Comparison of staff training strategies to promote generalized teaching skills.
Train staff with many varied practice clients first; they generalize teaching skills everywhere.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team wanted staff to teach new skills the same way with every client.
They compared four training styles. General-case training used many pretend clients, settings, and programs.
Other groups got lectures, manuals, or single-client practice. Staff worked with people who had developmental delays.
What they found
Every staff member who got general-case training hit the generalization goal.
No other training did that in two back-to-back studies.
Skills moved smoothly to real clients, new rooms, and fresh lesson plans.
How this fits with other research
Bartle et al. (2026) extends this idea to video. They added wrong examples to the model and saw even higher treatment fidelity.
Levin et al. (2014) and Eldevik et al. (2013) move the same logic onto a computer. Interactive lessons still produce strong generalization, so you can train without live actors.
Preston (1994) used a similar coach-the-coach package on school principals. Goal setting, feedback, and praise lifted their classroom visits just like direct-care staff here.
Why it matters
You can copy the 1992 package today. Pick three to five mock clients who differ in age, prompt level, and materials. Run practice trials until staff score 90% across all examples.
If time or space is tight, swap in the computer versions from Levin et al. (2014) or Eldevik et al. (2013). They give the same spread of examples without extra people.
Either way, build the generalization check into your supervision. Probe new clients and settings the first week after training. You will catch drift early and keep teaching quality high.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add two new mock clients to your next BST session and score accuracy across both—then probe with a real client you have never used before.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Two studies compared the effectiveness of different strategies for promoting generalization of staff skills in teaching self-care routines to clients with developmental disabilities. In Study 1, 9 direct-care staff members of group homes were trained sequentially through four conditions; (a) the provision of written instructions, (b) performance-based training using a single client program exemplar and simulated clients (single case training), (c) performance-based training using actual developmentally delayed clients as trainees (common stimuli training), and (d) performance-based training using multiple client program exemplars with simulated clients (general case training). The results indicated that staff members did not reach all generalization criteria until general case training was provided. Because staff members had been trained sequentially through several conditions in Study 1, a second study controlled for potential sequence effects. In Study 2, 7 staff members were trained using only the general case strategy after baseline. All staff members reached generalizations criteria with only general case training, replicating the findings of Study 1. Together, the two studies demonstrated that the general case training strategy was more effective at promoting generalized training effects across clients, settings, and client programs than other commonly used staff training approaches.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1992 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-165