Recommendations for Future Research

Considering one of the limitations of the present study, with respect to the outcomes of the present study not linked to student outcomes, future research that evaluates the effectiveness of a training strategy (e.g., BPF) on paraeducator instructional behavior must attempt to formally link the results of the study to outcomes obtained for students in order to best establish practices with evidence that would aid in the acquisition of skills for students with ASD and/or other disabilities (Frantz, Hansen, Erturk, Machalicek, Squires & Raulson, 2019). Similarly, with respect to the use of multiple settings to conduct experimental phases of this study, future research must attempt to establish experimental settings that may be better suited for the evaluation of IVs of similar nature to those in the present study. However, it is worth noting that despite trainings being conducted in different planned settings, the independent variables evaluated (i.e., BPF, BST) produced desired outcomes in instructional behavior in paraeducator participants, thus strengthening the external validity of the present study.

As noted in the limitations of the present study, student participants displayed some levels of problem behavior related to non-cooperative behaviors observed in traditional instructional sessions and reported by special educators that could have compromised the assessment of the training strategies evaluated for the purposes of this study. Therefore, future replications of the present study or studies that attempt to evaluate performance of paraeducators in relation to students’ responding may consider including students that display, preferably, low levels of

problem behavior so that the experimental evaluation of selected IVs are not compromised by factors such as intense problem behavior displayed by students. Similarly, considering the evaluation of intervention effect post training was only conducted for five weeks following training termination, future replications of the present study must attempt to explore paraeducator performance post-training over more extended periods of maintenance or follow-up to best determine whether specific training interventions (e.g., BPF; BST) produce lasting effects. Moreover, future replication of the present study must also attempt to identify whether implementation of this specific training (i.e., BPF) results in generalized performances (e.g., implementation of the same procedures across other students, settings, or other instructional skills). Despite BPF producing notable results at increasing the instructional performance related to both DVs examined in this study, as well demonstrating the potential time efficiency of BPF over BST, this experimental demonstration can only relate to the extent of teaching verbal skills (i.e., tact, listener responding, and intravervbal) errorless teaching procedures. Further demonstrations of the effectiveness and efficiency of BPF, or other abbreviated training method for paraeducators supporting students with ASD, should attempt to evaluate them in the context of more complex behavior chains (e.g., more steps). Similarly, future experimental demonstrations of the effectiveness and efficiency of BPF, or other brief feedback-based training strategy for paraeducators, should attempt to do so with behavior chains that may result in varied responses by students as a result of application of behavioral principles (e.g., behavior management strategies; extinction procedures; Hagermoser Saneti et al., 2007; Madzharova et al., 2018).

In the present study, a component of skill rehearsal was programmed as the only additional antecedent strategy in combination with PF. Results of the present study showed that the combination of skill rehearsal and performance feedback were sufficient to increase paraeducator

instructional behavior related to the implementation of targeted practices (i.e., errorless teaching procedures); in addition to being supported by previous findings in the existing literature (Gilligan et al., 2007). However, the literature has also presented evidence of effectiveness of other antecedent strategies, programmed in combination with PF, when training paraeducators in the implementation of behavioral interventions for students with ASD (Madzharova et al., 2012; Madzharova et al., 2018; Robinson, 2011). Furthermore, the results of the present study may be in disagreement with previous additional findings suggesting other antecedent strategies being more powerful when evaluated in isolation or when combined with PF (i.e., modeling; Ward-Horner & Sturmey, 2012). Based on findings in the available literature, future research should continue to evaluate, in comparative studies, the effectiveness and potential efficiency of different antecedent strategies (e.g., modeling; skill rehearsal) in attempts to identify most effective intervention components to be programmed in combination with PF for the development of powerful and time efficient training interventions for paraeducators supporting students with ASD in special education classrooms).

Last, the implementation PF, as the main behavior change procedure, in BPF training, in the present study, addressed important dimensions of treatment fidelity identified in the existing literature (i.e., adherence, process, treatment differentiation; Collier-Meek et al., 2018; Hagermoser Sanetti & Kratochwill 2009). However, other important dimensions of treatment integrity may not have been addressed by delivery the delivery of PF (e.g., quality or quantity). Therefore, the nature of PF delivered to paraeducators in this study may not reflect aspects of implementation in a comprehensive manner or may have missed other important components of implementation. Future research regarding this aspect must attempt to design feedback intervention, as the main training component to improve paraeducators’ instructional behavior,

encompassing important and appropriate dimensions of treatment integrity for the appropriate evaluation of paraeducator performance of targeted practices.