A Brief History of Problem Solving

Why It Matters!

A Brief History of Problem Solving

Brian Gaunt, Ph.D. & Clark Dorman, Ed.S.

IntroductionsWhy history of PS mattersOverview of context 1890-1970Behavioral Consultation as “anchor”Cross-walk: BC steps & Various

“Technology”Looking Ahead…

Agenda

“Differences in conceptions of the problem-solving process have sharply divided psychologists.”

…requires defining the problem, observing and collecting data, formulating a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, and drawing and applying a conclusion.

Guess the Year

Rapid scale up for MTSS…CCSS…PBiS…

NCLB: Implement EBPs – PS @ EBP.

Integrating while implementing (ex. PBS, RtI, CCSS)

Barrier: different “name-brand” models of PS.

Why Knowledge of PS History Matters

12 stepsGoodwin & Coates, 1976

7 stepsMeyers, 1973; Curtis & Meyers, 1989

6 stepsCorrigan & Kaufman, 1966

5 stepsDeno, 1989; 2005; Todd et al., 2011

4 stepsBergan, 1977; Bergan & Kratochwill, 1990NASDSE, 2006

So many models…

NASDSE, 2006Define the Problem

Is there a problem? What is it?

AnalyzeWhy is it happening?

Develop a PlanWhat shall we do about it?

EvaluateDid our plan work?

Original BC Model Design: Bergan (1970; 1977)

Problem IdentificationProblem AnalysisPlan ImplementationPlan Evaluation

Model Variations : Collaborative Cons.; Conjoint-Beh Cons.; Ecobehavioral Cons.; Instructional Cons., Organizational Cons; Systems Cons.

4-Step Problem Solving Model

Evidence-base…almost there...

Beh. Consult. ResearchMannino & Shore, 1975Bergan & Tombari, 1975Bergan & Tombari, 1976Medway, 1979Medway, 1982Albert, 1983Medway & Updyke, 1985Gresham & Kendall, 1987West & Idol, 1987Fuchs et al., 1992MacLeod et al., 2001Lewis & Newcommer, 2002Burns & Symington, 2002Guli, 2005

Component Analyses of PS

Bergan & Tombari, 1976Fuchs & Fuchs, 1989Fuchs, Fuchs, & Bahr,

1990Fuchs, et al., 1996Flugum & Reshly, 1994Kovaleski, et al., 1999Telzrow, et al., 2000Burns, et al., 2008Todd, et al., 2011Ruby, et al., 2011

“Although sufficient philosophical and empirical evidence supports the validity of the problem solving team theoretical construct (see Burns, Vanderwood, & Ruby, 2005) and efficacy within well controlled university-based studies (Burns & Symington, 2002), implementation inconsistencies have prevented widespread effectiveness (Burns et al., 2005).” (Pg. 234)

Ruby, et al., 2011

“It is clear from our two studies that training, whether it is the typical district model…or more intensive support provided by university faculty, is not sufficient in settings that have not created a culture of problem solving.”

(Pg. 251)

Ruby, et al., 2011

Experimental Analysis of Behavior/Beh. Analysis (Dewey, 1896; Thorndike, 1905; Watson, 1913; Pavlov, 1927; Skinner, 1938; Skinner, 1953; Bijou,

1955,1957; Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968; Bijou, Peterson, & Ault, 1968; Goldfried & Pomeranz, 1968).  

Research on Problem Solving (“sets”/S-R/S-R-S) (Dewey, 1933; Rees & Israel, 1935; Bloom & Broader, 1950; Newell et al., 1958; Duncan, 1959; Miller

et al., 1960; Parnes, 1967; Johnson et al., 1968; Crutchfield, 1969; D'Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971).

Consultation practice (MH/BC/Org) (Caplan, 1950; Perkins, 1953; Sarason, et al., 1960; Michael & Meyerson, 1962; Cutler & McNeil, 1964;

Bennis, 1965; Bergan & Caldwell, 1967; Englemann, 1967; Bergan, 1970; Reschly, 1976 [review])

Professional Identity of School Psychology (Thayer Conf, 1954; APA Div 16, 1958; Perkins, 1963; Tindal, 1964; Hyman, 1967; Bardon, 1968;

Reschly, 1976 [review])

Federal Policy Towards Education Equality & Access Foundation for the Blind & American Federation of the Physically Handicapped (1940s); National Association for Retarded Citizens (1950); National Adoption of Special Education Programs (1960s); Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) & Amendment (1969); Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amendment 1969); Handicapped Children’s Early Education Assistance Act (1968)

In the Beginning…1890-*1970

1950’sThayer Conference (1954) – Define School Psych RoleCronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific

psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684.Sought to align/integrate the to “disciplines” of psychology

APA Division 16 Created (1958)

1970’sPL94-142 (1975) – Special Education is mandatedCronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of

scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127.

Glass, G. V., Willson, V. L., & Gottman, J. M. (1975). Design and analysis of time-series experiments. Boulder, Col.: University of Colorado Press.

Cronbach 1957 & 1975

Exp Analysis of Behavior/Behavior AnalysisBehavior Therapy/Behavioral AssessmentInstructional Hierarchy/Task AnalysisConsultationPre-referral/PS TeamsCurriculum-based MeasurementData UtilizationFunctional Assessment/Brief Experimental

AnalysisTreatment Integrity/Implementation Science

Overview of Contributing Literatures1970 - Present

Several concepts, methods, and purposes can be identified with behavioral assessment (Kratochwill & Sheridan, 1990):

View human behavior (feelings, thoughts, and behaviors) as they occur in specific situations rather than manifestations of underlying personality.

Behavioral assessments should be empirically based

Role of situational influences on behavior.Behavior, cognitions, and affect as direct targets of

assessment rather than signs of underlying cause.Idiographic and individualized

Behavioral Assessment

By nature are systems orientedEmphasis on contemporaneous controlling

variables rather than historical causesEmphasis on instability of behavior over

timeCollection of data that are relevant for

treatmentReliance on multi-method assessment

strategiesEmbrace low level inferencesUse of repeated measurement

Behavioral Assessment

EAB/Behavior Analysis

Empirical evaluation of treatment (Bijou, 1970; Kazdin & Hersen, 1980)

Treatment utility of assessments (Hayes et al., 1987)

Target Selection/Guidelines (Mash & Terdal, 1981; Nelson & Hayes, 1979)

Evidence-based Problem Defining.

BC Consultation/CBM: Notable ResearchBergan & Tombari (1976):

PID – Plan Imp (.776); Plan Imp – Plan Solution (.977)

Flugum & Reschly (1994): Typical plans have no behavioral definition

Telzrow et al., (2000);Clearly identified goal & Data on Student RtI

were significant

Evidence-based Problem Defining

Treatment Utility of Assessment (Hayes et al., 1987)

Instructional Hierarchy (Haring & Eaton, 1978; Ardoin & Daly, 2007; Martins & Eckert, 2007)

Functional Analysis (Carr, 1977; Iwata et al., 1982; Carr & Durand, 1985; Lentz & Shapiro, 1986; Daly et al., 1997; Daly, et al., 1999; Dixon et al., 2012)

Eco-Behavioral approach to generating hypothesis (Gallessich, 1973; Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Ysseldyke & Christenson, 1987)

Evidence-based Problem analysis

Brief Exp. Analysis (Derby et al., 1992; Daly & Martins, 1994; Duhon et al., 2004; Martens & Gertz, 2009)

Notable Research:Telzrow et al., (2000): within-child hypotheses is

typicalTwernbold et al., (1996): Function vs. “Empiric”

(Behavior)Beavers et al., (2004): Function vs. “Empiric”

(Reading)“Empiric” = standard protocol

Evidence-based Problem analysis

Treatment Plan DesignTreatment acceptability (Kazdin, 1981; Easton &

Erchul, 2011; Eckert & Hintz, 2000; Nastasi & Truscott, 2000).

Stakeholder participation in planning (Elliott et al., 1991; Nastasi & Truscott, 2000).

Availability of relevant evidence-based knowledge (Gresham, 2004)

Match: problem severity & intervention intensity (Gresham, 2004)

Evidence-based Plan Design & Implement.

Treatment Implementation Monitoring

Performance feedback/Coaching (Codding et al., 2005; Duhon et al., 2009; Mortenson & Witt, 1998; Noell et al., 2002)

Multiple sources, types, and dimensions (Sanetti & Fallon, 2011)

Science is still emerging (Sanetti & Kratochwill, 2009; Sheridan et al., 2005)

Evidence-based Plan Design & Implement.

Organizational Capacity

Research to practice gap (Detrich & Lewis, 2013; Forman et al., 2005)

Comprehensive Data “Systems” (e.g.,Firestone & Gonzales, 2007; Honig & Venkateswaren, 2012;Ikemoto & Marsh, 2007; Kerr et al., 2006; Wayman, 2005; Wayman & Stringfield, 2006)

Evidence-based Plan Design & Implement.

Purpose:

Cronbach (1975) – recants ATI approach in favor of monitoring response to treatment.

Framework for determination of LD (Heller, Holtzman, and Messick, 1982).

EBI selection is insufficient; Experimentally observe effect on target student(s) (Gresham, 2004; Rilley-Tillman et al. 2012)

Evidence-based Treatment Evaluation

Impact on Educator Behavior (e.g., instruction)CBM – progress monitoring (Fuchs, Deno, &

Mirkin, 1984; Wesson et al., 1984)Formative Assessment (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986)Formative evaluation vs. Progress

monitoring (Fuchs et al., 2003; Burns, 2008)

Procedures and “data”Student response data (Fuchs, L. S., 2003)

Implementation fidelity data (Noell & Gansle, 2006)

Evidence-based Treatment Evaluation

Student Performance Outcomes

Good Questionable Poor

Implementat

ion Fidelit

y

High

Moderate

Low

Developing Decision Rules

Implications across steps, tiers & levels of educationTech alone is insufficent (need aligned roles/respon.)With or without PS, barriers exist in “using data for

decision-making”:Different conceptions about “data” (Coburn &

Talbert; 2006).Timely Access (Lachat & Smith, 2005)Lack of appropriate data (Coburn & Talbert, 2006; Kerr

et al., 2006; Protheroe, 2001)Limited Tech (Chen et al., 2005)Inefficient or incorrect entry and mgmt (Lachat &

Smith, 2005)Lack of Educator Skills (Cizek, 2000)

Re-Defining “Data System”

A search for the historical influences on Problem-Solving research and practice requires review of:Philosophy/Epistemology & PsychologyPsychology & BehaviorismPsychology & School PsychologySchool Psychology & Behavior Therapy,

Systems Change, Education, Policy/Politics.

In Summary…

“Problem solving as a service delivery approach is atheoretical. Interventions from different perspectives are neither accepted nor rejected on theoretical grounds. The approach is pragmatic.”

Reschly, 2004

“Thinking, problem solving, concept formation, and decision-making are important behavioral functions which impinge upon nearly every other area of psychology.”

Gagne’, 1959

In Summary…

Continue movement from “correlational” education to “experimental” education as foundation (Reschly, 2004)

MTSS @ org. framework to support stronger empiricism in education

Cost-Benefit/Situational research on problem solving components (e.g., Noell & Gresham, 1993; Beavers et al., 2004).

Reconcile FBA/BIP and RtI Problem Solving processes “academic problems” and “behavior problems” as

false dichotomy; explore common “critical” components.

Functional view of teacher’s use of data.Ecological view of “data systems”

Looking Forward…