Use of descriptive and experimental analyses to identify the functional properties of aberrant behavior in school settings.

The authors asked teachers to run two kinds of functional assessment in class.

First, teachers watched and recorded what happened before and after problem behavior.

Next, they ran short test sessions where they gave or removed items to see what kept the behavior alive.

The child had autism and the behavior was strong enough to disrupt lessons.

Both teacher methods pointed to the same cause: the child hit to escape hard work.

When the team used that data to let the child take short breaks after asking nicely, hitting dropped.

The same plan worked again when a new teacher tried it, so the finding held up.

Tonnsen et al. (2016) built on this idea by adding a quick parent-and-teacher interview before the test sessions.

Their full treatment package cut severe behavior and taught communication, showing the school FA still works two decades later.

Nevill et al. (2019) then moved the same interview-led FA into family homes and got big, lasting gains with parents in charge, proving the logic travels beyond the classroom.

Jarrold et al. (1994) ran a near-copy in school the next year; they also saw tantrums fall once the teacher matched the intervention to the function, giving an early replication.

You no longer need a specialist clinic to find the why behind problem behavior.

Teachers can collect ABC data and run brief test sessions between lessons.

Use their answers to build a simple break, attention, or tangible plan and watch the behavior fade.

Start Monday: ask the teacher to track what happens right before and after one target behavior for one period.