Adora Bright offers a wide range of individual and group services based on the principles of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) to help children achieve better outcomes. ABA is an evidence-based practice. According to Chance (1998), applied behaviour analysis is “the attempt to solve behaviour problems by providing antecedents and or consequences that change behaviour (p.17)”.
It is also as scientific approach that always precisely describes the intervention for behaviour change and measures the obtained changes in the person’s behaviour. The term “applied behaviour analysis” refers to the field of studying the relationship between environment and behaviour. Research Conducted on the benefits of ABA therapy for individuals with special needs have demonstrated outcomes such as increased attention, decreased self-stimulation, improved cognitive functioning, increased socialization, successful and safe self-expression, improved behavior, enhanced receptive/expressive language and enhanced sensory-motor skills. Our team of skilled clinicians will help to help meet the unique strengths and individual needs of each child by delivering a caring, responsive and family centred ABA services.
Ingredients of Successful Programs
Early intensive ABA can be delivered in various settings (e.g., centre-based, home-based) by various interventionists (e.g., therapists, educators, parents) and in various forms, but in all variations there are certain ingredients associated with successful outcomes. Many of these are listed below.
- Begin early (before 4 years)
- Intensive (20-40 hrs a week for at least 2 years)
- Use systematic behavioural teaching methods to build and generalize skills
- Makes programming changes based on direct measurement of child learning
- Use a functional approach to problem behaviours
- Curriculum is comprehensive in scope and developmental in sequence
- Schedule is individualized (goals, reinforcers used, teaching methods)
- Delivered by highly trained, well supervised staff
- Takes place in variety of settings (home, school, community)
- Involves parents in planning and treatment
- Involves integration with typically developing children
- Involves gradual and systematic transition from one-to-one instruction to typical classroom instruction.
(based on Anderson & Romanczyk, 1999; Green 1996b; Powers, 1992)
How to evaluate claims of treatment effectiveness?
One wants to avoid two types of errors in deciding about treatment adoption: (1) rejecting a treatment that in fact is effective; and, (2) accepting a treatment that has no effect or is harmful. Each of these two types of error has associated costs.
This question about how to evaluate claims of treatment effectiveness was addressed in a thoughtful chapter by Dr. Gina Green (1996a). Dr. Green presented the difference between science, pseudo-science, and anti-science, suggesting that claims about treatment effectiveness should be based on careful and critical consideration of their scientific merits through examination of the objective evidence about the treatment- that is, evidence from well-designed scientific studies, rather than anecdotes, testimonies nor speculations.
If we use these criteria for evaluating interventions based on their objective evidence, we can categorize treatment according to their associated evidence of treatment effectiveness.
- Category 1:
Interventions that have been demonstrated to be effective and not harmful in controlled studies using objective, independently verified measures of the intervention effects.
- Category 2:
Interventions that have been demonstrated not to be effective or to be harmful in controlled studies.
- Category 3:
Interventions for which there is not adequate scientific evidence on which to base any conclusions.
Decisions concerning adopting interventions in Categories 1 and 2 are clear. Under most circumstances, responsible professionals and parents would pursue treatments in Category 1 and not treatments in Ctegory2. It is less clear how to deal with treatments in Category 3, where there has been inadequate research. A conservative stance would be not to use any interventions that have not been clearly demonstrated to be effective.
Although this stance would result in rejecting treatments that may not be effective, it could also result in rejecting treatments that might ultimately prove to be effective. It is our belief that treatments with inadequate research should be treated as experimental procedures and used in conjunction with Category 1 treatment only if : a) there are no known harmful effects; b) they do not interfere with the use of demonstrated effective treatments; c) their effectiveness is plausible; d) with written informed consent; and e) careful measurement of their effectiveness.