To define a shaping performance assessment question, connect Kira's chosen outcome to a terminal response, current response, one measurable dimension, a reachable first approximation, eligible opportunities, and the consequence for meeting the active criterion. Add access, baseline, prompts, client experience, criterion-change authority, stop rules, and a result that would change action. Keep shaping distinct from prompting, fading, chaining, mastery, and generalization.

Begin with Kira's decision

Ask what Kira wants the camera routine to make possible. Describe the meaningful outcome before writing a terminal response. A technically precise motor form can still be irrelevant to the photograph, club experience, or access method she values.

Separate the response from its purpose

Define the observable camera action and the practical result it supports. Preserve alternate controls and useful supports. The assessment can examine duration or movement while leaving artistic quality and Kira's preferences separately attributable.

Name one changing dimension

State whether the criterion concerns duration, distance, latency, force, amplitude, accuracy, complexity, or another measurable feature. If two features change together, the evidence cannot show which change created difficulty.

Define the active consequence

Record what follows responses that meet the current criterion, what follows other functional responses, and what remains freely available. Confirm preference and practical value instead of assuming a familiar item or praise functions as reinforcement.

State the assessment inference

Decide whether the evidence concerns question readiness, baseline, response distribution, criterion attainment, reinforcement delivery, progress across steps, generalization, maintenance, burden, or treatment effect. Give each claim its own evidence.

Use this sequence to define a shaping performance assessment question

Start with Kira's priority, define current and terminal responses, select one dimension, verify access and authority, state the first criterion and consequence, set decision paths, and collect only evidence that can change support.

Build Kira's shaping-performance question brief

Create one versioned shaping-performance question brief for the adaptive photography club review. Include Kira's priority, terminal response, current response, changing dimension, unit, natural cue, eligible opportunity, ordinary supports, first and later criteria, response values, reinforcement due and delivered, prompts, latency, correction, access, health, exposure, advancement, hold, rollback, stop, authority, effective dates, integrity, agreement, invalidity, missingness, withdrawal, direct experience, burden, generalization, maintenance, result, uncertainty, decision, correction, and review trigger. Store only decision-relevant information with role-limited access.

Validate Kira's shaping evidence

A second reviewer should locate Kira's priority, terminal and current responses, changing dimension, measurement unit, first approximation, opportunity, consequence, access, comparison, decision owner, and stop rule from the brief alone. Trace each fact to Kira, direct observation, records, or a labeled hypothesis. Predeclare result paths for advance, hold, redesign, referral, closure, invalid evidence, and withdrawal. Confirm that ordinary stabilization and communication stay available throughout review.

Keep Kira's measures and experience separate

Measure opportunity coverage, response values, criterion attainment, reinforcement integrity, prompt exposure, access, generalization, and maintenance with their own units. Ask Kira separately about clarity, effort, comfort, usefulness, burden, and whether assessment should continue. Accurate implementation can coexist with poor fit. A valued outcome can also improve without evidence that shaping alone produced the change.

Work through Kira's example

Kira's brief requires 16 fields. Thirteen are ready. The terminal response is described as steadier camera use without a duration, the first approximation lacks an opportunity definition, and the criterion-change owner is missing. Readiness is 13/16. The photography club remains available while the team closes the three fields; an incomplete brief creates no reason to delay ordinary participation. Preserve every planned and valid unit, raw count, denominator, criterion version, response value, reinforcement event, prompt, latency, access state, integrity result, withdrawal, direct report, system failure, correction, and unresolved item. This fictional example demonstrates one assessment control. It offers no universal shaping sequence, step size, reinforcement rule, independence, mastery, generalization, diagnosis, trait, treatment effect, legal conclusion, coverage decision, payment promise, or outcome guarantee.

Address Kira's main assessment risk

A question such as why can Kira not hold the camera still places the problem inside Kira before examining the device grip, weight, chosen photo, fatigue, ordinary stabilization options, partner timing, and whether steadiness is necessary for the image she wants. Review goal relevance, response and dimension definitions, opportunity quality, ordinary supports, access, health, effort, prompts, reinforcement, partner behavior, context, client experience, authority, and causal scope separately. A clean graph cannot repair an inaccessible, burdensome, unwanted, or ethically unsound arrangement.

Keep shaping concepts and authority clear for Kira

The ABAI Basic Principles page supplies broad higher-education context. The BACB Test Content Outline includes shaping, differential reinforcement, measurement, prompting, generalization, maintenance, and evaluation as examination content. The current BACB Ethics Code addresses competence, client involvement, consent and assent when applicable, medical needs, positive reinforcement, risk, data, documentation, and evaluation for covered people. These sources create no individualized shaping plan or practice authority for Kira.

Distinguish gradual-change procedures for Kira

Vollmer's gradual-change review distinguishes shaping changes to response requirements from fading changes to stimuli, chaining changes to task components, and schedule thinning changes to reinforcement schedules. It is a conceptual review. Use the distinction to describe what changes in Kira's plan, while the qualified clinician selects and evaluates an individual procedure.

Read the small shaping comparison cautiously for Kira

Shane and colleagues compared a specified vocal-shaping condition with a broad reasonable-attempt condition for three autistic preschoolers and reported faster mastery under shaping in that study. The small, older, narrow comparison supplies no universal response form, step size, progression rule, or expected result for Kira.

Keep criteria and follow-up visible for Kira

For Kira's shaping-performance question brief, McDougale and colleagues provide a reporting caution from 157 skill-acquisition articles in selected behavior-analytic journals. In Kira's review, remember that 26% lacked a specific mastery-criterion method, 58% lacked maintenance probes, and 1% were unclear about maintenance. This descriptive evidence supports transparent criteria and follow-up; it identifies no single best shaping threshold.

Preserve treatment scope, AAC, assent, and access for Kira

The CASP public summary supplies high-level ABA behavioral-health-treatment scope for autistic people, with licensed detail outside this page. ASHA's AAC portal says AAC users should always have access to their communication tools or devices. Breaux and Smith provide assent-focused practice guidance in an evolving evidence base. Follow governing sources and preserve communication, health care, food, water, bathroom use, mobility, rest, relationships, safety, and emergency help for Kira.

Choose Kira's next bounded action

Kira chooses a goal of keeping her preferred framing long enough to activate the shutter through either the camera control or an accessible remote. Record the qualified owner, supporting evidence, effective date, current criterion, ordinary supports, health and access state, implementation check, accessible explanation, disagreement route, and reassessment trigger. Preserve the original assessment when responses, criteria, people, systems, tasks, health, or priorities change. A new arrangement creates a dated version rather than an error in Kira's earlier performance.

Close Kira's shaping review

Review the shaping-performance question brief with Kira, the qualified behavior analyst, relevant partners, access owners, and specialists named in the manifest. Confirm that each criterion and denominator is reproducible, response shaping stays separate from prompting, fading, chaining, and schedule changes, AAC and basic access remain protected, health and motor questions stay with qualified professionals, and conclusions remain bounded to the sampled response, task, people, and context. Keep this page draft and noindex until every required review is complete.

Related resources

Sources