How Children Develop Naming and How This Development Sets Life’s Prognosis
|Sunday, September 29, 2019|
|3:00 PM–3:50 PM |
|Stockholm Waterfront Congress Centre, Level 4, A1|
|Area: VRB; Domain: Applied Research|
|Instruction Level: Intermediate|
|CE Instructor: R. Greer, Ph.D.|
|Chair: Peter R. Killeen (Arizona State University)|
|R. GREER (Columbia University Teachers College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences)|
|Greer is Professor of Psychology and Education at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and Teachers College of Columbia University where he directs the MA and Ph.D. programs in education as behavior science. He has served on the editorial boards of 10 journals, published over 200 research and theoretical articles in more than 20 journals and is the author of 14 books in behavior analysis. Two of his most recent books are translated into Korean, Spanish, and Italian. Greer has sponsored 236 doctoral dissertations, taught over 2,000 teachers and psychologists, originated the CABASÒ model of schooling used in the USA, Ireland, Italy, England, founded the Fred S. Keller School, and established general education classroom models for elementary and preschool education in public education based entirely on behavior science (www.cabasschools.org). He has done basic and applied experimental research in schools with students, teachers, parents, and supervisors as well as pediatric patients in medical settings. He and his colleagues and students have identified controlling stimuli for verbal and social behavior developmental cusps and protocols to establish them when they are missing in children, as well as, a strategic science of teaching for general and special education. He is a recipient of the Fred S. Keller Award for Distinguished Contributions to Education from the American Psychology Association, Fellow of the Association for Behavior Analysis International, May 5 as the R. Douglas Day in Westchester County, International Dissemination of Behavior Analysis from the Association for Behavior Analysis International and the Jack Michael Award for Contributions to Verbal Behavior. He has served as guest professor and lecturer at universities in China, Spain, Wales, England, Japan, Korea, India, Ireland, Italy, USA, and Nigeria.|
Bidirectional naming (BiN) developmental research has advanced our understanding about how children come to learn the names of things incidentally from experiences and how this leads to continuous expansion of new controlling stimuli. Interventions are available that allow the instantiation of BiN when children are missing the relevant stimulus control (i.e., children with autism, those raised in dis-enfranchised environments, and second language learners). Several types have been identified including the simultaneous acquisition of: actions, additional sounds, learning under exclusion conditions, and different effects of familiar and nonfamiliar novel visual stimuli. We are leaning how BiN in one language affects: bilingual children’s responses in each language, monolingual children and adult response to tests of BiN in an unfamiliar language, and the role of echoic precision in derived naming in an unfamiliar language. Moreover, the types of BiN that are part of children’s verbal developmental repertoire, at any given point in stimulus control development, determine what can be taught/not taught, what can be learned/not learned from observation, the types of learn unit presentations that are most effective, and the relations between BiN and other relational responding.
|Target Audience: |
Intermediate to advanced.
|Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the presentation, participants will be able to: (1) describe how bidirectional naming (BiN) results in incidental leaning of names of things as both listener (unidirectional naming) and speaker without direct instruction; (2) describe the different types of BiN (i.e., exclusion, actions, additional sounds, familiar and unfamiliar novel stimuli; (3) describe how bidirectional and unidirectional naming change the use of antecedents and consequences in instructional presentations (i.e., learn from antecedents or only consequences in direct or observed instruction); (4) differentiate programs of research in BiN as a cusp and programs of research focused on the role of BiN in derived intraverbal relation; (5) discuss how BiN leads to leaning multiple operants (i.e., speaker, reader, writer) and respondents from instruction in experience or from observation alone?|