Impact of a Training Package to Improve the Effectiveness of Descriptive Assessment Data
A short training package can plug the biggest hole in descriptive assessment—staff who don’t know how to record the data.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Tereshko and colleagues wrote a position paper. They say most BCBAs learn descriptive assessment from a lecture slide or two.
The authors claim this is not enough. They want a full training package that teaches staff how to record and read the data.
What they found
The paper does not give new data. It argues that better training will make descriptive assessment safer and more useful.
How this fits with other research
Griffith et al. (2020) already showed a self-instruction packet plus group feedback can teach undergraduates to run trial-based FAs with near-perfect fidelity.
Brown et al. (2021) used a short BST package to fix session-note completion in six technicians. Gains held for two weeks.
Shabani et al. (2006) added supervisor feedback after in-service training. Staff frequency counts jumped from shaky to reliable.
Leaf (2025) widens the lens. That paper says the whole ABA training system needs an overhaul, building on the 2023 call for better assessment training.
Why it matters
You probably ask staff to watch and take notes during descriptive assessment. If they miss events or miscount, your hypothesis could be wrong.
Try the same fix that works for session notes and FAs: give a clear script, model the recording, and add quick feedback. One hour next team meeting could save weeks of bad data.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Pick one upcoming assessment, write a one-page data sheet with examples, and review it with your observer before the session starts.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Identifying the maintaining contingencies of problem behavior can lead to effective treatment that reduces the occurrence of problem behavior and increases the potential for the occurrence of alternative behaviors. Many studies use descriptive assessments, but results vary in effectiveness and validity. Comparative research further supports the superior utility of analog functional analyses over descriptive assessments, but clinicians continue to report the consistent use of descriptive assessments in practice. Direct training on the recording of descriptive assessments as well as the process for interpreting the results are limited. The absence of research-based guidance leaves clinicians to interpret the results as they see fit rather than following best practice guidelines for this critical activity. This study examined the potential impact of direct training on several components of descriptive assessment: the recording of narrative antecedent-behavior-consequence data, interpretation of the data, and the selection of a function-based treatment. Implications for training and practice are reviewed.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2023 · doi:10.1007/s40617-022-00717-5