Communication Training for Bilingual Learners
By: Elizabeth Zeppernick, M.Ed., BCBA, LBA
The United States is increasingly culturally and linguistically diverse. This context is important for clinicians working in the field of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) who teach functional communication to develop the language skills of children with disabilities. Functional Communication Training (FCT) is a commonly employed intervention which can be used to replace challenging behavior with appropriate communication that serves the same function as the difficult behavior. As practitioners, we must consider the best use of FCT with a child for whom bilingual instruction may be beneficial.
Researchers Lang et al. (2011) studied the effect of skill training in both English and Spanish for a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) who came from a Spanish speaking family. It likely does not come as a surprise that correct responding increased and challenging behavior decreased when instruction took place in the child’s home language.
A related study by Neely, Graber et al. (2020) found that Functional Communication Training in English only contexts, (i.e., school or clinic) rarely generalizes to Spanish only contexts, (i.e., home and community). In fact, they found that challenging behavior increased during therapy sessions in Spanish which followed therapy sessions in English. Specifically, they looked at mand training which is a term for teaching the individual to express their needs or wants. They concluded that children from bilingual households may not have their needs or wants reinforced in each of the two environments which can result in a resurgence of unwanted behaviors. For example, when a child is taught to communicate in English that they wish for ‘more snack’ at school, the communication may be consistently reinforced or strengthened. If they return to a Spanish speaking environment at home and ask for ‘more snack’ using this newly acquired communication, they may not receive the reinforcement of additional snack and they may revert to a disruptive behavior to communicate the same need. Neely, Graber et al. (2020) suggest that intervention and communication training are more successful when they include the language of all relevant settings (i.e., home and school).
When mands or the communication of needs and wants do not receive reinforcement then they can be subject to extinction. In ABA terminology, this means the behavior, albeit a positive communication skill, may cease to exist. Researchers Bloom and Lambert (2015) found that we can teach socially appropriate alternative responses when an individual’s initial responses are faced with extinction to lessen the likelihood they will default to unwanted behaviors.
Researchers Banerjee et al., (2021) sought to replicate the work of Neely, Graber et al. (2020) but also analyze the effect of what they called, Repair the Message (RTM) training on manding and challenging behavior. Repair the Message suggests that the individual is taught to discriminate when a need or want isn’t reinforced and try an alternate response that may lead to reinforcement. Ideally, an individual is taught to discriminate; if they ask for a break in English and it doesn’t yield a break then they, in turn, ask for the break in Spanish.
In their study, researchers Banerjee et al., (2021) worked with two participants with ASD who demonstrated challenging behaviors. These two participants primarily spoke Spanish at home and English at school. Both children had a limited repertoire of short phrases, verbal approximations (e.g., “wawa” for “water”) and gestures. Instruction of the target phrases took place in both Spanish and English. For instance, one participant was prompted to ask “Podemos jugar” and then reinforced with access to the preferred toys. They also had repeated practice of saying “Can we play” which was also reinforced. The therapists then created repeated practice sessions where the initial request was made in one language without receiving reinforcement and the participant was prompted to use the alternative mand, i.e. request, before receiving access to the toys. When challenging behavior occurred during the training portion of the study, the therapist put on a bracelet which served as a visual stimulus and started a 30 second visual timer while simultaneously removing attention and access to the toys.
The results of this study demonstrated that both bilingual learners learned to adapt when their initial requests were experiencing extinction and produce an alternative response that successfully resulted in reinforcement. One participant did this successfully across 90.5% of opportunities and the other participant did this successfully across 54.8% of opportunities while both reducing the occurrence of problem behavior.
Parents were trained to help maintain their child’s newly mastered skills using a behavior skills training model; they received instruction on the procedure, modeling from the therapist, rehearsal for the parent to practice followed by corrective feedback (Miltenberger, 2012).
In summary, we can look at these studies as a sample of available literature supporting the need for treatment that is appropriate for bilingual learners, specifically for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In a field of study where bilingual clinicians are scarce, it’s important to note that the therapists in this study were fluent in English but not in Spanish but they were trained to pronounce a select number of phrases which were relevant to each participant. Even without the availability of a bilingual therapist, by systematically teaching individuals to adapt a select number of relevant responses, we have the potential to increase our client’s successful contacts with reinforcement and decrease instances of challenging behavior.
Sources:
Banerjee, I., Lambert, J.M., Copeland, B.A., Paranczak, J.L., Bailey, K.M. and Standish, C.M. (2021), Extending functional communication training to multiple language contexts in bilingual learners with challenging behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.883
Bloom, S. E., & Lambert, J. M. (2015). Implications for practice: Resurgence and differential reinforcement of alternative responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(4), 781-784. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.266
Lang, R., Rispoli, M., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G., Andrews, A., & Ortega, L. (2011). Effects of language of instruction on response accuracy and challenging behavior in a child with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 20(4), 252-259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-011-9130-0
Miltenberger, R. G. (2012). Behavior modification (5th ed). Cengage Learning.
Neely, L., Graber, J., Kunnavatana, S., & Cantrell, K. (2020). Impact of language on behavior treatment outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 53(2), 796-810. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.626