test, and conducted the ABLA-R with high accuracy in a generalization assessment with a child with ASD. An implication of this research is that the self-instructional training package is an effective tool for training ABA service providers to accurately administer the ABLA-R to children with ASD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".