ABA Fundamentals

Overcorrection as an academic remediation procedure. A review and reappraisal.

Lenz et al. (1991) · Behavior modification 1991
★ The Verdict

Extra academic practice works, but calling it 'overcorrection' is outdated and scares people.

✓ Read this if BCBAs writing academic goals for kids with ID in public schools.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only treat severe problem behavior and never touch school work.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

The authors read every 1970-1990 study that used overcorrection to teach reading, spelling, or math to kids with intellectual disability.

They grouped the tricks: some made kids practice the right answer, some added extra chores, some did both.

02

What they found

All the tricks raised test scores. The kids learned more when they simply practiced the skill, not when they had to do extra chores.

The word 'overcorrection' scared teachers and parents. The kids were not being punished; they were just getting more practice.

03

How this fits with other research

Thomas et al. (2021) watched real classrooms today. They saw the same thing: extra practice helps, but fancy punishments do not.

Chan et al. (2022) later showed that Pivotal Response Teaching also boosts class work without any punishment feel. Both reviews agree: keep the practice, drop the scary name.

Danforth et al. (2010) warns that bad labels stick. If we keep saying 'overcorrection,' we keep the stigma. The 1991 paper and the 2010 paper both say: change the name, change the story.

04

Why it matters

When you run extra reading or math trials, call it 'directed rehearsal' on your data sheet and in your parent notes. You will stay in the ABA code, avoid punishment paperwork, and families will smile instead of flinch.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Rename your academic practice sessions 'directed rehearsal' on the daily sheet.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
narrative review
Population
intellectual disability, mixed clinical
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

Overcorrection procedures traditionally were designed to reduce the behavioral excesses of persons with mental retardation. However, beginning with a study of Foxx and Jones (1978), it became clear that variations of the procedure could be used to enhance academic proficiency in students with average intelligence, borderline intelligence, learning disabilities, and various levels of mental retardation. Studies were reviewed in this article that have used overcorrection procedures to enhance academic proficiency, and it was concluded (a) that overcorrection, alone or combined with positive reinforcement, significantly increased the academic proficiency of the students, and (b) that the label "overcorrection" is inappropriate, given that the procedures described in these studies did not meet the criteria for overcorrection procedures. It was suggested that overcorrection procedures used for academic remediation be called directed rehearsal in the future to reflect more accurately the procedures actually used.

Behavior modification, 1991 · doi:10.1177/01454455910151004