PS498 Unit 9 Results and Evaluation Paper Example

One Child Met Every Goal and One Met Most: A PS498 Unit 9 Results and Evaluation Paper

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

PS498: Bachelor's Capstone in Applied Behavior Analysis

Unit 9 Results and Evaluation Paper

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The writer, the clinic, the families, the children and every figure are composite and illustrative; the articles and book cited are real.

Data Quality First

Before interpreting results, I checked whether the data and the procedures could be trusted. A second technician recorded independently on 27 percent of clinic days. Interval agreement averaged 96 percent for accidents and 92 percent for continent voids, and occurrence agreement for self-initiations averaged 86 percent, the lowest, because a glance or a step toward the bathroom door was sometimes scored differently. Procedural fidelity, scored independently by my supervisor on a protocol checklist during one sit per child per week, averaged 94 percent for clinic staff.

Amara's Results

In five days of baseline, Amara averaged 4.0 accidents per clinic day, with almost no voids in the toilet and almost no requests. Within six training days, accidents fell to an average of 1.2 per day and continent voids rose to more than three. She moved to Phase 2 on day 14 and Phase 3 on day 18. By day 30 she had met the full success criterion for accidents and requests. At the one-month follow-up, she averaged 0.6 accidents and two self-initiations per day.

Leo's Results

Leo's ten-day baseline was stable, averaging 5.8 accidents per clinic day, and it stayed level while Amara's accidents fell, which supports the conclusion that her change was not caused by something affecting the whole clinic. After training began, Leo's accidents fell more slowly, to about 3.0 per day after ten training days, just short of the decision rule's requirement of a fall by half. My supervisor reviewed the protocol, shortened his sit interval to twenty minutes and added a small reinforcer for dry checks. Accidents then fell to an average of 1.4 per day by day 30 and 1.1 at follow-up.

Self-initiations were different. Leo used his toilet sign on an average of 0.3 occasions per day across the training phase, usually when a technician was already walking toward the bathroom. He did not meet the self-initiation part of the success criterion.

Leo learned to stay dry on a schedule; he did not yet learn to ask.

Visual Analysis

Cooper et al. (2020) describe visual analysis of level, trend and variability within phases and the immediacy of change between them. For Amara, the change in level of accidents was immediate and large, with no overlap between baseline and training days after the second training day. For Leo, the change was smaller and more gradual, with some overlap during the first training week, followed by a second change after the protocol revision. Variability in Leo's data was higher throughout, partly linked to days after weekend visits to his grandparents.

Judging the Design

The multiple baseline across two participants shows two demonstrations of effect, each occurring when training began and not before. Horner et al. (2005) proposed at least three demonstrations at different points in time as a standard for establishing evidence. The capstone does not meet that standard, as planned, and so it supports the conclusion that the protocol was associated with change for these two children, not a broader claim. The protocol revision for Leo also means his later improvement reflects a modified intervention.

Alternative Explanations

Three alternative explanations deserved a direct look. Maturation could explain gradual change, but Leo's flat baseline over ten days, while Amara improved, makes it unlikely that age alone produced the timing of either child's change. Amara's new afternoon preschool program could have contributed, since she saw other children using the toilet there; but her accidents fell within days of training at the clinic, a week before her preschool began, which points to the protocol. Finally, the thirty-minute checks in baseline might themselves have prompted voiding, but neither child voided in the toilet during baseline despite those checks, so the checks alone did not produce the change.

Costs

The project used about three technician hours per child per clinic day in the first two weeks, falling to under one hour by Phase 3, plus about four hours of caregiver training per family and my supervisor's oversight. Materials cost little: underwear, a child seat, a footstool, crackers, stickers and a musical toy. Compared with the clinic's cost of changing diapers for two children over several more years, the investment was modest.

Generalization and Maintenance

Probes in other settings showed partial generalization. On weekly preschool probe days, Amara had about one accident, similar to the clinic. Leo's grandparents reported about two accidents on visit days, higher than the clinic. Parent-reported evening data at both homes fell after caregiver training. Follow-up data one month after the criterion showed both children maintaining most of their gains at the clinic.

The Self-Initiation Gap

Kroeger and Sorensen-Burnworth (2009) noted that self-initiation is less consistently studied and achieved than continent voiding in toilet training research. Leo's results reflect that pattern. Scheduled sits may have made asking unnecessary: if an adult takes you to the bathroom every twenty minutes, there is little reason to ask. The protocol's Phase 3, with fewer scheduled sits, is designed to create that reason, and my supervisor plans to add prompted sign practice just before likely voids. Whether this works will be known only after the capstone ends.

Social Validity

Each family scored the goals near the top of the importance scale and judged the procedures acceptable. Amara's mother reported that the school had agreed to place Amara in a general kindergarten classroom next fall. Leo's parents rated satisfaction with results as moderate; they were pleased with fewer accidents but disappointed that he did not yet ask, an honest view that matches the data. Amara's preschool teacher rated the change as important for classroom routines, noting that Amara now joined the group for outdoor play instead of waiting for a change, and Leo's speech therapist reported that his toilet sign appeared in her sessions twice, a small sign of progress worth building on.

Conclusion

The capstone's data were reliable and the protocol was delivered with high fidelity. Amara met every success criterion, with immediate, large changes and maintenance at follow-up. Leo's accidents fell after a protocol revision, but his self-initiations stayed low, consistent with the gap Kroeger and Sorensen-Burnworth identified. Visual analysis following Cooper and colleagues supports an effect for both children, and Horner and colleagues' standards limit the claim to these two.

References

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.

Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203

Kroeger, K., & Sorensen-Burnworth, R. (2009). Toilet training individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities: A critical review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3(3), 607-618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2009.01.005