Video Brings Visibility to Invisible Disabilities and Invisible Illness!

Video Brings Visibility to Invisible Disabilities and Invisible Illness!


(Natalie Tysdale) Have you watched someone parking in an accessible spot but they’re not using a wheelchair? Have you wondered if they really have a disability? Has someone ever shared with you about their illness or disability and you can’t see the symptoms and you might think or actually say to them “you don’t look sick?” Well these situations and many others like them often end in disbelief, prejudice, isolation and loneliness. Wayne and Sherri Connell founded the Invisible Disabilities Association for these very reasons over twenty years ago. they wanted to provide education, encouragement and connection to the millions who are touched by illness, pain and disability around the globe. IDA is treating the deeper roots of problems in society not just specific diseases but the perceptions and misconceptions and deep-seated notions of what it means to live daily with an invisible disability or to care for someone who does. Everyone has a story a friend, a family member, a co-worker, maybe even yourself? Here are some of their stories. (Sherri Connell) I had great plans for my life. I was extremely active goal oriented person. I was just always on the go and none of those plans included being sick. I was also having bouts with paralysis and they didn’t know why then at 27 years old all of the sudden one side went totally paralyzed the next thing I know I was paralyzed from the ribs down. Eventually after being in the hospital for a week, they diagnosed me with multiple sclerosis. The world changed I was in an auto accident and the accident. I was unconscious. I was injured and my memory was fading away. I discovered that I had a brain injury as a result of the accident. (Pete Ohlin) [piano music] Initially I was interested in Invisible Disabilities because I believe my music could help others they’re struggling with an invisible disabilities and then about four years ago my daughter was diagnosed with a with a rare heart condition which would be considered an invisible disability. [Piano Music] (Cassandra Perkins) I was born blind in my left eye and you can’t tell because it’s hemi-blindness people get angry people would make fun of me and you know you don’t think that it gets to you but then it starts to get to you. I can’t even take care of my daily needs I can barely get a shower or wash my hair. It takes takes me days to wash my hair and get it combed out. No one can imagine living alone with a brain injury. You don’t know if the dishes are done you don’t know if you’re taking a bath you don’t know how to dress you don’t know, you don’t know because you don’t remember if you know me, you see me you don’t think that I have this thing going in my head that I’m constantly battling. And the hardest part is people didn’t get it. People would say, “but you look fine.” “What’s the problem?” People need to see it to believe it! and that is the hardest part. And I was this happy, positive, outgoing, life loving kid and then everyday being told that “I’m fat” that “I’m emo” that “I’m goth” that “I’m ugly” it gets in your head it really starts to get to you and I would go to my mirror every day in my room and slowly this person this Cassandra Perkins that I love just disappeared. One of the most insensitive things I think that I got from a principal and also a teacher was that your daughter “looks fine” “she looks great” and I get it from people on Facebook to which in my head I’m replying like “yeah right you can you can see that the blood is pooling in her legs and that her heart isn’t working correct right?” [Laughing] One day I realized I have an invisible disability! It’s invisible! People can’t see it! And I was so excited because it just completely wrapped around the description of what I was going through. I think if we give people a platform and give people a safe place to talk about these things they’re gonna be more willing to open up and know that they can make connections. I have someplace to go some people to talk to when I’m starting to get frustrated or I had a bad day I can pick up a phone and call that’s very important because up until recently I was by myself. There’s days where people feel really good, there’s days where people feel really bad, but they know that they can come to this social media platform and be able to connect through that. [Background Music] And the Invisible Disabilities Association shows people the mountain so that they can see our perseverance and how hard we fight. I feel supported and I feel like I have an organization that’s fighting for me! Here’s why I love Invisible Disabilities because there’s so many aspects of the spectrum there’s helping the caregiver there’s helping the person who’s going through it as well as helping people who are just outside family or friends how to help that person how to say the right things what to do. So what I drool? So what my clothes don’t match? It’s my disability, get over it! I’m here and I’m not going to go away, I’m not gonna hide anymore, I’m here! [Background Music] (Wayne Connell) Wow, those stories were amazing and many of you have a story maybe it’s a story of illness and pain but really what it is is a story of people not believing you and we want to believe you we want to understand that just because we can’t see the illness or the pain that doesn’t mean it’s not real so it Invisible Disabilities we believe you, we want to acknowledge the difficulties you’re going through because we know you’re the expert who’s living with the illness and pain and disability. We want to be your voice and we want you to join us in that. We want you to join us in sharing those stories and we want you to be that voice as well along with us. So please go to InvisibleNoMore.com that’s InvisibleNoMore.com Because let’s together envision a world where people living with illness, pain and disability will be Invisible No More!

PHILOSOPHY – David Hume

PHILOSOPHY – David Hume


The 18th century writer, David Hume, is one of the world’s great philosophical voices because he hit upon a key fact about human nature- that we are more influenced by our feelings than by reason. This is, at one level, possibly a great insult to our self image, but Hume thought that if we could learn to deal well with this surprising fact, we could be both individually and collectively a great deal calmer and happier than if we denied it. Hume was born in Edinburgh in 1711, to a family that was long established but far from rich. He was the second son and it was clear early on that he would need to find a job eventually, but nothing seemed to suit him. He tried law, the vocation of his father and his older brother, but soon decided that it was: “a laborious profession, requiring the drudgery of a whole life.” He was considered for academic posts at the University of Edinburgh and the University of Glasgow, but he didn’t land either job. So, he set out to become a public intellectual, someone who would make his money selling books to the general public. It was pretty hard-going. His first book, ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, for which he had the highest hopes, met with a dismal reception. “Never literary attempt was more unfortunate than my Treatise”, he wrote. “It fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction as to even excite a murmur along the zealots.” But Hume kept at it, realising that the blame largely lay with the way that he had expressed his ideas. And doggedly training himself to write in a more accessible and popular manner, eventually, he did find an audience. his later works: popular history books and collections of elegant essays were best-sellers of the day. As he would say, not without some pride: “The money given me by booksellers much exceeded anything formerly known in England; I was to become not only independent but opulent.” Humes philosophy is built around a single powerful observation: that the key thing we need to get right in life is feeling rather than rationality. It sounds like an odd conclusion. Normally we assume that what we need to do is train our minds to be as rational as possible, to be devoted to evidence and logical reasoning and committed to preventing our feelings from getting in the way. But Hume insisted that whatever we may aim for – reason is the slave of passion. We are more motivated by our feelings than by any of the comparatively feeble results of analysis and logic. Few of our leading convictions had driven by rational investigations of the facts. We decide whether someone is admirable, what to do with our spare time, what constitutes a successful career, or who to love on the basis of feeling above anything else. Reason helps a little, but the decisive factors are bound up with our emotional lives, with our passions, as Hume calls them. Hume lived in a time known as the Age of Reason, when many claimed that the glory of human beings consists in their rationality, but for Hume a human is just another kind of animal. Hume was deeply attentive to the curious way that we very often reason from not to our convictions. We find an idea nice or threatening and on that basis alone declare it true or false. Reason only comes in later to support the original attitude. What Hume didn’t believe however was that all feelings are acceptable and equal. that’s why he firmly believed in the education of the passions. People have to learn to be more benevolent, more patient, more at ease with themselves and less afraid of others. But to be taught these things they need an education system that addresses feelings rather than reason. This is why Hume so deeply believed in the role and significance of public intellectuals. These were people who (unlike university professors that Hume grew to dislike immensely) had to excite a passion-based attachment to ideas, wisdom and insight. Only if they succeeded would they have the money to eat. It was for this reason that they had to write well, use colorful examples and have recoursed wit and charm. Hume’s insight is that if you want to change people’s beliefs reasoning with them like a normal philosophy professor won’t be the most effective strategy. He’s pointing out that we have to try to adjust sentiments by sympathy, re-assurance, good example, encouragement and what he called “art”. And only later, for a few determined souls, should we ever try to make a case on the basis of facts and logic. A key place where Hume made use of the idea of the priority of feeling over reason was in connection with religion Hume didn’t think it was rational to believe in god. That is – he didn’t think there were compelling logical arguments in favor of the existence of a deity. He himself seems to have floated between mild agnosticism (there might be a god, I’m not sure) and mild theism (there is a god, but it doesn’t make much difference to me that there is). However the idea of a vindictive god, someone ready to punish people in an afterlife for not believing in him in this one, this he considered a cruel superstition. Hume’s central point is that religious belief isn’t the product of reason. So arguing for or against it on the basis of facts doesn’t touch the core issue. To try to persuade someone to believe or not believe with well-honed arguments seemed particularly daft to Hume. This is why he was a foremost defender of the concept of religious toleration. We shouldn’t treat those who disagree with us over religion as rational people who’ve made an error of reasoning and so need to be put right, but rather as passionate emotion-driven creatures who should be left in peace so long as they do likewise with us. Trying to have a rational argument over religion was for Hume the height of folly and arrogance. Hume was what is technically known as a skeptic someone committed to doubting a lot of the common sense ideas of the day. One of the things he doubted was the concept of what is technically called “personal identity”. The idea that we have that we can understand ourselves and have a more or less graspable and enduring identity that runs through life. Hume pointed out that there is no such thing as a ” Core Self ” “When I enter most intimately into what I call “myself”,” he famously explained, “I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch “myself” at any time without a perception and can never observe anything but the perception. Hume concluded that we aren’t really the neat definable people reason tells us that we are and that we seem to be when we look at ourselves in the mirror or casually use that grand and rather misleading word ” I “. Yet, despite being skeptical of temper Hume was very happy for us to hold onto most of our common-sense beliefs because they are what help us make our way in the world Trying to be rational about everything is a special kind of madness. Hume was making a slight dig at Descartes. The French philosopher had died 60 years before Hume was born. But his intellectual influence was still very much alive. He had argued that we should throw out every fruit of the mind that wasn’t perfectly rational. But Hume proposed that hardly anything we do is ever truly rational And yet he ventured that most beliefs are justified simply because they work They’re useful to us. They help us to get on with what we want to do. A test of a belief isn’t its provable truth but its utility Hume was offering a corrective which we sometimes badly need to our fascination with prestigious but not actually very important logical conundrums In opposition to academic niceties he was a skeptical philosopher who stood for common sense Championing the everyday and the wisdom of the unlearned and the ordinary. Hume took a great interest in the traditional philosophical topic of Ethics A conundrum of how humans can be good. He argued that morality isn’t about having moral ideas It’s about having been trained from an early age in the art of decency through the emotions Being good means getting into good habits of feeling. Hume was a great advocate of qualities like wit, good manners and sympathy because these are the things make people nice to be around outside of any rational plan to be good. He was hugely struck by the fact that a person and here again, he was thinking of Descartes could be ostensibly rational and yet, not that nice. Because being able to follow complex argument or deduce trends from data doesn’t make you sensitive to the sufferings of others or skilled at keeping your temper. These qualities are the work of our feelings So, if we want people to behave well, what we need to do is to rethink education We have to influence the development of feeling We have to encourage benevolence, gentleness, pity and shame through the seduction of the passionate sides of our nature, without delivering dry, logical lectures. Hume’s philosophy always emerged as an attempt to answer a personal question. What is a good life? He wanted to know how his own character and that of those around him could be influenced for the best. And oddly, for a philosopher, he didn’t feel the traditional practice of Philosophy could really help. Though he was scholarly, he was in large part, a man of the world. For some years, he was an adviser to the British ambassador in Paris who welcomed his shrewd wisdom. He was much liked by those around him, known by the French as ‘Le Bon David’, a humane, kind and witty conversationalist, much in demand as a dinner companion. he insisted. That’s the way Hume lived. Not in the intellectual seclusion of a monastery or ivory tower, But deeply embedded in the company of other humans, dining. He especially liked roast chicken, chatting about love and career and playing Backgammon. Hume died in Edinburgh in August 1776, at home, in his house in St. Andrew’s Square His doctor wrote about the last hours to Adam Smith, for many years, Hume’s best friend. Hume remains a rather outstanding thing. A philosopher, alive to how much Philosophy can has to learn from common-sense.

Our failing schools. Enough is enough! | Geoffrey Canada

Our failing schools. Enough is enough! | Geoffrey Canada


Translator: Joseph Geni
Reviewer: Morton Bast I’m a little nervous, because my wife Yvonne said to me, she said, “Geoff, you watch the TED Talks.” I said, “Yes, honey, I love TED Talks.” She said, “You know, they’re like, really smart, talented — ” I said, “I know, I know.” (Laughter) She said, “They don’t want, like, the angry black man.” (Laughter) So I said, “No, I’m gonna be good, Honey, I’m gonna be good. I am.” But I am angry. (Laughter) And the last time I looked, I’m — (Applause) So this is why I’m excited but I’m angry. This year, there are going to be millions of our children that we’re going to needlessly lose, that we could — right now, we could save them all. You saw the quality of the educators who were here. Do not tell me they could not reach those kids and save them. I know they could. It is absolutely possible. Why haven’t we fixed this? Those of us in education have held on to a business plan that we don’t care how many millions of young people fail, we’re going to continue to do the same thing that didn’t work, and nobody is getting crazy about it — right? — enough to say, “Enough is enough.” So here’s a business plan that simply does not make any sense. You know, I grew up in the inner city, and there were kids who were failing in schools 56 years ago when I first went to school, and those schools are still lousy today, 56 years later. And you know something about a lousy school? It’s not like a bottle of wine. Right? (Laughter) Where you say, like, ’87 was like a good year, right? That’s now how this thing — I mean, every single year, it’s still the same approach, right? One size fits all, if you get it, fine, and if you don’t, tough luck. Just tough luck. Why haven’t we allowed innovation to happen? Do not tell me we can’t do better than this. Look, you go into a place that’s failed kids for 50 years, and you say, “So what’s the plan?” And they say, “We’ll, we’re going to do what we did last year this year.” What kind of business model is that? Banks used to open and operate between 10 and 3. They operated 10 to 3. They were closed for lunch hour. Now, who can bank between 10 and 3? The unemployed. They don’t need banks. They got no money in the banks. Who created that business model? Right? And it went on for decades. You know why? Because they didn’t care. It wasn’t about the customers. It was about bankers. They created something that worked for them. How could you go to the bank when you were at work? It didn’t matter. And they don’t care whether or not Geoff is upset he can’t go to the bank. Go find another bank. They all operate the same way. Right? Now, one day, some crazy banker had an idea. Maybe we should keep the bank open when people come home from work. They might like that. What about a Saturday? What about introducing technology? Now look, I’m a technology fan, but I have to admit to you all I’m a little old. So I was a little slow, and I did not trust technology, and when they first came out with those new contraptions, these tellers that you put in a card and they give you money, I was like, “There’s no way that machine is going to count that money right. I am never using that, right?” So technology has changed. Things have changed. Yet not in education. Why? Why is it that when we had rotary phones, when we were having folks being crippled by polio, that we were teaching the same way then that we’re doing right now? And if you come up with a plan to change things, people consider you radical. They will say the worst things about you. I said one day, well, look, if the science says — this is science, not me — that our poorest children lose ground in the summertime — You see where they are in June and say, okay, they’re there. You look at them in September, they’ve gone down. You say, whoo! So I heard about that in ’75 when I was at the Ed School at Harvard. I said, “Oh, wow, this is an important study.” Because it suggests we should do something. (Laughter) Every 10 years they reproduce the same study. It says exactly the same thing: Poor kids lose ground in the summertime. The system decides you can’t run schools in the summer. You know, I always wonder, who makes up those rules? For years I went to — Look, I went the Harvard Ed School. I thought I knew something. They said it was the agrarian calendar, and people had — but let me tell you why that doesn’t make sense. I never got that. I never got that, because anyone knows if you farm, you don’t plant crops in July and August. You plant them in the spring. So who came up with this idea? Who owns it? Why did we ever do it? Well it just turns out in the 1840s we did have, schools were open all year. They were open all year, because we had a lot of folks who had to work all day. They didn’t have any place for their kids to go. It was a perfect place to have schools. So this is not something that is ordained from the education gods. So why don’t we? Why don’t we? Because our business has refused to use science. Science. You have Bill Gates coming out and saying, “Look, this works, right? We can do this.” How many places in America are going to change? None. None. Okay, yeah, there are two. All right? Yes, there’ll be some place, because some folks will do the right thing. As a profession, we have to stop this. The science is clear. Here’s what we know. We know that the problem begins immediately. Right? This idea, zero to three. My wife, Yvonne, and I, we have four kids, three grown ones and a 15-year-old. That’s a longer story. (Laughter) With our first kids, we did not know the science about brain development. We didn’t know how critical those first three years were. We didn’t know what was happening in those young brains. We didn’t know the role that language, a stimulus and response, call and response, how important that was in developing those children. We know that now. What are we doing about it? Nothing. Wealthy people know. Educated people know. And their kids have an advantage. Poor people don’t know, and we’re not doing anything to help them at all. But we know this is critical. Now, you take pre-kindergarten. We know it’s important for kids. Poor kids need that experience. Nope. Lots of places, it doesn’t exist. We know health services matter. You know, we provide health services and people are always fussing at me about, you know, because I’m all into accountability and data and all of that good stuff, but we do health services, and I have to raise a lot of money. People used to say when they’d come fund us, “Geoff, why do you provide these health services?” I used to make stuff up. Right? I’d say, “Well, you know a child who has cavities is not going to, uh, be able to study as well.” And I had to because I had to raise the money. But now I’m older, and you know what I tell them? You know why I provide kids with those health benefits and the sports and the recreation and the arts? Because I actually like kids. I actually like kids. (Laughter) (Applause) But when they really get pushy, people really get pushy, I say, “I do it because you do it for your kid.” And you’ve never read a study from MIT that says giving your kid dance instruction is going to help them do algebra better, but you will give that kid dance instruction, and you will be thrilled that that kid wants to do dance instruction, and it will make your day. And why shouldn’t poor kids have the same opportunity? It’s the floor for these children. (Applause) So here’s the other thing. I’m a tester guy. I believe you need data, you need information, because you work at something, you think it’s working, and you find out it’s not working. I mean, you’re educators. You work, you say, you think you’ve got it, great, no? And you find out they didn’t get it. But here’s the problem with testing. The testing that we do — we’re going to have our test in New York next week — is in April. You know when we’re going to get the results back? Maybe July, maybe June. And the results have great data. They’ll tell you Raheem really struggled, couldn’t do two-digit multiplication — so great data, but you’re getting it back after school is over. And so, what do you do? You go on vacation. (Laughter) You come back from vacation. Now you’ve got all of this test data from last year. You don’t look at it. Why would you look at it? You’re going to go and teach this year. So how much money did we just spend on all of that? Billions and billions of dollars for data that it’s too late to use. I need that data in September. I need that data in November. I need to know you’re struggling, and I need to know whether or not what I did corrected that. I need to know that this week. I don’t need to know that at the end of the year when it’s too late. Because in my older years, I’ve become somewhat of a clairvoyant. I can predict school scores. You take me to any school. I’m really good at inner city schools that are struggling. And you tell me last year 48 percent of those kids were on grade level. And I say, “Okay, what’s the plan, what did we do from last year to this year?” You say, “We’re doing the same thing.” I’m going to make a prediction. (Laughter) This year, somewhere between 44 and 52 percent of those kids will be on grade level. And I will be right every single time. So we’re spending all of this money, but we’re getting what? Teachers need real information right now about what’s happening to their kids. The high stakes is today, because you can do something about it. So here’s the other issue that I just think we’ve got to be concerned about. We can’t stifle innovation in our business. We have to innovate. And people in our business get mad about innovation. They get angry if you do something different. If you try something new, people are always like, “Ooh, charter schools.” Hey, let’s try some stuff. Let’s see. This stuff hasn’t worked for 55 years. Let’s try something different. And here’s the rub. Some of it’s not going to work. You know, people tell me, “Yeah, those charter schools, a lot of them don’t work.” A lot of them don’t. They should be closed. I mean, I really believe they should be closed. But we can’t confuse figuring out the science and things not working with we shouldn’t therefore do anything. Right? Because that’s not the way the world works. If you think about technology, imagine if that’s how we thought about technology. Every time something didn’t work, we just threw in the towel and said, “Let’s forget it.” Right? You know, they convinced me. I’m sure some of you were like me — the latest and greatest thing, the PalmPilot. They told me, “Geoff, if you get this PalmPilot you’ll never need another thing.” That thing lasted all of three weeks. It was over. I was so disgusted I spent my money on this thing. Did anybody stop inventing? Not a person. Not a soul. The folks went out there. They kept inventing. The fact that you have failure, that shouldn’t stop you from pushing the science forward. Our job as educators, there’s some stuff we know that we can do. And we’ve got to do better. The evaluation, we have to start with kids earlier, we have to make sure that we provide the support to young people. We’ve got to give them all of these opportunities. So that we have to do. But this innovation issue, this idea that we’ve got to keep innovating until we really nail this science down is something that is absolutely critical. And this is something, by the way, that I think is going to be a challenge for our entire field. America cannot wait another 50 years to get this right. We have run out of time. I don’t know about a fiscal cliff, but I know there’s an educational cliff that we are walking over right this very second, and if we allow folks to continue this foolishness about saying we can’t afford this — So Bill Gates says it’s going to cost five billion dollars. What is five billion dollars to the United States? What did we spend in Afghanistan this year? How many trillions? (Applause) When the country cares about something, we’ll spend a trillion dollars without blinking an eye. When the safety of America is threatened, we will spend any amount of money. The real safety of our nation is preparing this next generation so that they can take our place and be the leaders of the world when it comes to thinking and technology and democracy and all that stuff we care about. I dare say it’s a pittance, what it would require for us to really begin to solve some of these problems. So once we do that, I’ll no longer be angry. (Laughter) So, you guys, help me get there. Thank you all very much. Thank you. (Applause) John Legend: So what is the high school dropout rate at Harlem Children’s Zone? Geoffrey Canada: Well, you know, John, 100 percent of our kids graduated high school last year in my school. A hundred percent of them went to college. This year’s seniors will have 100 percent graduating high school. Last I heard we had 93 percent accepted to college. We’d better get that other seven percent. So that’s just how this goes. (Applause) JL: So how do you stick with them after they leave high school? GC: Well, you know, one of the bad problems we have in this country is these kids, the same kids, these same vulnerable kids, when you get them in school, they drop out in record numbers. And so we’ve figured out that you’ve got to really design a network of support for these kids that in many ways mimics what a good parent does. They harass you, right? They call you, they say, “I want to see your grades. How’d you do on that last test? What are you talking about that you want to leave school? And you’re not coming back here.” So a bunch of my kids know you can’t come back to Harlem because Geoff is looking for you. They’re like, “I really can’t come back.” No. You’d better stay in school. But I’m not kidding about some of this, and it gets a little bit to the grit issue. When kids know that you refuse to let them fail, it puts a different pressure on them, and they don’t give up as easy. So sometimes they don’t have it inside, and they’re, like, “You know, I don’t want to do this, but I know my mother’s going to be mad.” Well, that matters to kids, and it helps get them through. We try to create a set of strategies that gets them tutoring and help and support, but also a set of encouragements that say to them, “You can do it. It is going to be hard, but we refuse to let you fail.” JL: Well, thank you Dr. Canada. Please give it up for him one more time. (Applause)

The first 20 hours — how to learn anything | Josh Kaufman | TEDxCSU

The first 20 hours — how to learn anything | Josh Kaufman | TEDxCSU


Translator: Gustavo Rocha
Reviewer: Marssi Draw Hi everyone. Two year ago, my life changed forever. My wife Kelsey and I welcomed our daughter Lela
into the world. Now, becoming a parent
is an amazing experience. Your whole world changes over night. And all of your priorities
change immediately. So fast that it makes it really difficult
to process sometimes. Now, you also have to learn
a tremendous amount about being a parent like, for example,
how to dress your child. (Laughter) This was new to me. This is an actual outfit,
I thought this was a good idea. And even Lela knows
that it’s not a good idea. (Laughter) So there is so much to learn and
so much craziness all at once. And to add to the craziness,
Kelsey and I both work from home, we’re entrepreneurs,
we run our own businesses. So, Kelsey develops courses
online for yoga teachers. I’m an author. And so, I’m working from home,
Kelsey’s working from home. We have an infant
and we’re trying to make sure that everything gets done
that needs done. And life is really, really busy. And a couple of weeks
into this amazing experience, when the sleep deprivation
really kicked in, like around week eight, I had this thought,
and it was the same thought that parents across the ages,
internationally, everybody has had this thought,
which is: I am never going to have
free time ever again. (Laughter) Somebody said it’s true. It’s not exactly true, but it feels really, really true
in that moment. And this was really
disconcerning to me, because one of the things that I enjoy more than anything else
is learning new things. Getting curious about something
and diving in and fiddling around and
learning through trial and error. And eventually becoming pretty good
at something. And without this free time, I didn’t know how I was ever
going to do that ever again. And so, I’m a big geek, I want to keep learning things,
I want to keep growing. And so what I’ve decided to do was, go to the library,
and go to the bookstore, and look at what research says about how we learn and how we learn quickly. And I read a bunch of books,
I read a bunch of websites. And tried to answer this question, how long does it take
to acquire a new skill? You know what I found? 10,000 hours! Anybody ever heard this? It takes 10,000 hours.
If you want to learn something new, if you want to be good at it, it’s going to take 10,000 hours
to get there. And I read this in book after book,
in website after website. And my mental experience
of reading all of this stuff was like: No!! I don’t have time!
I don’t have 10,000 hours. I am never going to be able
to learn anything new. Ever again.
(Laughter) But that’s not true. So, 10,000 hours, just to give you
a rough order of magnitude, 10,000 hours is a full-time job
for five years. That’s a long time. And we’ve all had the experience
of learning something new, and it didn’t take us anywhere
close to that amount of time, right? So, what’s up? There’s something
kinda funky going on here. What the research says and what we expect,
and have experiences, they don’t match up. And what I found, here’s the wrinkle: The 10,000 hour rule came out of studies
of expert-level performance. There’s a professor
at Florida State University, his name is K. Anders Ericsson. He is the originator
of the 10,00 hour rule. And where that came from is,
he studied professional athletes, world class musicians,
chess grand masters. All of this ultra competitive folks
in ultra-high performing fields. And he tried to figure out
how long does it take to get to the top
of those kinds of fields. And what he found is,
the more deliberate practice, the more time
that those individuals spend practicing the elements
of whatever it is that they do, the more time you spend,
the better you get. And the folks at the tippy top
of their fields put in around 10,000 hours of practice. Now, we were talking about the game
of telephone a little bit earlier. Here’s what happened: an author by the name
of Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book in 2007 called
“Outliers: The Story of Success”, and the central piece of that book
was the 10,000 hour rule. Practice a lot, practice well,
and you will do extremely well, you will reach the top of your field. So, the message, what Dr. Ericsson was actually saying is, it takes 10,000 hours to get
at the top of an ultra competitive field in a very narrow subject,
that’s what that means. But here’s what happened:
ever since Outliers came out, immediately came out,
reached the top of best seller lists, stayed there for three solid months. All of a sudden the 10,000 hour rule
was everywhere. And a society-wide game of telephone
started to be played. So this message, it takes 10,000 hours
to reach the top of an ultra competitive field, became, it takes 10,000 hours
to become an expert at something, which became, it takes 10,000 hours to become
good at something, which became, it takes 10,000 hours
to learn something. But that last statement,
it takes 10,000 hours to learn something, is not true.
It’s not true. So, what the research actually says — I spent a lot of time here
at the CSU library in the cognitive psychology stacks
’cause I’m a geek. And when you actually look
at the studies of skill acquisition, you see over and over
a graph like this. Now, researchers,
whether they’re studying a motor skill, something you do physically
or a mental skill, they like to study things
that they can time. ‘Cause you can quantify that, right? So, they’ll give research participants
a little task, something that requires
physical arrangement, or something that requires
learning a little mental trick, and they’ll time how long a participant
takes to complete the skill. And here’s what this graph says,
when you start — so when researchers gave participants
a task, it took them a really long time, ’cause it was new
and they were horrible. With a little bit of practice,
they get better and better and better. And that early part of practice
is really, really efficient. People get good at things
with just a little bit of practice. Now, what’s interesting to note is that, for skills that we want to learn
for ourselves, we don’t care so much about time,
right? We just care about how good we are,
whatever good happens to mean. So if we relabel performance time
to how good you are, the graph flips, and you get
his famous and widely known, this is the learning curve. And the story of the learning curve
is when you start, you’re grossly incompetent
and you know it, right? (Laughter) With a little bit of practice,
you get really good, really quick. So that early level of improvement
is really fast. And then at a certain point
you reach a plateau, and the subsequent games
become much harder to get, they take more time to get. Now, my question is,
I want that, right? How long does it take
from starting something and being grossly incompetent
and knowing it to being reasonably good? In hopefully, as short a period of time
as possible. So, how long does that take? Here’s what my research says: 20 hours. That’s it.
You can go from knowing nothing about any skill that you can think of. Want to learn a language?
Want to learn how to draw? Want to learn how to juggle
flaming chainsaws? (Laughter) If you put 20 hours of focused
deliberate practice into that thing, you will be astounded. Astounded at how good you are. 20 hours is doable, that’s about 45 minutes a day
for about a month. Even skipping a couple days,
here and there. 20 hours isn’t that hard to accumulate. Now, there’s a method to doing this. Because it’s not like you can just start
fiddling around for about 20 hours and expect these massive improvements. There’s a way to practice intelligently. There’s a way to practice efficiently, that will make sure that you invest
those 20 hours in the most effective way
that you possibly can. And here’s the method,
it applies to anything: The first is to deconstruct the skill. Decide exactly what you want
to be able to do when you’re done, and then look into the skill
and break it down into smaller pieces. Most of the things
that we think of as skills are actually big bundles of skills
that require all sorts of different things. The more you can break apart the skill, the more you’re able to decide, what are the parts of this skill
that would actually help me get to what I want? And then you can practice those first. And if you practice
the most important things first, you’ll be able to improve
your performance in the least amount of time possible. The second is, learn enough
to self correct. So, get three to five resources
about what it is you’re trying to learn. Could be book, could be DVDs,
could be courses, could be anything. But don’t use those as a way
to procrastinate on practice. I know I do this, right? Get like 20 books about the topic,
like, “I’m going to start learning
how to program a computer when I complete these 20 books”. No. That’s procrastination. What you want to do
is learn just enough that you can actually practice and self correct or self edit
as you practice. So the learning becomes
a way of getting better at noticing
when you’re making a mistake and then doing something
a little different. The third is to remove barriers
to practice. Distractions, television, internet. All of these things
that get in the way of you actually sitting down
and doing the work. And the more you’re able to use
just a little bit of willpower to remove the distractions that
are keeping you from practicing, the more likely you are to actually
sit down and practice, right? And the fourth is to practice
for at least 20 hours. Now, most skills have what I call
a frustration barrier. You know, the grossly-incompetent-
and-knowing-it part? That’s really, really frustrating.
We don’t like to feel stupid. And feeling stupid is a barrier to us
actually sitting down and doing the work. So, by pre-committing to practicing
whatever it is that you want to do for at least 20 hours, you will be able to overcome
that initial frustration barrier and stick with the practice long enough
to actually reap the rewards. That’s it! It’s not rocket science. Four very simple steps that
you can use to learn anything. Now, this is easy to talk
about in theory, but it’s more fun to talk about
in practice. So one of the things that I’ve wanted
to learn how to do for a long time is play the ukulele. Has anybody seen
Jake Shimabukuro’s TEDTalk where he plays the ukulele
and makes it sound like — he’s like a ukulele god. It’s amazing. I saw it, I was like,
“That is so cool!” It’s such a neat instrument.
I would really like to learn how to play. And so I decided
that to test this theory I wanted to put 20 hours
into practicing ukulele and see where it got. And so the first thing
about playing the ukulele is, in order to practice,
you have to have one, right? So, I got an ukulele and
— My lovely assistant? (Laughter) Thank you sir.
I think I need the chord here. It’s not just an ukulele,
it’s an electric ukulele. (Laughter) Yeah. So, the first couple hours are just
like the first couple hours of anything. You have to get the tools
that you are using to practice. You have to make sure
they’re available. My ukulele didn’t come
with strings attached. I had to figure out
how to put those on. Like, that’s kind of important, right? And learning how to tune,
learning how to make sure that all of the things
that need to be done in order to start practicing
get done, right? Now, one of the things when I was
ready to actually start practicing was I looked in online databases
and songbooks for how to play songs. And they say, okay, ukuleles, you can
play more than one string at a time, so you can play chords, that’s cool, you are accompanying yourself,
yay you. (Laughter) And when I started looking at songs, I had an ukulele chord book
that had like hundreds of chords. Looking at this and
“Wow, that’s intimidating”. But when you look at the actual songs, you see the same chords
over and over, right? As it turns out, playing the ukulele
is kind of like doing anything, There’s a very small set of things
that are really important and techniques that you’ll use
all the time. And in most songs
you’ll use four, maybe five chords, and that’s it, that’s the song. You don’t have to know hundreds,
as long as you know the four or the five. So, while I was doing my research, I found a wonderful little medley
of pop songs by a band called Axis of Awesome.
(Whistles) — Somebody knows it. — And what Axis of Awesome says
is that you can learn, or you can play pretty much
any pop song of the past five decades, if you know four chords, and those chords are G, D, Em and C. Four chords pump out
every pop song ever, right? So I thought, this is cool! I would like to play
every pop song ever. (Laughter) So, that was the first song
I decided to learn, and I would like to actually
share it with you. Ready? (Applause)
Alright. (Music) (Singing)
Just a small town girl, living in a lonely world, she took the midnight train
going anywhere. I heard that you settled down,
(Laughter) that you found a girl, that you’re married now. Every night in my dreams
(Laughter) I see you, I feel you, that is how I know you go on.
(Laughter) I won’t hesitate no more, no more.
It cannot wait, I’m yours. ‘Cause you were amazing,
we did amazing things. If I could, then I would,
I’d go wherever you will — Can you feel the love tonight.
(Laughter) I can’t live with or without you. When I find myself — When I find myself in times of trouble,
mother Mary comes to me, Sometimes I feel like I don’t have partner.
No woman, no cry. Yeah mama, this surely is a dream. I come from a land down under.
(Laughter) Once a jolly swagman
camped by a billabong. Hey, I just met you, and this is crazy,
(Laughter) but here’s my number, so call me Hey sexy lady, op, op, op, op,
oppan gangnam style. (Laughter) It’s time to say goodbye. Closing time, every new beginning
comes from some other beginning’s end. (Singing and music ends)
(Applause) Thank you, thank you. I love that song.
(Laughter) And I have a secret to share with you. So, by playing that song for you, I just hit my twentieth hour
of practicing the ukulele. (Applause)
Thank you. And so it’s amazing, pretty much
anything that you can think of, what do you want to do. The major barrier to learn
something new is not intellectual, it’s not the process of you learning
a bunch of little tips or tricks or things. The major barrier’s emotional.
We’re scared. Feeling stupid doesn’t feel good, in the beginning of learning
anything new you feel really stupid. So the major barrier’s not intellectual,
it’s emotional. But put 20 hours into anything. It doesn’t matter.
What do you want to learn? Do you want to learn a language?
Want to learn how to cook? Want to learn how to draw? What turns you on?
What lights you up? Go out and do that thing.
It only takes 20 hours. Have fun. (Applause)

Le petit + : Aider les enfants à se repérer

Le petit + : Aider les enfants à se repérer


Bonjour. Le petit plus du jour c’est le Time Timer Les jeunes enfants n’ont pas de représentation
abstraite du temps. Hier, aujourd’hui, dans une heure… ça
ne veut rien dire. Leurs premiers repères temporels se font
essentiellement avec les activités de la journée : repas, sieste, jeu, etc. L’utilisation d’un time timer aide l’enfant
dans cet apprentissage du temps qui passe. Dans 10 minutes, ce sera l’heure de se savonner le corps. L’enfant visualise le temps qui s’écoule
et il se prépare à la fin d’une activité. C’est très utile pour les activités que
l’enfant a du mal à quitter. Petit Bonus : proposer à l’enfant de manipuler lui même le time timer. www.latelierdesparents.fr

Geography Now! NAURU

Geography Now! NAURU


Hey guys, so this episode is gonna be filmed in my office because I didn’t have time to book that YouTube space. Ah, there’s gonna be a special one. It’s not very often. We cover a place like Nauru. Usually we get you guys, the Geograpeeps, to help out with these videos But sadly not a single Nauruan was available to contact us. No surprise. I mean, there’s not many in the world and it’s kind of hard to find them or visit them. Like, literally, this is the least visited country in the world. So NAU we cover NAURU [Good pun, no punching?] Hi everybody, I’m host Barb’s. Yes. It’s pronounced “Now-roo”, not “Nah-oo-roo” The Pacific Islands are always so fun to research because they really are like the hidden gems concealed within the massive expanse of seemingly endless ocean and with Nauru you find a new type of gem that nobody quite knows how to classify but it’s shiny Let’s go treasure hunting on the map now. Shall we? Linguist speculate that the name Nauru may be derived from the Nauruan word Anaoero Which means “I go to the beach.” Of course most island nations have beaches But the ones on Nauru are sectioned off in a special way First of all, the country is literally just one island located on the confluence of all three oceanic regions of Oceania: Melanesia, Micronesia And Polynesia, however categorically they belong to the region of Micronesia (not to be confused with the Federated States of Micronesia which is a country within Micronesia. We already talked about it) Anyway The country is the smallest country in Oceania and only about 8.1 square miles or 21 square kilometers The entire perimeter of the country is only about 12 miles or 19 kilometers long That means you could literally take a nice morning jog around the entire island and make it back in time for lunch Just a few hours later. The country is divided into fourteen administrative districts However when election time rolls around, the country is divided into eight constituencies to send representatives to the Parliament and this is where things get weird Nauru is the only country in the world that doesn’t have an official capital Most sources will tell you that its Yaren simply because that’s where the parliament and administration buildings are as well as the only airport on the island “Nauru International”. However, it is only the de jure capital and only listed as a main district with only about 1300 people Yaren is actually the third largest town on the island. The largest actually being Arijejen in Aiwo with a whopping 2,400 people and Menen in the Meneng district with about 1,400. Aside from the airport coming into Nauru by boat is nearly impossible For large commercial ships as the entire country is surrounded by jagged sharp coral reefs that have been known to puncture holes Which is why they have no major seaport There are only two small harbors able to accommodate small or medium sized boats one at Anibare on the east side at Anibare Bay and another one On the town of Aiwo on the west side of the island. Right below that harbor though You see these strange long extending pier-looking things and think, “Oh, isn’t that like a shipping port?” Well, no Those are actually really long phosphate cantilever booms that were used to transport. Phosphate minerals to large ships out to sea past the coral wall. There’s another one further south that is currently being disassembled as neither of them are being used much anymore Otherwise getting around Nauru is pretty easy I mean It’s just one island unlike those confusing disjointed atolls in Kiribati or Tuvalu. Having one solid chunk of land is quite advantageous in the Pacific because it keeps you stable and strong. The country has a single paved road that goes around the entire nation known as the island Ring Road It takes just about an hour to go around the entire country by car And if you want to take public transport a community bus goes around once every hour or so for less than a dollar in fare There is only one traffic light at the airport to allow planes to cross the road into the airport terminal Otherwise, you can take the rugged unpaved gravel path road Shortcuts through the interior of the island to get to the other sides if you prefer. Not very popular but still possible. On these paths You can pass the Nauru Detention Centers which are sites that cooperate with the Australian government to detain illegal immigrants We’ll explain more about this later The country does have three miles of rail track reserved for phosphate transport and sometimes people will cling on to this train to move back and forth from the coast of Aiwo to the inland mining areas Yeah, they actually have a train and it’s still kind of running. Nonetheless Nauru is definitely not quite the tourist hotspot. Annually the country receives on average less than a thousand tourists a year sometimes as low as 200. Speaking of which if you are one of the lucky few that treks over here some spots of interest might include places like Yaren’s Parliament building. Buada Lagoon. The Moqua Well & Caves. Frigate bird games. Anabare Bay. The central plateau known as Topside. The old World War II artillery bunkers near Yaren. The Linkbelt oval sportsfield where you can play sports. And of course, there’s scuba diving everywhere. Alright, so that pretty much rounds up this segment. Let’s see what type of landscape they have on this one little island, shall we? Well, there’s gonna be interesting because we only have about eight square miles of land to work with How can we possibly extract a complex data analysis on such a limited surface area? I’ve been doing this show for years guys. Watch me. First of all, Nauru sits on the middle of the Southern Pacific Plate only about 34 miles (56 kilometers) away from the equator. Out of all the islands in Oceania, Nauru sticks out as one of the three great phosphate rock islands. The first one being Kiribati’s Banaba Island right next door, and Makatea Island over 3,000 miles away across the International Dateline on Makatea Island in French Polynesia Why do they have so much phosphate? Simple: bird poop! Over thousands of years Guano droppings in the inland areas from migrating birds have accumulated making these islands super rich in the limited resource. Going back to Nauru though After we pass the jagged coral reef barrier You see that the entire Coastal ring around Nauru about 300 meters inland is the most fertile part of the country. If you look over here in the south though you’ll see Buada Lagoon, the largest inland body of water Nauru has no rivers or streams which means the majority people depend on either rain collection storage tanks on their roofs for water or 3d salinization plants located at the National Utilities Agency if you move inland further from that though You’ll notice the green fertile strip ends and you reach the grassy shrubby central plateau Composed of coral ridges and cliffs the highest point being command ridge at about 233 feet 720 meters high This is the phosphate zone where all the phosphate was mined over the past few decades. Whoo. Yeah, I mean quite a backstory, right? I mean at one point in 1968 They actually had the highest GDP in the world after they opened up the mines But now after almost all the phosphate deposits have been depleted Yeah, not so much. All right, and there’s a part where no one usually comes in for the physical geography section However, he’s not here because I kind of forgot to tell him at the last minute that we’re gonna fill my house Which means Ken you’re gonna have to be NOAA today. Nice. Wait, is this a promotion? Yeah, no, wait, really? Yeah You’re promoting the information about Naru to our viewers and get to what they’re waiting Nauru Niue that they’re finite phosphate deposits will eventually run thin So in order to cushion their transition period from over-dependence, they decided to invest heavily into trust funds The problem was many of these funds ended up mismanage and wasteful investments almost until they went bankrupt They’ve tried to become a finance haven, but too many controversies ensued so they had to drop it since 2004 They have been a cash-only exclusive economy. This means you could only use cash on the island So if you visit get your major ATM transactions in order before boarding the plane Because none exists on the island. Resource-wise, other than the nearly depleted phosphate reserves, all they really got going for them is fishing and minor crops that grow on the island, Like coconuts and fruits, and the Buada lagoon, they do practice aquaculture by raising native mill fish. It’s a tradition that actually predates European contact. Nonetheless nearly all basic and capital goods must be imported mostly from Australia and New Zealand. Otherwise with food, it gets kind of…fatty. Most grocery stores have to wait six weeks for every shipment. People either have to get their food from what’s available on the island or stock up on non-perishables that might not have the highest nutritional content. A typical traditional Nauruan meal would probably include grilled or fried fish. Coconut milk is used very often and possibly some pandanus or pineapple use in some way. However, the majority of the country prefers to eat Western or Eastern foods regularly. There are over 130 Chinese restaurants on the island, burgers, pizza, and spam fried rice are typically seen in many houses. Ah spam! America invented it but Asia glorified it. This typical diet has been one of the many factors that has led to Nauru becoming what the World Health Organization labels as “the most obese country in the world” with over 70 percent of their inhabitants being categorically obese and 94 percent overweight. Some of the people here though need to be big because it works to their advantage. But that’s a topic later we will discuss. In…. DEMOGRAPHICS Thank you Ken! Follow him on Instagram. Off you go now. [sound of door closing] Now Nauru is kind of like… I don’t know what’s a good analogy. It’s like one of those shrines in the middle of the Patagonian desert in Argentina, you know They’re so far out and remote very few people stop by and visit them yet as small as they are They’re packed with fascinating backstories. Yeah, I think that works First of all, the country has about 11 300 people and is the third least populated nation in the world after Tuvalu and Vatican City. About 60% of the people in Nauru are ethnically Nauruan, about a quarter are other Pacific Islanders, 8% are European and about 8% are Han Chinese. They use the Australian dollar as their currency. They use a type I plug outlet and they drive on the left side of the road. Now. Here’s the thing. Let’s talk about the largest ethnic group, the Nauruans. If you include the entire global diaspora It’s estimated that there are about 15,000 Nauruans in the entire world. Apart from the 6,000 or so Nauruans, about a thousand live in Australia, and about 8,000 in the U.S. Meaning that there are actually more Nauruans outside of Nauru than in it, but what exactly is a Nauruan? You know what? Ken is usually like the island guy? So, you know what? Ken, just explain what a Nauruan is. All right, Nauruans are in themselves kind of a cultural anomaly. They are genetically kind of a mix between Micronesia and Polynesia. They don’t even know exactly where they belong. Although everyone on the island speaks English. The Nauruan mother tongue is Nauruan. Obviously. Linguists say it is technically classified as a Micronesian language, but most Micronesians can’t understand them. Historically, the populace prior to outside immigrations was divided to these twelve tribes. Each with a matrilineal inheritance. Thank you, Ken. I’ll take it from here. Now, in terms of the tribes, they each kind of had their own section of the island and developed their own unique customs. One of which being the Nauruan navigational system. It’s a unique way of expressing cardinal direction that can only be used on the island. There are four main directions that cover a quadrant of the island and a fifth and six direction that traverses the interior. Sadly over time many of the traditions were lost to Western influence. Pictures were taken of Nauruan warriors in the 1800s with armour made of thick coconut fibers and puffer fish helmets. Similar to the ones we talked about in the Kiribati(?) episode. The traditional music style called Teigen is usually performed at celebrations. Finally every so often certain fishers still practice trained frigate bird fishing. Otherwise Nauruans love AFL, rugby, weightlifting. Sometimes weightlifting is considered the national sport. Even women take part in it Keep in mind in 2001 Nauru also signed the Pacific Solution agreement with Australia Which opened up a detention center to hold people that were illegally trying to enter into Australia by sea for asylum. This means in addition to the population that lives there permanently Nauru has a temporary fluctuating population of detainees at any given moment. The highest amount of people held at once was 1233 in 2014 and at the end of 2018, there are about 30. And speaking of dates and times, History! In the quickest way, I can put it: Micronesian and Polynesians settle in and mix. They have babies. Boom! Nauruans are born. Twelve tribes are set. British whalers stop by and start trading. Boom! Tribal war in 1878. Germans come in and annex it. They establish kings. Phosphate discovered by this dude. World War 1, Australia captures it. Influenza epidemic. Japan takes over in World War 2. They relocate a ton of Naurans to Chuuk Island. Australia fights them off. About 800 Nauruans repatriate back to Nauru. 1968 independence, they get super rich! But then kind of lose it all. Current dealings with Australia to move forward. And here we are today! Now this is kind of a part where I talk about notable famous people and it’s interesting because Almost all the famous people from Nauru have held a position in government. Yeah, it gets interesting! So here we go King Aweida. Hammer DeRoburt. Marlene Moses. Keiren keke. David Adeang. Itte Detenamo. Alopua Petoa. Yukio Peter. Rianna Solomon Yeah, and their former president was an Olympic athlete and he won seven gold medals at the Commonwealth Games Then he resigned because of a scandal but look at him left! Speaking of the Commonwealth and activities with other countries abroad [jingle] Friendzone! When it comes to diplomacy Nauru is kind of like in the middle of so many Tug-of-wars and they don’t really care who says what just as long as you can kind of invest in the nation They’ll be happy from one They generally get along with their other ocean neighbors like Kiribati, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Solomon Islands. Fiji, however, kind of acts as like their hub and gateway to the world. Most flights to Nauru operate through Fiji and most Nauruans travel to Fiji to further invest in their schools and education. When it comes to the big guys though Nauru has a bit of controversy they are one of the only four nations that recognizes Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent nation states to which Russia in appreciation gave over fifty million dollars in humanitarian aid in return 1981 They did once recognize the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic but that in 2000, they withdrew the tie in favor to signing Accords with Morocco Who wanted to invest in there already depleting phosphate mines. When they joined the UN they had first recognized and supported Taiwan as a nation state, but then in 2002 They switched that up and signed an agreement to recognize the PRC instead which really pissed off Taiwan and they cut ties One year later, though Nauru was like, oh shoot. I’m sorry I changed my mind again and they closed their embassy in Beijing prompting a reestablishment of ties to Taiwan in 2005. When it comes to their best friends, however many Nauruans would probably say Austrialia. Australia is kind of like the caregiver that provides most their business and aid, most of the imports come from Australia and Foreign ministers have worked together to find solutions to develop new streams of revenue to keep the nation afloat Apart from the Pacific Solution, some other ideas include things like a potential boat repair industry and reclaiming the damaged land for other uses. In conclusion, it doesn’t matter if it’s just a single little green dot in the vast white ocean. Nauru can still stand up and say Now we are here! Now we are free! And now is Nauru’s time to shine! Stay tuned. Nepal is coming up next! [End music]

How to Fill Out the FAFSA

How to Fill Out the FAFSA


The Free Application for
Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, is the application for grants,
loans, and work-study funds provided by
the federal government. It is also used by many
states and schools for their financial aid programs. For the fastest
and easiest way to apply, visit our official website,
fafsa.gov. The FAFSA is available
in English and Spanish. As you fill it out online you’ll
be able to automatically skip questions that don’t pertain
to you, check out your status immediately,
and get online help. It takes most people less
than 30 minutes to complete the application. You’ll need a
few things when you fill it out, so get ready by gathering your Social Security number, your Permanent Resident Card
if you have one, any W-2 forms or records
of money you earned for the previous year,
and your tax records. By the way, a nice time-saving
feature of the FAFSA is that many people are eligible
to automatically transfer their tax data from the IRS
into the FAFSA. So keep an eye out
while you’re applying, in case you’re
offered that option. If you have any questions about
what information to gather, there is a complete list of
documents that you will need at fafsa.gov. Before you begin the process
of filling out the FAFSA, you should create a user name
and password called an FSA ID that will act as your
electronic signature. You’ll only need to create an
FSA ID once; and you can use it to renew your FAFSA
each year that you apply. Your parents will need
an FSA ID too if they have to provide any information. So now you’re ready
to begin filling out the FAFSA to apply for financial aid. There are three groups
of questions that include personal information,
such as your name, address, and marital status; financial information,
such as your income; and any parent information
that is required. If you get hung up or confused
about a question, the “Help and Hints” box
on the right-hand side of the application can help with
each question as you move along. Also, look for the online chat
feature under “Help” if you would like assistance from
a knowledgeable agent. Because colleges and career
schools use the FAFSA to provide financial aid, you can list
up to 10 schools that you are interested in attending. You should list all of
the schools that you are considering, even if you haven’t
been accepted or applied yet. If you have more than 10 schools
in mind, you can submit your FAFSA with 10 schools and then
replace some of those schools with other schools later. When you finish filling out
the FAFSA, use your FSA ID to sign the form. If you are required to submit
parent information on your FAFSA, a parent will need to
sign the application with his or her own FSA ID as well. If you have any questions
or need more information, please visit StudentAid.gov.

How to Make an Attractive City

How to Make an Attractive City


Cities are a big deal: we pretty much all have to live in them; We should try hard to get them right. So few cities are nice; very, very few out of many thousands are really beautiful. Embarrassingly, the more appealing ones tend to be old, which is weird because we’re mostly much better at making things now: cars, planes, or phones. Why not, then, cities? It’s crazy to settle for this and to leave something so important to chance. We need to get more scientific and identify the principles that determine how a city gets to be pretty or ugly. It’s not a mystery why we like some cities so much better than others. This is a manifesto about how to make attractive cities. There are six fundamental things a city needs to get right. 1. Not too chaotic; Not too ordered One of the things we really love in cities is order. Order means balance, symmetry and repetition; it means the same thing happening again and again, and the left side matching the right side. Order is one of the reasons so many people love Paris. But most cities are a complete mess. When it’s a mess, it seems like no one is in charge. And that’s worrying. It’s horrible when everything is jumbled up. A pitched roof next to a flat roof, a stark geometrical box next to a muddled car park, high rise towers that look as if they’ve been placed at random, like teeth in a gaping mouth. We generally have an itch to straighten things out, and when we can’t, it’s frustrating. The same urge is there when we look at cities. Often, it’s not skyscrapers that we mind in the city, it’s skyscrapers that have been dumped without planning, like they are increasingly in London, whereas New York or Chicago shows the ordered way that we love. However, you have to keep something else in mind: excessive order can be just as much of a problem. Too much regularity can be soul destroying. Too much order feels rigid and alien. It can be bleak, relentless, and harsh. So the ideal we’re seeking is variety and order. This is the idea in a square in Telč in the Czech Republic: where every house is the same width and height but within that ordered pattern, every house has been allowed freedom at the level of form and colour or in Java-eiland in Amsterdam where the pattern is quite strict: each house has the same height and width, the color range is restricted, but within this grid, each unit is completely individual. We’re perfectly in the middle between chaos and boringness here. And that’s what humans adore. That’s what more and more cities should have: order and variety. So as a general rule: too much mess, and it’s off putting, but too much simple order, and it’s boring. What we crave it’s organized complexity which you can see as much here: as here: Now, for the second thing that makes cities beautiful: they have to have visible life. There are streets that are dead and streets that are alive and in general, we crave the live ones. This is a live street in Hong Kong. This is a live scene in Venice. In the 18th century, the painter Canaletto specialized in pictures of cities everyone loved because they’re full of life. There’s always plenty going on. In this painting we can see a stonemason’s yard. The work sheds are rough, but they’re charming. It’s fascinating to see what people are up to. How do they load those huge blocks onto the gondolas? The life of the city is on display, and we’re primed to love this. Contrast this with dead streets of many modern cities. Today, the places where a lot of the work gets done look dull and dead. They’re spaced out along huge highways, and you never go there unless you happen to work there yourself because there’s nothing to see. And most office buildings are brutally anonymous; the people inside might be working
in all sorts of fascinating stuff, but we just don’t know, and it’s disorienting and cold. The street levels are dead. Contrast this with the streets we all love, where you can see things going on: a bakery, a cobbler’s shop, and markets selling carpets, a burger bar, a bookshop; these are streets we love because they’re full of life. More and more, in modern cities, we’ve hidden life away. We have lots of dead sheds, and dead towers, connected up by dead motorways where you can barely glimpse your fellow humans. Rather than the old alleyways
where you can see people at work, look them in the eye as they walk down the road and feel connected to others. Modern planners have become obessed by hiding technology rather than trying to make it nice to look at. Today we’de be outraged if we heard a huge pipeline was gonna be slapped across a lovely river; we’d be up in arms! But we book trips to go and see the Roman Pont du Gard in southern France. That’s because it’s built for beauty and practicality. We think it’s the pipe we hate. It’s not. It’s just the ugliness. So let’s make sure our streets are full of life, full of people doing stuff you can see through the windows. That’s what make certain cities
so attractive to walk along: the work is on show, the people are proud of what they’re doing and happy to let the world notice and appreciate the practical side of things. There’s a third principle of good cities: They are compact. In the past, being able to be alone or just with your partner or family, was at first, a huge achievement. Only the largest class, the poor, lived huddled together and it was horrid. As soon as people had money,
they wanted to move out, and have their own plots. Through the later decades of 20th century, more and more people tucked themselves away in a private realm. And it’s been a disaster. It’s become deadly, cold, and boring, and very, very wasteful on the environment. A compact city like Barcelona swallows a fraction of the energy of a sprawling one like Phoenix, in Arizona. We’ve built a world of endless dead dormitory suburbs connected by sterile wide motorways all because we labor under the false impression that we want to be far away from other people. But in fact it’s wonderful to have the balancing moderating influence of living close to other people in uplifting surroundings. That’s why we need tightly packed, well-ordered cities with lots of squares in public places in which we can hang out. All the most beautiful compact cities have squares. Yet, the art of the square has gone into terrible decline. We keep promoting the invention of mobile phones, but no one’s built a good square anywhere on this planet for decades. It’s not rocket science though. Look at the Piazza di Santa Maria in Trastevere, Rome. It’s a public place, but intimate and closed enough to feel like an extension of your home. Lounging about here, having a coffee or a beer, reading a paper, you get to be around other people, their moderating, cheering affect is restoring. It takes you away from the over intense, couple obsessed atmosphere of the home. There’s an art to a good square: it should be neither too big nor too small, anything over 30 meters in diameter starts become too large by which we mean: the individual become overly small relative to the space around them, creating a sense of alienation and dislocation. In a good square you should be able to see the face of a person across the square, You could if need be hail someone walking on the other side. The ideal square must offer a feeling of containment, but not claustrophobia. There’s another principle of good cities to do with orientation and mystery. By definition, cities are huge, but the cities that a lot of people love also have lots of little back streets and small lanes where you can feel cozy and get a bit lost. We’re drawn to the sense of mystery and enclosure that these streets offer. It’s actually lovely to get a bit lost. A warren of alleyways can feel homely and intimate. At Cartagena, in Colombia, the balconies nearly touch across the street- you can see your neighbors having breakfast, you know when they’ve gone to bed, what time the children do their homework on a Sunday evening. The fact that everyone is little bit on display a lot of the time tends to make people nicer. They don’t shout at each other quite so much. They put flowers on the table more often. We like it, but we forget that we do, and we don’t quite know how to ask for it. Modern planners and developers give us maximum privacy because they suppose that’s what we all want, and because they insist that cars and lorries, which like a lot more space than people, are the most important things in the world. Of course we need balance between small streets and big ones. Necessarily, cities are large. We love small streets, but they’re a nightmare when you have to go any distance. So the ideal is to have big boulevards, grand, wide straight places, and also little warrens of streets. We need cities that offer us two important pleasures: the pleasures of mystery and the pleasures of orientation. Let’s think about scale now. Modern cities are all about big things. Joseph Campbell once wrote: “If you want to see what a society really believes in, look at what the biggest buildings on the horizon are dedicated to”. The biggest most prominent things tell us about the actual, rather than admitted priorities of a society. We don’t collectively say we worship
sports shoe corporations, tax specialists, the oil industry, and pharmaceuticals. Our cities, however, tell another story. They’re full of enormous towers devoted to just these things. That is a bit depressing. As humans, we don’t mind things being big, per se, we don’t mind being humbled, so long as the things we are bowing to deserve homage, like a beautiful mosque, or a cathedral, or a museum. But we’ve allowed our cities to be hijacked by aggressive commercial interests, by towers that honor not God, or love, or humanity, but pizza corporations and hedge funds. They exist because we’ve made a big dumb collective mistake: we focused on who owns land, but we don’t think about who owns space, who has air rights. And in the end, who has air rights determines what you can see from your window. We suggest that the ideal height for any city block is five stories high. No more. Above that people start to feel small, insignificant, and trivial. So we say: cut down those towers and pack everything into five stories. Make it dense, compact, and tight, like they do in some parts of Berlin, Amsterdam, London, and Paris, the bits we love. Of course, occasionally there can be a huge building, but let’s keep it for something really special, something all of humanity can love. Towers have to be worthy of their prominence, they must be aligned with our best ambitions and long-term needs. Finally, make it local. Somethings should be the same everywhere. We don’t expect there to be a uniquely Venezuelan telephone or a distinctively Icelandic bicycle. But, we don’t want buildings to look the same everywhere. It’s hugely disappointing when you fly somewhere for hours, land, and feel you could be anywhere. The problem isn’t just that we like a bit of variation for it’s own sake; because of climate, history and social traditions, each society really does have different needs, different strengths and weaknesses. There are many distinct styles of happiness; many good and varied ways of conductive and collective life. The sameness of cities is a problem because it reveals how far each of us must be from engaging with an specific character of it’s own place. It’s like wearing the same clothes in all climates, or speaking exactly the same way irrespective of who you’re talking to. Cities need to have strong characters connected to the use of distinctive local materials and forms. The pale sandstone, of Millbrae Crescent in Glasgow’s south side, is a local material, A medium grained, carboniferous, blond sandstone- formed when the Scottish landmass lay near the equator. Or around Cambridge, brick from the local yellowish gault clay is a major traditional material. Or think of the way the great Australian architect, Glenn Murcutt, found ways to put up buildings that reflected the distinctive character Australian life. So the law should be: don’t make your city from buildings that could be just anywhere; find a style of architecture that reflects what makes your location specific. The obstacles to building beautiful cities and not economic. Collectively, we’ve got enough money. We face two main problems: firstly, an intellectual confusion around beauty, and secondly, lack of political will. The intellectual confusion is: we think no one has a right to say what’s beautiful and what’s ugly; we get worried about who decides; we think beauty is subjective, so surely no one should say anything about it. It’s a very understandable qualm, but it’s horribly useful to greedy property developers. It’s such a relief to these people to learn that there is no such thing as beauty; it means they can get away with murder. We may not agree to the very last point about what a beautiful city is, but we know an ugly one when we see it. No one’s ever willingly taken holiday in Frankfurt-on-Main or Birmingham, and there are good reasons for this to do with an objective sense of beauty. So let’s stop being dangerously relativistic about this. Yes! There is such a thing as beauty. Sydney and San Francisco and Bath and Bordeaux have it and most other places don’t. The proof lies in the tourist statistics. Let’s not just say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; that’s just a gift to the next wealthy idiot who wants to put up a horrible tower. The other obstacle is a lack of political will. We’ve abandoned the design of cities to the greedy rich. We’ve given up believing in democracy. We’ve faced and have lost the battle between the public good and commercial opportunism. There will always be a greedy, slick lobby fighting for ugly development, but we can say no. Beautiful cities have only ever been created when governments impose strict and ambitious regulations to keep the greedy, private guys in check. Think of Edinburgh’s amazing New Town, which only got of the ground because the government established clear rules to keep developers in check. They were precise legislation detailing heights for buildings, quality of finish, the width of pavements, and a character of the skyline. That’s the only way you get beauty. They didn’t leave it to the free market. Do that, and you will have chaos. When governments give up on beauty, people start to hate all building. We become collectively despondent. We think we hate all building, and that we can’t create beautiful places We get obsessed by restorations and opposed to anything new, which is wrong because we need places to live. Humanity hasn’t put up a single beautiful city since about 1905. When Venice was built, no one regretted the lagoons that had been swallowed up. The goal of building, should be to put up things that don’t leave us regretting the nature that’s been lost because the architecture is every bit the equal of the designs of nature. We can create more beautiful cities, but we have to confront opportunistic developers and our own intellectual confusions. Governments can only create beauty if they have enough public backing. Political will is ultimately about what all of us, the electorate, are asking for. That’s why we made this film and hope to awaken you to your power as citizens to help legislate for beautiful cities in the future These are the six rules. Now, it’s time to fight to put them in action.

Assessment and Treatment of Self Injury

Assessment and Treatment of Self Injury


[MUSIC PLAYING] DR. WAYNE FUQUA: Brian. Would you be
so kind as to introduce yourself to our viewers? DR. BRIAN IWATA: Sure. My name is Brian Iwata, and I’m on the faculty at the University of Florida. WAYNE: Great. Thank you, Brian. Brian is an internationally recognized expert on the assessment and treatment of self-injury. And that is the topic we have for this training video. So Brian, let me start off by asking you
to describe what we mean by self-injury and how it pertains to intellectual disabilities,
developmental disabilities, and autism in particular. BRIAN: Self-injurious behavior is sort of
an interesting disorder, because it really doesn’t consist of any particular behavior. It’s simply defined by its outcome– any behavior
that produces injury to the individual’s own body. Now, I guess estimates of prevalence
range somewhere between 10% to about 17% among individuals diagnosed with
severe or profound intellectual disability or autism. So maybe 15% might be
a good, round prevalence number. And SIB can take a number of different forms. In fact, I’ve got several slides here
that I can show you that will illustrate some of them. The most common form of self-injurious
behavior is forceful contact, usually against the head. So in this first slide, we see a young boy
banging his head against his walker. And the typical injuries that you see are
bruises, abrasions, and lacerations about the site of the injury. Now, here are some other examples–
an example of biting behavior. You can see the lesions
up and down this young woman’s arm. This is an example of eye-poking behavior. An example of severe and chronic scratching behavior. This is an unusual form of self-injurious behavior. It’s technical name is aerophagia, more commonly known as air swallowing. And so this young woman essentially has taken air into her stomach instead of into her lungs. And to give you an idea of the extent to which she’s done that– this is an adult female who weighs 65 pounds. And so what you’re seeing there is basically an inflated stomach. Now, here are some internal views of self-injurious behavior. This is a photograph of a tongue that has been partially bitten off. Here’s a view through a CT scan, and the yellow arrow points to a whitened area. That’s a calcified retina, and it was produced not through direct trauma into the eye but rather indirectly as a result of head-banging, again, one of the most common forms of SIB. Here’s an x-ray of a hand. It belonged to a young man who hit himself forcefully in the face and on the head, and as you can see, has fractured in two places. So if you can imagine hitting yourself hard enough to break your hand in two places, you might imagine the damage that’s done inside the brain. And finally here is an example of pica. This individual has somehow ingested a nail. So as you can see, self-injurious behavior involves a variety of different responses. The common feature is injury produced to the body. Now, some of the behavior is fairly
dangerous and may actually be life-threatening, but we don’t have good
prevalence figures about mortality rate. Because individuals who present
with significant risk are usually either restrained or sedated–
that is medicated. And so we don’t really have a good
figure on how many people actually kill themselves. WAYNE: It sounds like a serious problem
that must present all kinds of health issues and personal freedom
restrictions and stuff of that nature. How do we go about assessing self-injury? And how does that then lead into
some of the treatment protocols that we think might be effective, Brian? BRIAN: Well, for many years the major
focus on the treatment of self-injurious behavior was to simply stop it quickly. It’s a dramatic disorder.
Individuals who engage in it may cause severe harm. And so typically the field has focused
on interventions that eliminate the behavior very rapidly. Occasionally that has been effectively
treated with reinforcement-based interventions. But early in the development of our
treatment procedures for this behavior, a large amount of it was basically
treated by way of restrictive interventions, restraints, punishment, and so forth. Now, that’s simply an attempt to stop it. More recent research has
attempted to understand why it occurs. And one of the predominating theories
is that self-injurious behavior is simply behavior that is learned. It’s acquired as other behavior is. And so that begins to focus our attention
on contingencies of reinforcement. Now, some problem behavior tends to be
maintained by specific types of contingencies. So let me go through a couple of other
responses before getting to self-injury. Let’s take aggressive behavior–
also a significant problem. Well, a great deal of research
on aggression has shown that it’s primarily a social response. It is maintained by either
social positive reinforcement, people deliver things to those who are aggressive, or social negative reinforcement,
people who are aggressive effectively escape ongoing work demands. It’s basically never maintained
by automatic reinforcement– that is the felt aspects of aggression. By contrast we have very stereotypic behaviors–
these are non-injurious repetitive motor behaviors, like the twirling, and the flipping, and so forth. And these behaviors have been shown
primarily to be maintained by automatic reinforcement. Now, one might wonder why that’s the case,
and I’m not really sure, but one can speculate that aggression is a sufficiently dangerous
disruptive behavior that will immediately produce a reaction by people in the environment. They stop things that are going on.
They start things that aren’t happening. Whereas stereotypic behavior, although
it’s disruptive, it’s not immediately disruptive. And so evidence indicates that that
behavior doesn’t really enter into social contingencies. Now, self-injurious behavior is interesting,
because it’s a disruptive behavior. So it basically requires some
sort of reaction from the environment. But it’s also a behavior that
produces a number of felt aspects. And so self-injurious behavior is
one behavior that’s likely to be maintained by any sort of reinforcement contingency. And as this chart sort of illustrates,
it basically lays out the kinds of contingencies that could maintain self-injury. So for instance, if attention or access
to various items are rewards, and if they are not available, then an individual with poorly developed
language skills may learn that a good way to get access to attention and various tangible items
is to engage in self-injurious behavior. Similarly in the presence of work requirements
that are demanding and perhaps somewhat aversive, an individual who doesn’t have any socially
acceptable way to indicate that he or she would like a break may learn that bleeding is an appropriate
way to get people to stop what’s happening. And finally, self-injurious behavior
could be a self-stimulatory behavior. Not so much that people are producing
injuries because others will react, but simply because it produces a great deal of sensory
stimulation when none is available. WAYNE: In spite of the fact that most
people would identify that as painful stimulation. BRIAN: Yes, that’s true.
WAYNE: That’s the possibility of that maintaining, right? BRIAN: As an example, you could take,
for instance, let’s say a long-distance runner. If you were to stand at the finish line
of a marathon, you would not see too many people running across, simply as if they’re
having fun, smiling, and waving, and so forth. Most of them look like they’re
ready to fall over and die. Now, what maintains that behavior? Well, possibly it’s shaped up by
a way of some sorts of social contingencies– praise and various things like that
for learning to run well, but eventually most long-distance runners maintain that behavior
because of basically the felt aspects of running– a sense of accomplishment,
being in good condition, and things like that. So although it looks as though someone
engaging in vigorous exercise feels bad or may be subjected to aversive stimulation,
in fact they’re just engaging in the behavior because it produces some
sort of sensory stimulation. WAYNE: Interesting.
Now, you mentioned sensory stimulation. Does that imply there’s a biological
and/or genetic cause for self-injury? BRIAN: Well, that’s a very appealing possibility. Because biology seems so tied up in
that response, it sort of cries out for a biological explanation. And so a number of theories have been proposed. For instance, one is that individuals who
engage in self-injurious behavior may be experiencing some sort of chemical imbalance, or they
may have been exposed to some sort of environmental toxin. Now, some basic laboratory studies have
shown that if you expose laboratory animals to very high doses of certain toxins,
you occasionally can induce self-injurious behavior. Well, the question becomes then,
does that generalize to actual humans? And in fact, it’s been shown that it’s
very unlikely that most people have ever been exposed to these toxins in the doses
required to produce self-injurious behavior in animals. And so although there’s a preparation
that may lead to a biological explanation, that doesn’t seem to account
for self-injurious behavior in humans. Another possibility is that individuals who
engage in self-injurious behavior simply don’t feel pain. And if they don’t feel pain, then, let’s say,
banging one’s head– when ordinarily it would look like a response that’s directly deterred because of pain,
might be no different than, let’s say, raising one’s arm. And in fact, it might be
a more effective way to get attention. And it doesn’t really matter that I raise my arm
or bang my head, because I don’t feel the pain away. And of course, that requires all sorts
of pain sensitivity tests given to individuals who engage in self-injurious behavior versus not. And not a whole lot of evidence has shown
that individuals who engage in self-injurious behavior are less tolerant to painful stimulation. Now, the third biological theory
is kind of a very interesting one. And it suggests that individuals who engage
in self-injurious behavior may be activating their endogenous opiate system. So for instance, the body produces its
own opiate-like substances under conditions of high stress. And as the theory goes, people who
engage in a chronic self-injurious behavior are simply activating their own opioids, and in fact,
perhaps producing something akin to a biological high. And that’s probably the most interesting
biological theory, because it has led directly to the development of a drug regimen
that might selectively reduce self-injury, and that is the opiate blockades,
like Naltrexone and Naloxone. Now, unfortunately if you look at those
studies what you find is that the evidence is mixed. Some studies show partial effects,
some show no effect, others show relatively reliable effects that wash away rather quickly. And of course, it may be the case that
there’s something to this particular biological theory, in which case you’d have to
explain all the conflicting findings. Well, one possibility is that those types
of drugs would be effective for individuals whose behavior is maintained by that particular source
of reinforcement– the biological reinforcer. But of course, what they haven’t done is to
determine why particular individuals are engaging in self-injurious behavior
before they administer those drugs. And so that’s one possible promising avenue
that needs to be developed a little further. WAYNE: Brian, the endogenous opiate
theory sounds like it’s interesting but is not yet proven to be an efficacious treatment based on that. Are there any other biological, physiological
issues that are pertinent to our understanding of SIB. BRIAN: Well, the way that the medical
and the psychiatric community has typically responded to SIB is to prescribe drug regimens. And these could either be chronic
psychotropic drugs or relatively short acting sedating drugs. And often individuals who are diagnosed
with SIB are given another diagnosis for which these chronic drug regiments might be appropriate. Generally, however, it’s been found that
these drugs have no selective suppressive effect on SIB. Rather if they slow SIB done, it’s probably
a function of simply sedating the individual. WAYNE: And that, of course,
has side effects well beyond the SIB in terms of their
interaction with the environment. So let’s assume that
you have a case referred to you of SIB. Can you kind of walk us through the protocol
of how you do assessment, what you look for, and then how that begins to link
into some sort of treatment planning? BRIAN: Sure. Actually, over the years we’ve
developed sort of a general protocol or assessment sequence for dealing with self-injurious behavior. Now, the first thing has nothing to do with treatment,
and that is the identification of risk and protection against harm, because these individuals
are usually causing tissue damage. And what we want to do first is to determine
how severe that damage is likely to be by reviewing a history of the kinds of injuries that have been produced. We would have a physician check that
individual to make sure that the behaviors that are occurring are not likely to be life-threatening. For example, one of the most dangerous
forms of SIB is pica– ingestion of inedible substances. And pica per se is not necessarily that dangerous
except for the fact that it doesn’t produce any visible injuries. And so an individual who has a history
of pica, in theory, could swallow a broken piece of glass and cause major damage,
if not death, rather quickly. And so first we have the person evaluated
by a physician, we conduct a medical record review, and then we try to, I guess, prescribe
a short-term intervention that would reduce risk– such as the provision of protective devices. Now, these may be regarded by many
people as restrictive, but the alternative is sedating drugs, because there’s no way to stop SIB right now. And once we can protect the individual, then we
have more time to conduct other kinds of assessments. Now, in addition to having a medical
professional conduct assessments, there are several different kinds of assessments that
the typical therapist, even perhaps teacher, might be able to conduct on a regularly routine
basis to document the extent to which risk is occurring as a result of SIB, and we’ve
actually developed several of them. So for instance, here is an example of a rating scale that we published a number of years ago. It’s called the Self-Injury Trauma Scale. And it’s a way for non-professionals to simply observe an individual, to conduct a fully body check, and to actually document the kinds of injuries that are visible on the body, the severity of those injuries, to differentially weight them depending upon whether any injuries are in the location of the head, because those are more severe. And you can come up with a sort of general index of risk based on the number, the location, the type of injury, and so forth. And this might be done quickly on an intake. It might be done prior to treatment. It might be done after treatment has been in effect for a while to sort of document the changes and observed aspects of SIB. Because we as behavior analysts, typically,
when we treat a problem like SIB, we look for changes in terms of reductions and rates. But that’s not necessarily an indicator
of whether or not risk is being reduced. So we like to use these corollary measures. WAYNE: So it sounds like a supplementary
measure of a response product essentially– what damage are you doing to yourself? BRIAN: Yes. And it might be particularly good
for occasional out-patient use when you don’t have access to regular data on the frequency of problem behavior. Now, there’s another way you can actually
get a more fine-grained analysis of severity of injuries. And we’ve sort of worked on this one, too. Many years ago, we tried actually to
figure out how to judge how bad a wound is. And of course, the problem back then was
that you photograph a wound, and the distance from the wound determined size,
and there were a lot of problems. But now we are in the computer age. And so we’ve located some software that
you can download freely from the NIH website. And using that software and a digital
camera, you can get a precise measure on a wound. Now, that might seem sort of esoteric,
but then again if you’re working in an out-patient clinic, you don’t see the individual regularly,
you can take photographs of the wounds and actually document changes over time. For instance, here is a screenshot
of a lesion that we photographed, and we’ve uploaded it to
our software, which is called ImageJ. And all you need to do is to have a ruler
of known length in the photograph, so that you can adjust the resolution based on the ruler. And so we’ve got the wound in the picture,
we’ve got a ruler in the picture, and I’ve basically drawn a circle around a five-centimeter section of the ruler. And we could enter that into the software,
and that automatically adjusts for distance to the wound. You then, as illustrated in this slide,
can simply draw a border around the size of that wound, and that basically is automatically
calibrated by the software, which then yields a measure. So it gives you basically a wound surface
area measure of a wound simply based on a photograph. And what you can do is basically have
parents or teachers who are responsible for implementing treatment programs
send you these data, again, as corollary measures to determine whether or not reductions
that you see in the frequency of behavior are correlated with reductions in
wound size, or risk, or what have you. WAYNE: Do you sometimes
find them to be uncorrelated, Brian? Changes in wound size appears
to be unrelated to changes in behavior, SIB behavior? BRIAN: Well, one that we found,
interestingly, is that when you attempt to correlate wound size with response rate,
that response rate increase immediately translates into noticeable observed differences in wound size. But if SIB were to stop,
then wound reduction is usually delayed, so that the correlation is very good
one way, it’s delayed in the other way. So at any rate, the first thing we do
is to identify risk to see if we can figure out how to document it and then to prescribe
some interim strategy to reduce risk. We then move on to
looking at the function of behavior. As I indicated before, there is a good
bit of evidence to indicate that self-injurious behavior might be maintained by a variety
of different sources of reinforcement. And our field has developed
a number of ways for conducting what’s known as a functional behavioral assessment. A functional behavioral assessment
simply means any formal method for identifying environmental determinants of a problem
behavior, or alternatively stated, sources of reinforcement. And there are three general
methods that have been developed. The first is known as the indirect,
anecdotal, or verbal report measure. It basically consists of checklists
and questionnaires that we use to solicit information from caregivers
about circumstances under which behavior occurs. Now, the strength of these methods
is that they are efficient and simple to use, but of course, the data are highly unreliable. We then have what are known as
descriptive analyses– these involve objective observation of the circumstances under which
behavior occurs out there in the natural environment. And although these are highly objective,
they tend to only inform us what’s happening, but not necessarily what’s causing behavior. And therefore we have the third approach,
known as the functional or the experimental analysis. And it involves exposing individuals
to that general environment but only portions at a time. So we can basically tease out that part of
the environment that’s responsible for behavioral maintenance. So then we have the function of
problem behavior identified, but there are a couple of more things we need
to do before we move on to treatment. The next one is to evaluate
the individual’s adaptive repertoire, because eventually we will want to replace
self-injurious behavior with some alternative behavior. And one thing we’ve learned over
the years is that there are three particular aspects of adaptive behavior
that we need to consider. Now, of course, we could consider
all kinds of adaptive responding, and in general, you would want to do
that for educational purposes. But for the treatment of self-injurious
behavior we found that there are three key types of responses that
are very important to have. The first one is a method to
solicit positive reinforcement from the environment. And if the individual does not have
communication that produces that function, so to speak, we need to establish that. It doesn’t really matter what
the function of the behavior is. If that part of the repertoire is missing,
then self-injury, essentially, could evolve to produce that kind of consequence. The other one is basically
compliance with instructions. And if an individual has very low
levels of compliance, it’s likely that they will have difficulty performing tasks. They will therefore find those tasks
aversive and may engage in problem behavior as a means to escape or avoid. So we look at the individual’s ability
to engage in imitative behavior to follow instructions. And if there are any deficits there,
we know we need to do some strengthening. And the third one is, I guess for
the lack of a better term, a play repertoire. Does the individual have any
responses that will put the person in contact with reinforcing aspects of the environment? And I’m not talking here about social
reinforcement, but simply engaging in leisure behavior. Many clients do not have that type of repertoire. And if they don’t, then chances are they may acquire
an inappropriate or perhaps dangerous self-stimulatory response. And so we look at those kinds of
responses to figure out where deficits are, and we will need to establish them if they’re missing. Then the last part of
the assessment is, of course, motivation. Why would an individual
be motivated to acquire these new responses? And so we use a variety of methods,
which probably are going to be reviewed in another segment, for conducting what’s known
as a systematic preference assessment. We try to identify a series of items,
these will be various types of social interaction, access to edibles or leisure materials
that are highly preferred, and we can use these to establish those alternative responses
that eventually will replace self-injurious behavior. WAYNE: It sounds like
a comprehensive assessment, Brian. What do you do with this information? How do you then turn this into
a comprehensive treatment strategy for SIB? BRIAN: Well, everything is somewhat
keyed off with a functional analysis. We conduct the functional analysis,
which supposedly identifies the source of reinforcement for problem behavior. And then based on that outcome,
we can put together an intervention plan that neutralizes the source of reinforcement
that’s responsible for behavioral maintenance. So for example, I’ve got several slides here
that just lay out that strategy in a very general type of way. Let’s say that we conduct a functional analysis
and find that problem behavior, or SIB in this case, is maintained by social positive reinforcement–
access to attention or tangible items. Well, we know that there are three general
ways that you can reduce behavior with reinforcement. One of them involves eliminating
the antecedent event that serves as what we call an establishing operation
that makes a reinforcer valuable. If the reinforcer is less valuable,
the individual is less motivated to engage in the behavior. The second one is to eliminate the contingency
that maintains behavior, that is extinction. And the third one is
to strengthen an alternative response. So if we apply those three general strategies
to behavior maintained by social positive reinforcement, what would that look like? Well, the establishing operation is usually
going to be depravation from the positive reinforcer. Right? Because the person is
engaging in the behavior to get it. So once we identify the function,
we can identify the establishing operation. We basically deliver reinforcement for free. So we use a procedure that is often
called non-contingent positive reinforcement– increase free access to positive reinforcement,
decrease deprivation, decrease motivation to engage in self-injury. Now, the second strategy– eliminating
the contingency of reinforcement– we’ve also identified by way of the functional analysis. We find that self-injury is
maintained by access to attention. Well, we know the way to extinguish
that behavior is to not attend to occurrences of SIB or approximations thereto. Now, the third general strategy, establishing a replacement response, we know that positive reinforcement is valuable, we know that this behavior occurs because it produces positive reinforcement. And so what we therefore need to do is to establish another response that’s socially acceptable that will produce positive reinforcement. And we already have the reinforcer that we can use to establish that response. It’s basically the attention that’s used to maintain the problem behavior. And so that becomes the focus of our differential reinforcement procedure. And many people call that functional communication training. In this case, the function is positive reinforcement. Now, if behavior is maintained by
social negative reinforcement, interestingly, these same three general strategies
apply, but procedurally they are the opposite. So if problem behavior is maintained
by negative reinforcement, it is not the case that deprivation is the establishing operation,
but rather it is usually the presence of aversive stimulation. Having identified the contingency that
maintains behavior, we can then identify the aversive event that serves as the establishing operation,
and we can modify it in a number of different ways. We might simply give the person
free breaks from work, at least initially, because that’s a very quick
way to reduce problem behavior. That will then buy us some time
such that we can conduct further assessments. Those assessments would be aimed at
identifying what feature of work makes it aversive. So for some individuals it might be
the nature of the task, that is novel tasks are more aversive than maintenance or familiar tasks. So we can continue to present some tasks to
that individual, but they just won’t be as difficult as they used to be. Or it may be the duration of the work session. So at any rate, we could, through
some systematic assessments of curriculum, identify those features of the task that
make it aversive, modify those features, and problem behavior should decrease. We could then combine that with
a strategy known as stimulus fading. That is gradually reintroducing that
part of the environment that occasioned problem behavior very slowly, and the person
may be able to tolerate gradual return to the original situation that produced problem behavior. Now, another procedure has gone by
a particular name, and that is the high probability instructional sequence,
or as we call it, the Hi-p sequence. And this particular procedure is
usually implemented in a characteristic way. It involves first identifying a series
of instructions for which there is a high probability of compliance, and of course,
a corresponding low probability of problem behavior, which is why it’s called a Hi-p sequence. And so we sequence instructional
situations as follows– we start every session with three Hi-p instructions, assuming that
that does not produce problem behavior, we then kind of sneak in a Lo-p instruction. Now, of course, if we got compliance
with the Lo-p instruction, we don’t want to persist. Because that may then occasion
problem behavior, so we go right back to the Hi-p instructions. And so a Hi-p instructional sequence is
implemented by alternating, typically, three Hi-p’s to every one Lo-p throughout a session. There’s one final possibility, and this is sort of
an indirect approach to getting at the establishing operation. The other methods that I’ve described
sort of directly reduce aversiveness of a situation. Occasionally we’ll find that
you can’t change the nature of the work. I mean, it is what it is. You have to take the shower,
you have to perform the math worksheet, whatever. And so there’s no way to directly
reduce the work requirement, but it’s possible that we might make the general
situation more tolerable simply by throwing in free positive reinforcers. And so, yes, you have to work,
but while you’re working you get free access to better positive reinforcers. And that may make the situation
tolerable enough so the person is less likely to engage in escape behavior. And as long as they’re remaining
in that situation, they may actually work, and they’re compliance may increase. So there is a series of things one
might do that all fall under the strategy of eliminating the establishing operation. Now, we then get to the actual
contingency that maintains behavior, in this case it’s escape. Now, extinction remains the operative
method for reducing behavior, but in this case, extinction of escape-maintained
behavior is procedurally the opposite of extinction of behavior maintained by attention. So for instance, we’ve all heard of
procedures known as planned ignoring– time out. Those are all procedures that involve
terminating ongoing events, which might be appropriate as extinction for behavior
maintained by positive reinforcement. Well, if we use those same procedures
for behavior maintained by negative reinforcement, we’re not using extinction,
we’re delivering negative reinforcement. And so the way you extinguish that
particular function of behavior is to not terminate what’s going on– that is you continue
the situation and not allow problem behavior to produce escape. Now, that particular version of
extinction can become very effortful, because you’re attempting to maintain
the ongoing work task, the individual is trying to escape, and their behavior may escalate, and physically
it may become difficult to manage that situation. Now, the third approach is the replacement
behavior, and there are several options there. Occasionally people who engage
in severe problem behavior engage in other minor sorts of behaviors before actually
engaging in the severe problem behavior. For instance, let’s say you are
an instructor trying to get me to work. Well, eventually if it gets bad enough,
I will engage in aggression, or I’ll throw my chair, or something like that, but initially
I won’t do that. I might start basically by cursing, or by shuffling my papers, or by losing
eye contact, or groaning, or things like that. And these responses
we would call precursor responses. And so if an individual engages
in reliable precursor behavior, and you’re observant enough to see that,
then what you might simply do is to give an individual a break from work contingent
upon the occurrence of these precursor behaviors. Now, the reason I list that first
is that doesn’t involve any new teaching. The person already had that response
in their repertoire, you just are selecting it out, and you get to forgo the aggression
or the significant property destruction. Now, the bad aspect of doing that
is that sometimes these precursor behaviors aren’t a whole lot better than
the problem behaviors– the cursing or the throwing things. And there’s another subtle issue–
and that is that these precursor and target behaviors are often tied together because
they have a common history of reinforcement. And if you select that one that is,
let’s say, the minor behavior, then that’s the one you’ll get, but the major one
stays functional in their repertoire. And let’s say you are willing to tolerate
a slightly non-compliant student or one who curses, but that student goes to the next class,
that teacher doesn’t tolerate that. Well, that teacher is going to get beat up. And so a better approach, even though
it takes a little bit longer, is to teach the individual a more socially acceptable escape response. Now, that’s not difficult do, but you would
do it in a way that’s very different than teaching a new attention getting response. So we can pick the same response,
that is, let’s say, raise your arm, and if we deliver lots of attention or edibles for doing that,
we’ve taught the person how to get access to attention or edibles. You can’t do that with an escape response.
The reinforcer is terminating ongoing events. So the way you initially develop
that behavior is you start a work situation. Before problem behavior occurs,
you prompt what you would like to establish as the new escape response,
and you simply walk away. Come back in a few minutes,
restart the work session. Before problem behavior occurs,
you prompt the alternative response and walk away. And it may take several hundred trials,
but eventually, I hope you’ll notice, is that, let’s say, I, the teacher, approach you, and now
you’re engaging in that behavior, I give you a break. Now, that type of behavior is
valuable for everyone to have, because we don’t know when people will encounter aversive stimulation. So although to some it may seem like
we’re simply teaching people how to get out of work, that’s valuable because the next time
they are faced with an aversive event, it would be nice if they had
an appropriate rather than inappropriate way to escape. Now, of course, the final strategy for replacement behavior is to teach some sort of compliance with the task at hand, because that’s the behavior that should be occurring. And the thing about this function of problem behavior that is escape is that although we know that vastly improving positive reinforcement for compliance may increase it, we also know that escape is a valuable reinforcer. So we can combine negative reinforcement and positive reinforcement and make compliance more valuable than problem behavior. So for instance, you could hit your head and you don’t have to work, or you can engage in compliant behavior, that is perform
the task, and you get a break from work. And while you get a break from work,
you get access to these neat positive reinforcers. And so basically that’s the general way
you would formulate strategies for behavior maintained by social negative reinforcement. Now, there’s one more function.
WAYNE: Sure, go for it. BRIAN: And that is behavior
maintained by automatic reinforcement. Now, in this case, the ongoing
social environment is not particularly relevant to the maintenance of behavior,
because it’s maintained because it produces its own reinforcers. That being the case, we would
first ask– what’s the establishing operation? Why is self-injurious behavior valuable? And the answer is probably that
the person is not getting a lot of physiological stimulation. And so the first strategy of eliminating
the establishing operation would involve eliminating general deprivation to sensory stimulation. We would try to make access to sensory
stimulation available as often as possible. And to the extent that that sensory stimulation
is at least as good as, if not better than the stimulation produced by self-injury,
we would see some temporary reductions. Now, that’s not the solution,
but at least that’s a start. Now, then we have reinforcement
and how to limit reinforcement. And the problem here is that the person
is actually producing his or her own reinforcers. And so the types of extinctions that
one would use for behavior maintained by either social positive or social negative
reinforcement are totally irrelevant. They just won’t work. A general strategy known as
sensory extinction has emerged in the literature. It’s a little bit of a trial and error procedure,
but it involves attempting to interrupt the final part of the behavior or rather to attenuate
the stimulation produced by the behavior. So the behavior could occur,
but not its endpoint, or the behavior could occur to its endpoint, but the stimulation is reduced. As in, for instance, putting thickly padded
protective arm devices on the arms of someone who scratches. They can still scratch, but it feels
a little bit different, and to the extent that it’s less reinforcing, again,
behavior may temporarily increase. Now, there’s another group of
interventions that are not technically extinction, but they have been shown
to produce extinction-like effects. And they go under the category
of response effort interventions. So if we can make the behavior
more effortful to exhibit, although if they would exhibit the behavior,
they would still produce the consequence, it may be sufficiently effortful
that eventually they just stop. And a perfect case example that was published
many years ago in a case study by Ron Van Houten, who was working with a woman
who punched herself in the face, and what he simply did was to put
1.5-pound wrist weights on her arms. Now, it wasn’t extinction,
because she could hit herself, still feel the effects, but she would do that a couple of times
and then simply stop because it was too effortful. And the interesting thing about it was
that these arm weights then acquire discriminative properties. So while you’re wearing them you
know that it’s more effortful, and so you stop engaging in the behavior over time. Other examples of response effort interventions
have included things like these arm sleeves that you can fit onto individuals who engage in,
let’s say, forceful punching behavior. And they actually have channels in them
so you can place flexible Plexiglas rods in these channels, and you can actually dial in the amount
of effort required to reach one’s face. So for instance, if the problem behavior
is punching severely, I put several rods in these arm sleeves, and now I can reach my arm, and it’s
a little bit– my face, rather– it’s a little bit effortful to do that. So I can feed and scratch and things
like that, but it’s hard to punch very effortfully. So that would be another example
of response effort interventions. The final solution to this function of
problem behavior is to teach, again, a replacement behavior. But in this case, social consequences
are not particularly relevant. The important thing would be to teach
a response that will put the individual in contact with a variety of sources of sensory stimulation. So in essence you teach the person
new, socially appropriate, self-stimulatory behavior. Now, you may initially need to prompt
and reinforce arbitrarily with, let’s say, edible items– that response just to get it going. You may also need to block
self-injurious behavior for a good bit of time. But the hope is that eventually once
the individual starts engaging in that response a number of times, they will then come
into contact with alternative sources of reinforcement, and now you’ve built
another self-stimulatory response. Well, now that they’re interacting with
the physical environment, it should be easier to build another self-stimulatory response. And then before long, the individual has
what we would consider to be a socially appropriate toy play repertoire,
which is what most people have. WAYNE: That sounds fascinating, Brian.
There’s a whole range of effective behavioral interventions that need to be matched up based on,
it sounded like, the function of the self-injury. BRIAN: Right. WAYNE: Now, one that was notable
in its absence, I didn’t hear you mention anything about the use of punishment.
What is your perspective on that? Is that ever appropriate in this
armamentarium of interventions for self-injury? BRIAN: Well, possibly. Earlier I mentioned
that way back in the beginning when we began dealing with this problem,
the goal was to eliminate it quickly. And the procedure that has the fastest
influence on behavior is punishment. Although some people might argue
that that’s not necessarily the case, if you go look at all the published data,
the fastest way to reduce behavior is by way of punishment. Now, of course, punishment is
an intrusive intervention– many people object to its use. And so we’ve developed this sort of
technology of behavior reduction with reinforcement tied to a functional analysis of behavior. Now, that is not a simple technology. As you’ve just seen, it requires knowing
the function of behavior, having these different strategies, turning these strategies into procedures. But if we do that, then by and large we can
decrease a large proportion of self-injurious behavior through their use. Now, that doesn’t mean
that they are always effective. Occasionally you can’t use extinction
with severe problem behavior, such as you can’t ignore someone who’s bleeding,
or you can’t continue to require someone to work if they’re very large,
or you can’t interfere with the sensory stimulation produced by the response. And so occasionally extinction
is simply impossible to use. Well, then we have difficulties,
because the behaviors will always be reinforced. And under those conditions,
when all of the positive reinforcement-based procedures we have available aren’t effective,
we might consider the use of punishment, again, because it produces relatively rapid effects. And the idea is that we might
use punishment for a short period of time simply to suppress the behavior
long enough for the other components of intervention, namely the reinforcement procedures, to take hold. WAYNE: And I would imagine that
if you do move in that direction you have to be concerned with all kinds of
ethical and/or health issues about the use of the punishing stimuli. BRIAN: Sure. Many punishing
procedures have been sort of documented in the literature, and so it would
be a matter of going to the literature, finding them, paying very careful attention to
the limiting conditions of their use– like, what are the limits
of applying this procedure? And then making sure that
whatever review committees or review boards there are that oversee intervention
plans have an opportunity to review those procedures. WAYNE: That sounds very reasonable.
It sounds like a very effective technology. It has a fair number
of decision points in there. I’m wondering if you might be able
to help us understand how it’s actually applied with the help of a case study
or something of that nature, Brian? BRIAN: Sure. In fact, I have
a case study, and it illustrates self-injurious behavior maintained by
social positive reinforcement that is attention. So as you can see in this
introductory slide, this client was Henry. And he was a very young boy,
just three years old, one of the youngest children we ever treated. He didn’t
have any formal means of communicating, but he generally seemed
to be somewhat socially responsive. And his problem behavior
was forceful head-banging. That is he was banging
his head against the floor and against the walls to the point where he was
at significant risk for doing brain damage. Now, we conducted a functional analysis of his SIB, and these are the results. Now, if someone hasn’t seen a functional analysis graph before, let me just steer you through it. Each data point represents a session of a particular assessment condition. And they’re sequenced from left to right going from first to last. And the measure being portrayed, that is the y-axis, reflects mean responses per minute of SIB across the minutes of a session. And back when we treated Henry, our standard session length was 15 minutes. And I’ve color-coded the data so you can see the different assessment conditions. The red data points illustrate self-injurious behavior during the contingent attention condition. This is a condition in which the therapist does not deliver any attention except as a consequence for SIB. So the antecedent is deprivation, the consequent event is delivery of attention. The blue data points represent the demand condition, which is another typical test condition of a functional analysis. The antecedent event here is the presentation of work trials, and the consequence is the termination of those trials. So it’s the test condition for behavior maintained by negative reinforcement. And the black data points represent the alone condition. That’s a condition in which nothing happens. So we’re ruling out the effects of social reinforcement here unto the extent that behavior maintains, it’s probably being maintained by its own consequences. There is one control condition included, and that’s illustrated by the green data points. And in that condition attention is available for free, so there’s no deprivation from attention. There are no task demands, so that establishing operation is also gone, and there are lots of fun things to do– free access to leisure items. So we would suspect that regardless of the function of problem behavior, you should get low rates of problem behavior in that condition. Well, as you can see from the graph, there is clearly a higher rate of self-injurious behavior in this attention condition. So we would say, Henry’s self-injurious behavior is maintained by attention. Now, how do we turn that into treatment strategies? We implemented his intervention in several phases. In the first phase, we combined two of
these strategies for reducing behavior with reinforcement. We attempted to eliminate the establishing
operation, that is deprivation from attention, by simply providing continuous attention. Attention is available for free. We combine that with extinction, and that is
if you engage in head-banging, then attention goes away. And so it’s exactly the opposite of
the assessment condition of a functional analysis. You get lets of free attention.
It temporarily goes away if you engage in SIB. And the reason we combine those two
is because those two in particular typically produce an immediate large reduction in problem behavior. Now, we could add in that third strategy–
that is teaching the replacement– but that would have required Henry to learn
new behavior to get reinforcement. And by combining the “eliminate the establishing operation”
and “eliminate the reinforcement contingency,” Henry didn’t have to learn any
new behavior, he just stops his old behavior. And so once the self-injurious behavior
decreases, we then come in with the second phase. We can reduce the access to
non-contingent reinforcement, we keep the extinction in effect, and we
attempt to establish an alternative behavior. In Henry’s case it was simply
an arm raise– you just raise your arm and that’s the new replacement. And some authors have particular
biases about the type of replacement behavior that should be selected, like a vocal
response, or a PECS response, or something like that. And we don’t have any particular biases.
Simply we’re looking for a behavior that is easily shaped, and if it occurs, it will be
highly discriminative in the environment. Someone is likely to recognize that behavior. And so we frequently
prompt that throughout a session. When that behavior occurs,
we deliver enthusiastic attention, and temporarily we also deliver edibles. Now, edible reinforcement was
unrelated to why Henry engaged in the head-banging, but we were attempting to make
the arm raise more valuable than the head-bang ever was. And so in a relatively short
amount of time, as I’ll show in the data, Henry acquired the new
replacement attention-getting behavior. Now, at that point we have
an effective intervention that’s totally impractical, because people can’t
do this all day long. And so what we eventually do
is to come up with a maintenance strategy which involves gradually
reducing the amount of reinforcement we deliver for that replacement behavior. So let me show you some results. This graph shows two sets of data. The blue data points represent the rate of self-injurious behavior. The red data points represent unprompted– that is independent occurrences of the replacement behavior. That is this sign “the arm raise.” And as you can see during baseline, Henry’s averaging about six head-bangs per minute. This is like one every 10 seconds. This is an extremely high rate of head-banging behavior, and of course, never raises his arm. In the next condition we combine non-contingent reinforcement and extinction, and you can see SIB drops immediately, precipitously, to the point where by the third session SIB is occurring at zero rate. And we run that out for a little bit, just to make sure that we have a nice reduction in self-injurious behavior. In the next condition labeled as DRA, or differential reinforcement of alternative behavior, we are prompting Henry to engage in the replacement response, we are delivering the attention, we are delivering the edibles. Now, although we’re frequently prompting him throughout the session to engage in a behavior, we are only counting it in the data if it’s unprompted. So as you can see in the graph, during the first couple of sessions the behavior really is not occurring. Well, it’s actually occurring but not independently. But after about a dozen sessions, what you notice is that the rate of independent arm raising has reached the same rate that the original SIBs occur at during baseline. And so at that point I said we had a very effective intervention, totally impractical. So finally, in the last condition, what we simply do is to place the replacement for behavior on an intermittent schedule of reinforcement, so that we reinforce it less often. Now, on the slide you’ll notice that we were using interval schedules of reinforcement. And that could lead to a very long discussion about maintenance programs, but let me just give you the sort of CliffsNotes version. In typical behavioral acquisition,
let’s say we’re teaching someone new adaptive behavior, everyone knows the value of
the intensive prompting and the shaping and use of continuous schedules of reinforcement,
and we do that because otherwise people don’t learn. Well, once they have acquired
the behavior, we don’t need to deliver reinforcement all the time,
in fact, it’s very impractical. The most common way to thin out
continuous schedules of reinforcement during maintenance is to increase the ratio requirement. So that originally it would be
every behavior gets a reinforcer, which is basically a fixed ratio one schedule. So we might then go, OK,
now let’s put that on an intermittent schedule. We’ll go to fixed ratio two–
every other behavior gets a reinforcer. Or a fixed ratio of five–
every fifth behavior gets a reinforcer, until we get out to some terminal schedule. Now, why do people
use these ratio schedules? A couple of reasons–
they’re easy to use, and they have a characteristic effect on behavior.
They produce high rates of behavior. And so for relatively few reinforcers,
we’re maintaining higher rates of behavior. But of course, the only way to get
the reinforcer is to engage in that behavior that we’ve taught the individual. Now, we can encounter a problem
occasionally when we stretch that ratio too high. We encounter a situation
that’s called ratio strain, where– sort of using lay terms–
the reinforcer has gotten too expensive. We are requiring too many
responses per a reinforcer, that person stops behaving, we recognize that as a problem,
and we have to readjust that schedule. Now, that’s typical acquisition. When we replace problem behavior
with an alternative behavior, we also have an acquisition situation,
but the difference here is that the person already has a behavior that
is more well established in their repertoire to produce that reinforcer. So you’re attempting to teach them
the new response, but they already have an old response in their repertoire. We shape up the new response.
We put in a ratio schedule of reinforcement. We make the reinforcer
more and more expensive. The rate of the new response
goes up, the person hits ratio strain. I would submit much faster
than under typical acquisition conditions. Why? Because the person can
switch back to an old behavior. And so this seems counter-intuitive,
but I think it’s an important part of maintenance for severe problem behavior,
including self-injury, and that is we don’t want a high rate of the replacement behavior. Because then we will be able to
reinforce a larger proportion of them, and the behavior is less likely
to then be replaced by the problem behavior, which is why we use interval schedules. So that was not quite the CliffsNotes
version, but it was, I think, short enough. And so what we do is use
interval schedules in which the reinforcer is available periodically–
after 30 seconds, after a minute, after however long. But whenever that interval is up,
only one behavior is required, and so the reinforcer never becomes more expensive. And what you have there is
a rate of response that simply starts to decrease. And so by the end of treatment,
what we have is a zero rate of self-injurious behavior– Why? Because it’s being extinguished–
and a low rate of the replacement behavior. And so as long as Henry’s caretakers
can periodically deliver reinforcement for this arm raise and not deliver reinforcement for
the head-bang, he should be OK. WAYNE: That sounds pretty darn effective.
Now, what about the course of treatment, Brian? Is that a pretty standard course
of treatment in terms of how quickly he responds and what you do for maintenance? BRIAN: Well, that’s a good question. Because the typical way that intervention
is implemented is to come up with the plan, and then the plan goes into effect
everywhere, all day, across all teachers and therapists. And there’s a good reason why
that’s a common way to intervene. Because if it’s effective, life changed,
and life is now good because problem behavior goes away. But in a way, that model
of intervention requires success. Because if you are not successful,
there are several problems that you might need to solve. The first one is when we implement
interventions all day long by everybody, necessarily we have to come up
with a practical intervention, which means usually a maintenance schedule
rather than an acquisition schedule. And so if we have a failure,
it may be the case that we didn’t select the wrong procedure,
but we simply implemented it in such a watered down way that it was ineffective. Now, if it’s being implemented all
day long by everybody, you have a higher likelihood that people are going to–
what? Do it incorrectly. And the question becomes–
how effective does an intervention have to be in order to be therapeutic? In other words, what about 90%
of the time it’s being implemented correctly? Well, most of us would say
that would probably be pretty effective. What about 60%?
What about 50%? And if everyone is doing
the thing all day long, then chances are you can’t monitor everyone very closely. And so another possibility is,
again, not that the procedure was incorrect, but it was just not being done correctly. And of course, the third possibility
is you have the wrong procedure. And if you implement interventions
using the typical model, although, it’s seemingly efficient to start with, if you encounter
a problem it’s almost impossible to figure out what the problem was,
because there are at least three different problems. And so our preferred mode
of intervention is as follows– and that is we have figured out
how to temporarily reduce risk, and that’s in effect all day long. And several times throughout
the day we will bring that person into a session and implement the intervention
at maximum intensity, so we know that we couldn’t have done it
any more intensively than it was done. We only have one or two people
doing it, so we could monitor them and ensure they’re doing it at a high accuracy. And so very quickly we can
figure out if it’s that third problem– namely the procedure was ineffective. And if it was that third problem,
we didn’t go to the effort of training everyone to do it, so we could just train that
one therapist to change things, and we can keep on cycling through
interventions very quickly until we get the right one. And then at that point we start
to look for the maintenance and a generalization program. WAYNE: That sounds like it
is a perfectly good strategy. I wonder if implementing
the intervention across lots of people and lots of settings, which I know
you don’t always do, but if that adds to the possibility a satiation
problem with the reinforcer. Does that ever happen at all, Brian? BRIAN: That may, but if it does,
then it might be OK. So for instance, let’s say I engage
in self-injurious behavior to get attention. Now, I get a lot of attention,
and I get a sufficient amount of attention so that now I’m satiated to attention. Well, then you might not be able to
use attention to reinforce any particular behavior, but I’m also sufficiently unmotivated so that
I won’t be engaging in much attention-getting behavior. And usually satiation with reinforcement
is a more significant problem when we are using arbitrary reinforcers to compete with
the reinforcers that are maintaining problem behavior. Let’s use Henry as an example.
He banged his head to get attention. Well, if we didn’t do a functional analysis
and wanted to use reinforcement, we might say, OK, we’ll just deliver edibles
for Henry for not engaging in self-injury. And if the edibles, at least temporarily,
were more valuable than the attention, then he might refrain from
SIB to get the edibles. But as he has consumed
more and more edibles, edibles will become less valuable, and that’s
when attention will become more valuable. And so at some point when
we use these arbitrary reinforcers to compete with the reinforcers that maintain
problem behavior, that’s when satiation can become a problem. Initially the arbitrary reinforcer is
more valuable, but with prolonged use it loses its value. WAYNE: What you’ve talked about for
the most part, Brian, is really focused on treatment, and very effective treatment I should mention. Does any of this have implications
for the prevention of the emergence of self-injury? BRIAN: I think so and not
just for prevention of self-injury but for most problem behaviors. Again, way back in the early
development of our field, if someone is referred with a problem behavior, we’ll fix it. And of course, if you don’t have
a problem behavior, then you’re not of interest to us, because you don’t need our help. And so the point at which
we became involved with an individual was the point at which
the problem behavior became severe enough to do something about it. And so as a result we simply
didn’t focus very much on prevention. And of course, at that time
we didn’t really know much about functions of behavior, so we really weren’t
too clear about the origins of behavior, and we hadn’t really
developed any prevention strategies as a result. Well, now that we’ve identified
environmental circumstances that maintain behavior, instead of waiting until we have
the severe head-banger or the horribly aggressive client referred for treatment,
of course, we have to keep working with them, but instead of generally waiting
for problem behaviors to emerge, we can begin to look at the environments of
young children who are at risk for the development of problem behavior
but who don’t yet show it. And especially in early
intervention programs we can start to look at their environments very carefully. And when we begin to see
certain things happening, like deprivation from attention, failing to produce
a socially acceptable response to get attention, or aversive stimulation–
a student or a child many not tolerate that very well. When we begin to see these
sorts of environmental situations arise, we can act quickly to actually
use those occasions as a warning that we have to teach
these alternative adaptive responses before they’re actually needed. And so when faced with
deprivation, when faced with aversive stimulation, the individual already
has these responses in their repertoire, and they may become less
sensitive to the kinds of environmental arrangements that produce problem behavior. And I think that’s eventually
where our field wants to go. WAYNE: Yeah. The idea of early
intervention– that takes it even further towards the extreme of early, doesn’t it? BRIAN: Yes, it does.
WAYNE: Absolutely. Brian, is there anything else you
would like to offer in terms of advice for practitioners in terms of assessment
and treatment of self-injurious behavior? BRIAN: One of the things that
people often ask me or becomes apparent– when they make referrals, or just,
let’s say, send me information about their clients, is that often the situation has
become so bad, by the time people seek outside advice, that a clear emergency is occurring. And some significant, perhaps permanent,
injury is likely to happen quickly. And so if there’s anything that
I might recommend is that they pay attention to the early emergence
of self-injurious behavior and not simply dismiss it
as something that’s going to go away. Because if anything it’s likely
to intensify, because it becomes dramatic enough such the environment has
to respond to it and will maintain it. And so I would begin very quickly
when I see the emergence of anything that looks like it might be
self-injurious to start to do the assessment sequence and to start to establish
the replacement alternative behaviors. WAYNE: That sounds like
a great strategy actually. And just out of curiosity related
to that, do you see self-stimulatory behavior and self-injury as being
somewhat on the same continuum? Or do you see them as being
dramatically separate, distinguishable categories of behavior, Brian? BRIAN: That’s actually
an interesting question. There was a theory that was
proposed a number of years ago that self-injurious behavior
that’s self-stimulatory in nature always starts as
self-stimulatory behavior. And so there was a progression
of non-injurious, self-stimulatory behavior to eventually injurious. Now, there was very little
evidence to support that theory, although it kind of makes
sense if you think about it. I engage in mild behavior
that produces sensory consequences, and over time I require
more sensory consequences so the behavior may evolve to be self-injurious.
We’re not really sure if that occurs. Because there are a lot of people,
many more people, who engage in self-stimulatory behavior. And they do that for long periods of time,
over years, and they never become self-injurious. A much smaller subset of people
engage in self-injurious behavior. And so if it were the case that
the appearance of self-stimulatory behavior was predictive of a development
of self-injurious behavior, we should see generally about equal prevalences–
and we don’t, they’re much different. WAYNE: OK. Interesting.
Thanks, Brian. Could you give us a real quick
wrap-up and synopsis of your recommendations for practitioners in terms
of the management and assessment of self-injury? BRIAN: Sure. Again, I think the first thing
is assessment of risk and prevention of harm. So that is your first responsibility as a practitioner. And then once you’ve done that,
you have bought time to do a very careful job of assessment– the function
of behavior, adaptive repertoire of reinforcers. And so now you’re ready to intervene. And the functional analysis will,
in a sense, steer you toward certain intervention strategies. WAYNE: Great. Well, fantastic.
Well, Brian, thank you so very much for sharing your research and clinical
and scientific experience with self-injury. With some of these strategies,
assessment and treatment strategies, we can greatly improve the clinical
outcome for people that are afflicted with self-injurious behavior problems.
Thank you. BRIAN: Well, you’re welcome, Wayne.
I’m glad to do that. BRIAN: During the interview,
the case study presented on assessment and treatment of self-injurious behavior was Henry. If you recall, Henry was
the three-year-old boy who engaged in head-banging behavior
that was maintained by attention. And in this simulation, we will
sort of recreate part of Henry’s assessment, that is his functional analysis,
and then his treatment conditions. Now, how do we determine that Henry’s
self-injurious behavior was maintained by attention? We conducted what
is known as a functional analysis, which contains several
test conditions which examine the influence of various contingencies
on problem behavior and also a control condition. Now, the two key conditions
for Henry turned out to be the play condition, in which access to attention
is delivered freely, that is Henry does not need to engage in self-injurious
behavior to get attention, and then the attention condition,
which I will describe next. Now, Travis Jones is playing
the role of Henry. Jennifer Haddock is playing
the role of the therapist. And so let’s see what unfolds
during the playing condition. Henry has free access
to leisure items, free access throughout the session to attention,
no consequences are delivered for the target behavior, in this case, Henry’s
head-hitting behavior. JENNIFER: Henry, I really like
how you’re drawing and playing so nicely. You write your name really well. That’s a pretty cool puzzle we have here, too. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] BRIAN: Now, Henry engaged
in a problem behavior that is property destruction, but that’s not the focus of the assessment. And so the therapist
simply does nothing as a consequence. JENNIFER: That’s really good
how you wrote your name there, Henry. I also have this puzzle
if you want to play with it. That’s really good. Nice job. BRIAN: As you can see,
the therapist simply delivers attention freely throughout the session. JENNIFER: It’s a really cool day outside, huh?
I bet you’re going to go play outside when you get home. I think this is
a “Dragon Tales” puzzle. I like “Dragon Tales.” BRIAN: When he engages
in self-injurious behavior, the therapist does nothing in terms of a reaction. JENNIFER: That’s a cute dragon. Oh, there’s your puzzle piece. Do you want me to play you a song? [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] Nice. It’s a really pretty day outside.
You could go swimming or skateboarding after this. It’s going to be so much fun. BRIAN: Now, problem behavior
may occur occasionally during the session. But if no consequences are
delivered following its occurrence, over successive sessions
we should expect that it would decrease to a near zero rate. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] JENNIFER: I like that keyboard.
It’s pretty cool. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] You’re such a good musician. I really like how you’re drawing there.
You’re writing your name lots of times so neat. Henry you can sit there and play,
and I have to do some work. TRAVIS: Play with me. Play with me, please. BRIAN: Now, Henry has engaged
in a socially appropriate response that is a request to play. But we’re not attempting to
identify the function of that behavior, so the therapist really
does not deliver any consequences for it nor does she deliver any
consequences for any other problem behaviors except for the target.
For example, property destruction also will not produce attention. JENNIFER: Oh, Henry, I don’t like it
when you hit yourself. Henry, I’m trying to read.
Don’t hit yourself, please. Henry, are you OK?
That sounds like it hurt. TRAVIS: Play with me.
Please play with me. JENNIFER: Are you OK?
You’re going to leave a mark. Henry, I really don’t like it
when you hit yourself. TRAVIS: Look at the triangles I made. JENNIFER: Oh, Henry, how’s your ear?
It’s looking a little red there. Don’t hit yourself so hard, buddy.
You’re going to give yourself a headache. TRAVIS: See? Look, a triangle. JENNIFER: Henry, I really don’t
like it when you hurt yourself. No, Henry. Don’t hit yourself anymore. BRIAN: Now, once we had determined
that Henry’s self-injurious behavior was maintained by attention, we developed a series
of interventions aimed at attention-maintained SIB. And the three general components
of treatment were, first, non-contingent reinforcement, that is the non-contingent
availability of attention, extinction for the occurrence of SIB.
If SIB occurred, the therapist briefly turned away. And then eventually differential
reinforcement of alternative behavior, sometimes called functional
communication training, in which the therapist actually attempts to establish
a socially appropriate attention-getting response. So in this first simulation we’ll see
the implementation of non-contingent reinforcement and extinction,
that is attention freely available except when self-injurious behavior occurs. JENNIFER: Are we going to play
a matching game? So you turn them over like that. Yeah.
And then you turn over another one. Good. You didn’t get a match,
so I’m going to try. Oh, no match. Look at that rabbit.
He’s jumping rope. Oh, he’s making s’mores.
Those look delicious. Look, I found a match,
so I’m going to put it over here. And when you find a match–
you have a match. Nice job. BRIAN: As you see, attention is
freely available, but when problem behavior occurs extinction is put into effect. JENNIFER: Did you find any matches?
Let’s see– oh, he’s carrying lettuce. He looks so tired.
Yeah, those rabbits match. Nice job. Look at all those cards you turned over.
You have Tigger and Owl and Winnie-the-Pooh. Pooh’s getting into some trouble there.
He’s making a mess. And then there’s Eeyore.
He’s planting a flower. BRIAN: Now, in this simulation
self-injurious behavior is occurring to demonstrate how extinction would be used. However, during typical application,
one would expect that over a series of sessions self-injurious behavior would
eventually decrease to a near zero rate. JENNIFER: You need another
match of Owl flying a kite. I like to fly kites, do you?
I bet you do. BRIAN: Now, after the combination
of non-contingent reinforcement and extinction results in a low rate of
the self-injurious behavior, we enter the next phase of treatment,
during which the therapist attempts to establish a more socially appropriate
attention-getting response. Now, frequently throughout the session
the therapist will prompt the pre-selected target behavior, in Henry’s case
recall that it was an arm raise. She will then deliver enthusiastic
praise and initially also deliver an edible. Now, edible reinforcement
really didn’t have anything to do with the occurrence of
self-injurious behavior, but we used it with Henry to initially make
the arm raise, the replacement behavior, more valuable than
the former behavior, the head-banging. JENNIFER: Oh, nice job
raising your hand to get my attention. Have a chip.
They’re delicious. How’s it going, bud? Hey, Henry. Good job
raising your hand. Have a chip if you want. I like how you’re making
all those matches. Those are cool. BRIAN: When Henry does
engage in the self-injurious behavior, the therapist explicitly
ignores that response, so it’s being placed on extinction. JENNIFER: Nice job, Henry.
I like how you raised your hand. Look at all those Piglets
you have over there. Those are cool. BRIAN: And so as the session
continues, the therapist will be frequently prompting the replacement
behavior, delivering reinforcement, or terminating all interaction
following self-injurious behavior. JENNIFER: Great job
raising your hand, Henry. Here’s a chip if you want.
Look at all of those matches you’ve made. Are you having a good time?
This looks like a cool game. BRIAN: Now, once Henry
begins to initiate independent arm raises, the therapist will then decrease
the frequency of prompting, will prompt as necessary and deliver reinforcement,
but will also deliver reinforcement following every independent occurrence of the arm raise. JENNIFER: Great job raising
your hand, Henry. Here’s a chip. You’re still having fun
playing this game, huh? Hey, nice job raising
your hand, buddy. You can have a chip if you want.
Those are so good. They’re from Jimmy John’s. My favorite. Hey, good job raising your hand.
That was awesome. Have a chip if you want. Nice job raising
your hand, Henry. Here’s a chip. This is a fun matching game, huh? Hey, nice job, bud.
Have a chip. I really like how you’re
raising your hand all by yourself, buddy. You’re doing such a good job
matching all of these things, too. Hey, awesome job raising
your hand, my friend. Have a chip. BRIAN: And as sessions continued
during Henry’s treatment, as you saw from the data, the frequency of self-injurious
behavior remained low, eventually going to zero, and the frequency of independent
arm raises continued to increase. JENNIFER: Nice job raising
your hand. You can have a chip if you want. That silly Eeyore.
He’s a funny one. BRIAN: This sequence will
illustrate the assessment and treatment of self-injurious behavior
maintained by escape from task demands. Jennifer Haddock is playing
the role of the student/client who is engaging in self-injurious behavior
consisting of hitting her head. And Travis Jones will
play the role of the therapist. Now, first, how do we
identify that self-injurious behavior is maintained by escape? Well, again we conduct
an assessment known as a functional analysis. And the two important conditions
in this assessment are, first of all, the play condition. In the play condition, the individual
has free access to leisure items, no task demands are presented, and no consequences are
delivered following the occurrence of self-injurious behavior. TRAVIS: Wow. I like your star.
Nice work, Jennifer. Keep it up.
Look at you. Those are some great stars. This puzzle is pretty
fun, too, over here. JENNIFER: She lost an eye. TRAVIS: Yeah, she did
lose an eye. Nice job. We’ve got some tape
there to fix her up. JENNIFER: Thanks. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] TRAVIS: Wow. This music
over here is pretty fun. BRIAN: Occasionally occurrences
of self-injurious behavior may be observed in this condition, but as you can see,
they produce no consequences from the therapist. JENNIFER: That’s a cool dinosaur. TRAVIS: Yes. It is a cool dinosaur. Wow. This is going to be
such a pretty scene when we’re done with it. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] TRAVIS: Wow. Great music, Jennifer.
You are quite musical. Yeah. Nice job filling
in that piece of the puzzle. Look at you.
It’s all done. Great work. [TOY PLAYING MUSIC] That’s some beautiful
music you’re playing there. Oh, wow. Look at that.
Putting the stuff on the puzzle. That’s nice. BRIAN: The second important
condition of this assessment is what’s known as the demand condition.
And the demand condition is the test condition for problem behavior maintained by
negative reinforcement, typically escape from task demands. Now, in that condition,
the therapist delivers instructions and/or prompts to do work of various
types throughout the session. And the therapist will continue
to go through that sequence of instruction, prompting, and if the individual
engages in compliance, will deliver praise. However, if at any point in time
during the sequence Jennifer, the client, engages in self-injurious behavior,
the therapist terminates that trial. Now, it appears to look like
a time-out, but in fact, it is escape from task demands contingent
upon self-injurious behavior, which equals negative reinforcement. TRAVIS: Put the pencil in the bin. Good work. Put another pencil in the bin. Put the pencil in
the bin like me. You do it. Put the pencil in the bin like this.
That’s how you put the pencil in the bin. BRIAN: Now, as long as
self-injurious behavior does not occur, the therapist continues
to go through the instructional sequence. TRAVIS: Hand me the red chip. Good job. Hand me the black chip. You don’t have to. BRIAN: When self-injurious
behavior occurs, the task is terminated. Touch the pink card. Touch the pink card like me.
You do it. Touch the pink card like this. You don’t have to. Hand me the black–
you don’t have to. Put the pencil in the bin. Good work. Touch the– you don’t have to. Hand me the red chip. You don’t have to. Touch the white card–
you don’t have to. BRIAN: Once we have determined
that self-injurious behavior is maintained by escape from task demands,
we develop an intervention plan aimed at differential reinforcement of
an alternative, that is socially appropriate escape response, and in this
particular case we have selected touching a break card, which is a very
easy response to shape up. Now, the therapist will initially
begin an instructional trial, and before problem behavior occurs,
will prompt that break response and deliver a break. Now, the other component
of intervention is extinction. That is if at any point in time
during the sequence Jennifer would engage in self-injurious behavior,
the therapist does not terminate the trial, rather he prompts her
to complete the task. TRAVIS: You don’t have to. BRIAN: Now, as you can see,
he put out the materials, but he didn’t even deliver an instruction before she had
the opportunity to engage in self-injurious behavior. He prompted the response,
followed it with escape from the task demand. TRAVIS: Break time. Touch the white card. Break time. Touch the yellow card. Touch the yellow card like me.
You do it. Touch the yellow card like this.
That’s touch the yellow card. Touch the white card. Break time. BRIAN: Now, on those two trials,
first you observed that Jennifer engaged in self-injurious behavior,
and that did not terminate the instructional sequence. On the subsequent trial, the therapist
prompted the alternative response and allowed escape. TRAVIS: Put the pencil in the bin. Put the pencil in
the bin like me. You do it. Put the pencil in the bin like this.
That’s put the pencil in the bin. Hand me the black chip. Like this. You do it. Hand me the black chip like that.
That’s hand me the black chip. Hand me the red chip. Hand me the red chip like this.
You do it. Hand me the red chip like that.
That’s hand me the red chip. Hand me the black chip. Good work. Nice job. Put the pencil in the bin. Break time. Hand me the red chip. Hand me the red chip like this.
You do it. Break time. Put the pencil in the bucket. Break time. Touch the white card. Break time. Touch the red token. Like me. You do it. Touch the red token like that. Touch the black token. Break time. Put the pencil in the bin. Put the pencil in
the bin like me. You do it. Put the pencil in the bin like this. BRIAN: Now, as sessions progress,
Jennifer learns that an effective way to get a break is to touch the break card,
and so eventually she begins to do that independently. The therapist will continue
to initiate learning trials. If Jennifer does not engage in
self-injurious behavior, he will continue those learning trials. If she engages in self-injurious behavior,
he’ll still continue the learning trials. If, however, she independently
touches the break card, she then gets a break. TRAVIS: Hand me the black token. Hand me the black token like this.
You do it. Hand me the black token like that. Put the pencil in the bin. Put the pencil in the bin like me.
You do it. Break time. Hand me the red token. Hand me the red token like this.
You do it. Good job. Touch the pink card. Touch the pink card like me.
You do it. Touch the pink card like this.
That’s touch the pink card. Put the pencil in the bucket. Put the pencil in the bin like me.
You do it. Put the pencil in the bin like this.
That’s put the pencil in the bin. Break time. Put both pencils in the bin. Nice work. Touch the yellow card. Like me. You do it. Touch the yellow card like this. Hand me the black chip. Break time. BRIAN: So as you can see,
during this treatment session there are three different sorts of
consequences being delivered. If compliance occurs,
praise is delivered. If problem behavior that is
self-injurious behavior occurs, the therapist simply continues the prompting
sequence, not allowing escape. And if the new escape
response occurs, that is touching the break card, Jennifer gets a break. TRAVIS: Hand me the red chip. Good work. Touch pink. Break time. Put all three pencils in the bin. Put all three pencils in
the bin like me. You do it. Put all three pencils
in the bin like that. Hand me the black chip. Break time. [MUSIC PLAYING] CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY
TESSA M. ZIEBARTH, CLOUDSPEAK LANGUAGES LLC

What If a Venomous Snake Bites You? – Dear Blocko #8

What If a Venomous Snake Bites You? – Dear Blocko #8


Hey there! Welcome to Life Noggin! Yee Haw! It’s a western baby! Horses are falling from the sky! Sorry for that intro. Welcome to another episode of Dear Blocko! This is the show where I answer your questions
about your world, and my world! Let’s get started with the first question Star Shine Asks
Dear Blocko, What happens when a snake bites you? A snake bite? Ouch! I hope you’re not asking from personal experience. That’s because a snakebite can be pretty
dangerous, especially if you’re talking about one from a venomous snake. Any snake that bites you should be treated
as though it’s venomous and you should get help immediately. Venomous snakes can choose whether or not
to actually release their venom, but if they do, those fangs of theirs are going to release
different toxins into your body that have varying effects depending on what type of
snake bit you. Generally, these toxins can lead to things
like local tissue damage or internal bleeding, and can affect your nervous system, or directly
go after your heart. Paralysis and even death can happen in the
worst cases. The main thing about treating a snakebite
is to administer the right antivenom as soon as possible. Antivenoms can prevent or even reverse most
of the harmful effects of a snakebite, so they’re super important! Tito Rodriguez asks
#DearBlocko why do you laugh and have a funny feeling when your tickled? Well, it looks like people laugh when they’re
being tickled as more of a reflex-like behavior than more voluntary laughter, like say, when
you laugh at a good joke. “Tickling laughter”, as we’ll call it,
is actually an early form of social communication and vocalization in humans, and other primates
too. So, it’s not that you necessarily find being
tickled funny — in fact, many people don’t like to be tickled at all yet still can’t
help laughing. Recent research has also found that while
tickling laughter and voluntary laughter have some similar brain activity going on, one
thing that sets tickling laughter apart is that it’s more associated with your hypothalamus,
and as such, your flight-or-fight response. And now it’s time for questions about me
or my world! the real lazy bones asks
Dear Blocko what are those ”glitch” monsters? I mentioned the Corrupted Blocky Beings in
a previous Dear Blocko. My animator informed me he made a bunch of
Blocky beings way back in 1997. That’s like a thousand years ago? Right? He wanted to experiment with different looks,
and create a whole world of characters, but one character got corrupted and glitched out. It started to infect other beings in the first
town my animator made, and it was all down hill from there! Maybe we can figure out a way to turn them
back to normal. I’ll have to get back to you. Yusuf asks
Dear Blocko, have you and your animator had any problems or arguments? We do argue here and there. Animator sometimes is so indecisive! I get annoyed when things change too fast. As i’m walking he might change the trees,
oop i guess he didn’t like the sky that color, oh, and now i’m floating. I’m kinda like my Animators crash test dummy. Except I am no dummy! Uh, hold on guys. My animator want me to test out this new machine. One second. What exactly does this thing do again? Animator? Animator? WAH!! So, do you have any questions about your world
or my world? Let me know in the comment section below,
and make sure you use the hashtag Dear Blocko, so i can find it. Wanna watch more Dear Blocko? Check out the previous episode we did! Dear Blocko, could popping pimples kill you? I’m afraid to pop. I feel you amber. My adolescent years were the worst, but pimples
are actually pretty common, and usually aren’t that much of a concern. As always, my name is blocko , this has been
life noggin, don’t forget to keep on thinking!