TRAINING RESIDENTIAL SUPERVISORS TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK FOR MAINTAINING STAFF TEACHING SKILLS WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEVERE DISABILITIES
Open accessAbstract
We evaluated procedures for training supervisors in a residential setting to provide feedback for maintaining direct‐service staff members' teaching skills with people who have severe disabilities. Using classroom‐based instruction and on‐the‐job observation and feedback, 10 supervisors were initially trained to implement teaching programs themselves. The training improved supervisors' teaching skills but was insufficient to improve the quality of feedback they provided to direct‐service staff regarding the staff members' teaching skills. Subsequently, classroom‐based instruction and on‐the‐job observation and feedback that targeted supervisors' feedback skills were provided. Following training in provision of feedback, all supervisors met criterion for providing feedback to their staff. Results also indicated that maintenance of teaching skills was greater for direct‐service staff whose supervisors had received training in providing feedback relative to staff whose supervisors had not received such training. The need for analysis of other variables that affect maintenance of staff performance, as well as variables that affect other important areas of supervisor performance, is discussed.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 5 · Cited by 141
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [4]4. Page, T. J., Iwata, B. A., & Reid, D. H. (1982). Pyra- midal training: A large-scale application with institu- tional staff. Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis, 15, 335-351.
- Authors
- Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H.
- Affiliations
- J. Iverson Riddle Developmental Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Parsons, Marsha B.
- ORCID
- Reid, Dennis H.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 317-322
- ISSN
- 0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-3703
- PMC
- PMC1279829
- OpenAlex
- W2039399711
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 7.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Human Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
- Social Sciences › Education › School Leadership and Teacher Performance
- Keywords
- supervisor training, feedback skills, staff supervision, severe disabilities, residential settings, classroom teaching, teaching program, employee performance
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Behavior Therapy, Education of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities, Feedback, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Inservice Training, Male, Patient Care Team, Professional Competence, Residential Facilities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review