[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-7908
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Independent Living + Self-Care + Vocational
Date range: Sessions 1–9 across 18 days (2026-06-16 to 2026-07-04)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. brushing teeth independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
2. dressing (pants, shirt) (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. managing a budget (Independent Living)
   Method: Task Analysis
4. clocking in at start of shift (Vocational)
   Method: Task Analysis

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-06-16 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 11/15 correct (74%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×8
  dressing (pants, shirt): 10/13 correct (79%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  managing a budget: 9/11 correct (81%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×6
  clocking in at start of shift: 12/15 correct (82%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×5, I×8

Session 2 — 2026-06-18 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 8/11 correct (75%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×7
  dressing (pants, shirt): 8/10 correct (79%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×6
  managing a budget: 10/12 correct (82%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  clocking in at start of shift: 9/11 correct (86%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×0, I×7

Session 3 — 2026-06-20 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 11/15 correct (71%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×5, G×2, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/8 correct (75%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  managing a budget: 11/13 correct (81%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×11
  clocking in at start of shift: 13/15 correct (86%); latency 1.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×5, I×4

Session 4 — 2026-06-22 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 3/9 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×0, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/9 correct (44%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  managing a budget: 7/13 correct (55%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×8
  clocking in at start of shift: 6/15 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×4, I×3

Session 5 — 2026-06-24 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 3/8 correct (34%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/15 correct (41%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×10
  managing a budget: 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  clocking in at start of shift: 6/15 correct (41%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×5, PP×3, G×1, I×6

Session 6 — 2026-06-26 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 5/12 correct (38%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  dressing (pants, shirt): 4/8 correct (45%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×7
  managing a budget: 8/14 correct (58%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×3, I×3
  clocking in at start of shift: 5/12 correct (43%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×1

Session 7 — 2026-06-28 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (47%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/11 correct (48%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  managing a budget: 7/14 correct (53%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×10
  clocking in at start of shift: 6/13 correct (48%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×9

Session 8 — 2026-06-30 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 7/13 correct (57%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×11
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/11 correct (59%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×6
  managing a budget: 5/9 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  clocking in at start of shift: 8/14 correct (56%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×7

Session 9 — 2026-07-02 — 52 min — 1 observer
  brushing teeth independently: 8/12 correct (63%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×10
  dressing (pants, shirt): 9/15 correct (62%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×10
  managing a budget: 9/14 correct (61%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×12
  clocking in at start of shift: 7/12 correct (62%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×4, I×6

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Playing with non-task materials
- Leaving seat without permission
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Motivating-operation shift**: mid-log dip in responding followed by recovery suggests reinforcer-value change.
- Possible satiation with current reinforcer; preference reassessment indicated.

## Pattern Classification
motivating_operation_shift

A mid-log dip followed by recovery maps onto a motivating-operation change rather than a skill issue.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Conduct preference assessment to identify a currently-valued reinforcer.
- Program MO-establishing operations (deprivation for target reinforcer) before teaching sessions.
- Rotate reinforcers to prevent satiation.

### Consequence strategies
- Adjust reinforcement density to match current MO level.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 9 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 9 sessions: 54.7%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 74%, last session: 63%).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
Curriculum: Reading L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Approaching mastery

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
- Curriculum: Reading L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Approaching mastery

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What letter is this?"
Variations: "Read this letter"; "What does this say?"
Presentation: Present the letter flashcard.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
Current prompt level: At the approaching mastery stage, deliver gestural or positional prompts; fade toward independence.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: C, F, D
Distractor stimuli: I, B
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
"No, watch me" -> model -> re-present SD -> differential reinforcement for correct response.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy across 2 consecutive sessions with at least 10 trials each.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Interpret the following behavioral session log. Provide clinical concerns, pattern classification, behavior function hypothesis (if applicable), programming recommendations (antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis), escalation level, confidence, and data-supported rationale.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-8319
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Independent Living + Mand + Self-Care + Tolerating Denied Access + Vocational
Date range: Sessions 1–9 across 18 days (2026-08-19 to 2026-09-06)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. requesting a break during extended tasks (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. scheduling medical appointments (Independent Living)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. brushing teeth independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
4. wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT
5. clocking in at start of shift (Vocational)
   Method: Task Analysis

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-08-19 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 7/10 correct (70%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×4
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/8 correct (45%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (47%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 10/15 correct (69%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×5, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  clocking in at start of shift: 4/8 correct (50%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×4

Session 2 — 2026-08-21 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×2
  scheduling medical appointments: 5/10 correct (55%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  brushing teeth independently: 5/12 correct (46%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×9
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (66%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×2
  clocking in at start of shift: 6/12 correct (48%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×2, I×3

Session 3 — 2026-08-23 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 10/15 correct (65%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×4, I×5
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/8 correct (49%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  brushing teeth independently: 5/11 correct (44%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×6
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/12 correct (65%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×4, I×2
  clocking in at start of shift: 4/9 correct (46%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6

Session 4 — 2026-08-25 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 8/12 correct (66%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×4, I×6
  scheduling medical appointments: 6/14 correct (42%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×12
  brushing teeth independently: 7/13 correct (51%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×4, I×6
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/15 correct (56%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  clocking in at start of shift: 5/10 correct (50%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×1, I×5

Session 5 — 2026-08-27 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 5/8 correct (66%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  scheduling medical appointments: 5/12 correct (44%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×2, I×5
  brushing teeth independently: 7/14 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×1, I×9
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (64%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  clocking in at start of shift: 4/8 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5

Session 6 — 2026-08-29 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 5/8 correct (62%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/8 correct (52%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×7
  brushing teeth independently: 4/10 correct (43%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×9
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/13 correct (65%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×8
  clocking in at start of shift: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×5

Session 7 — 2026-08-31 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 7/9 correct (73%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/9 correct (40%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×4
  brushing teeth independently: 4/9 correct (42%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×6
  clocking in at start of shift: 6/15 correct (42%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×0, I×10

Session 8 — 2026-09-02 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/12 correct (73%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×10
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/8 correct (53%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×4
  brushing teeth independently: 4/10 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×3
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 8/14 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×3, I×7
  clocking in at start of shift: 7/15 correct (43%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×4, I×4

Session 9 — 2026-09-04 — 43 min — 1 observer
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/14 correct (66%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×7
  scheduling medical appointments: 4/11 correct (38%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×11
  brushing teeth independently: 6/14 correct (44%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×9
  wait calmly when a preferred activity is denied: 7/10 correct (67%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  clocking in at start of shift: 5/13 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×4, G×2, I×3

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Echolalic responding (repeating SD rather than answering)
- Stereotypic behavior during inter-trial intervals

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Plateau**: accuracy has remained near 68% for 9 sessions without meaningful improvement.
- Performance is below mastery criteria; current teaching procedure may not be effective for this learner.

## Pattern Classification
plateau

Responding has stabilized below mastery criterion without meaningful movement, indicating the current procedure is limiting further acquisition.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Modify teaching procedure — switch prompt type (e.g., from most-to-least to time delay).
- Conduct preference assessment and update reinforcer menu.
- Break the current skill into smaller component steps if possible.
- Increase practice opportunities by embedding targets in natural-environment training.

### Consequence strategies
- Check for inadvertent reinforcement of near-misses; tighten differential reinforcement.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 9 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 9 sessions: 67.4%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 70%, last session: 66%).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: spontaneously uses humor appropriately
Curriculum Reference: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L3
Learner Profile: Adolescent Learner
Current Mastery: Developing
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: spontaneously uses humor appropriately
- Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L3
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Create a small environmental change (new item, familiar item in new location, surprise event) that invites a verbal comment or question.
Primary natural context: morning greeting.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's morning greeting routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Expectant look (pause)
Deliver no prompt — maintain eye contact and hold the preferred item until the learner responds.
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, begin with a model prompt delivered during the motivated moment; fade to expectant look across sessions.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: adult attends to the comment with matching affect.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 3 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use across 3 different adults and 2 different settings within 2 weeks.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: selects items by feature (What is round?)
Curriculum: LRFFC L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Developing

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: selects items by feature (What is round?)
- Curriculum: LRFFC L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "Touch [target item]"
Variations: "Point to [target item]"; "Give me [target item]"; "Show me [target item]"
Presentation: Present an array of items on the table and deliver a clear verbal SD.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Most-to-Least (errorless)
Sequence: full physical -> partial physical -> gestural -> positional -> independent
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, begin at higher prompt levels (full-physical or partial-physical) with systematic fading.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: towel, jacket, ball
Distractor stimuli: book, blanket
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Prevent errors by using high prompts from the start; fade gradually. Paired with most-to-least prompt hierarchy.

## Reinforcement Schedule
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy at independent prompt level across 3 sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.

selects items by feature (What is round?)


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-1664
Profile: Adult Learner (18+ years)
Curricula: Mand + Self-Care + Vocational
Date range: Sessions 1–12 across 24 days (2026-04-02 to 2026-04-26)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. indicating 'all done' at task completion (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. requesting a break during extended tasks (Mand)
   Method: NET
3. completing assigned tasks in order (Vocational)
   Method: Task Analysis
4. requesting assistance using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
5. brushing teeth independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-04-02 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 7/12 correct (56%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×4, I×3
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 5/8 correct (65%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/9 correct (44%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×4
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/9 correct (60%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  brushing teeth independently: 4/8 correct (48%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×7

Session 2 — 2026-04-04 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 5/8 correct (63%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 7/10 correct (72%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×6
  completing assigned tasks in order: 6/12 correct (47%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×1, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/9 correct (49%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  brushing teeth independently: 6/12 correct (46%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×4, I×5

Session 3 — 2026-04-06 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 5/8 correct (63%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/15 correct (59%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×4, I×7
  completing assigned tasks in order: 7/15 correct (46%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/8 correct (46%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×6
  brushing teeth independently: 6/12 correct (49%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×4, I×3

Session 4 — 2026-04-08 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 9/14 correct (66%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×2, I×8
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/15 correct (62%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  completing assigned tasks in order: 5/10 correct (51%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 6/13 correct (45%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×8
  brushing teeth independently: 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×4

Session 5 — 2026-04-10 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 4/8 correct (50%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 8/14 correct (59%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×9
  completing assigned tasks in order: 3/8 correct (42%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 7/13 correct (53%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×0, I×8
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (49%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×2, I×2

Session 6 — 2026-04-12 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 49% (primary); IOA 93% agreement
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 67% (primary); IOA 93% agreement
  completing assigned tasks in order: 43% (primary); IOA 93% agreement
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 53% (primary); IOA 93% agreement
  brushing teeth independently: 51% (primary); IOA 93% agreement

Session 7 — 2026-04-14 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 4/8 correct (48%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×4
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 9/13 correct (68%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×2, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 3/8 correct (34%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/11 correct (40%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  brushing teeth independently: 8/15 correct (56%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×0, I×11

Session 8 — 2026-04-16 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 6/11 correct (58%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×3, I×2
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 6/10 correct (63%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/10 correct (37%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 3/8 correct (39%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  brushing teeth independently: 4/10 correct (44%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×5

Session 9 — 2026-04-18 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 6/14 correct (43%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×9
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 7/11 correct (63%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×2, I×4
  completing assigned tasks in order: 5/13 correct (39%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×4, I×7
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 6/11 correct (50%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×3, I×7
  brushing teeth independently: 4/8 correct (51%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×4

Session 10 — 2026-04-20 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×6
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 5/8 correct (60%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×6
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/9 correct (39%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×4
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 4/10 correct (42%); latency 4.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  brushing teeth independently: 5/10 correct (49%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×6

Session 11 — 2026-04-22 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 5/10 correct (47%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 6/10 correct (63%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/13 correct (31%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 5/13 correct (35%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×2, I×11
  brushing teeth independently: 7/14 correct (51%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×8

Session 12 — 2026-04-24 — 54 min — 1 observer
  indicating 'all done' at task completion: 6/12 correct (50%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×8
  requesting a break during extended tasks: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×2, I×5
  completing assigned tasks in order: 4/15 correct (28%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×5, G×1, I×8
  requesting assistance using AAC device: 3/8 correct (42%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  brushing teeth independently: 8/15 correct (54%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×10

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Leaving seat without permission
- Looking away during SD presentation

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Plateau**: accuracy has remained near 53% for 12 sessions without meaningful improvement.
- Performance is below mastery criteria; current teaching procedure may not be effective for this learner.

## Pattern Classification
plateau

Responding has stabilized below mastery criterion without meaningful movement, indicating the current procedure is limiting further acquisition.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Modify teaching procedure — switch prompt type (e.g., from most-to-least to time delay).
- Conduct preference assessment and update reinforcer menu.
- Break the current skill into smaller component steps if possible.
- Increase practice opportunities by embedding targets in natural-environment training.

### Consequence strategies
- Check for inadvertent reinforcement of near-misses; tighten differential reinforcement.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
high

Pattern is well-supported: 12 sessions of data, low variance, and IOA evidence confirm reliability.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 12 sessions: 53.0%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 56%, last session: 50%).
- IOA data: 93% agreement on IOA session — adequate.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: compares quantities (more/less/same)
Curriculum Reference: Math L2
Learner Profile: School-Age Learner
Current Mastery: Emerging
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: compares quantities (more/less/same)
- Curriculum: Math L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "How many?"
Variations: "Count these"; "What number is this?"
Presentation: Present the numeral card or a set of objects to count.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Most-to-Least (errorless)
Sequence: full physical -> partial physical -> gestural -> positional -> independent
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, begin at higher prompt levels (full-physical or partial-physical) with systematic fading.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: napkin, scissors, apple
Distractor stimuli: spoon, shoe, plate, cup
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Prevent errors by using high prompts from the start; fade gradually. Paired with most-to-least prompt hierarchy.

## Reinforcement Schedule
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
Curriculum: Reading L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Mastered at current level

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: identifies 5–10 upper-case letters
- Curriculum: Reading L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What letter is this?"
Variations: "Read this letter"; "What does this say?"
Presentation: Present the letter flashcard.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: C, J, G
Distractor stimuli: H, F
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
"No, watch me" -> model -> re-present SD -> differential reinforcement for correct response.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
90% accuracy across 3 consecutive sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a Task Analysis program for this multi-step skill.

Target: simple meal preparation (sandwich)
Curriculum: AFLS Home Skills
Learner: Adolescent Learner
Mastery Status: Mastered at current level

Please include the task analysis (numbered steps), chain type, prompt strategy per step, error correction, reinforcement, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: simple meal preparation (sandwich)
- Curriculum: AFLS Home Skills
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This Task Analysis program teaches the target skill as a chain of discrete steps, each taught and reinforced until the learner can complete the full sequence independently.

## Task Analysis
Chain type: Total-task presentation
Prompt the learner through the entire chain every trial; fade prompts across all steps simultaneously.

Steps:
1. Collect all ingredients (bread, filling, spread).
2. Place two slices of bread on the plate.
3. Apply spread to one slice.
4. Place filling on the spread slice.
5. Place the second slice on top.
6. Cut the sandwich in half if desired.
7. Place on a plate to serve.

## Prompt Strategy Per Step
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Allow independent attempt; add progressively more intrusive prompts only if learner does not initiate.
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, deliver the least intrusive prompt that prevents an error; expect independence on previously-mastered steps.

## Error Correction Procedure
Model -> prompt -> fade: Demonstrate the correct step; provide physical or gestural prompt as needed; fade prompt across subsequent trials

## Reinforcement
Terminal reinforcement (mastered) — Reinforcement delivered only at chain completion; no per-step reinforcement.
Pair the terminal reinforcer with the natural consequence of the completed task (e.g., clean hands, clean dishes, completed routine).

## Mastery Criteria
Chain self-initiated from the appropriate antecedent (no verbal prompt to begin) across 3 consecutive opportunities.

## Data Collection
Per-step data: each step is scored for independence / prompt level on every trial. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full chain across 3 different settings and with 3 different adults. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a Task Analysis program for this multi-step skill.

Target: using public transportation
Curriculum: AFLS Community Participation Skills
Learner: Adolescent Learner
Mastery Status: Developing

Please include the task analysis (numbered steps), chain type, prompt strategy per step, error correction, reinforcement, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: using public transportation
- Curriculum: AFLS Community Participation Skills
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This Task Analysis program teaches the target skill as a chain of discrete steps, each taught and reinforced until the learner can complete the full sequence independently.

## Task Analysis
Chain type: Forward chaining
Teach step 1 to mastery, then 1->2, then 1->2->3, progressively adding later steps.

Steps:
1. Confirm the correct stop or station.  <- Learner-taught step (forward chaining starts here)
2. Purchase or have the fare ready.
3. Wait at the designated boarding area.
4. Board the vehicle when it arrives.
5. Pay the fare or present the pass.
6. Sit or stand safely.
7. Monitor the route for the correct stop.
8. Exit at the correct stop.

## Prompt Strategy Per Step
Strategy: Most-to-Least
Start with full-physical prompt at each step; fade to partial physical, gestural, verbal, independent.
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, use full-physical or partial-physical prompts at each step; fade systematically.

## Error Correction Procedure
Model -> prompt -> fade: Demonstrate the correct step; provide physical or gestural prompt as needed; fade prompt across subsequent trials

## Reinforcement
CRF per step (acquisition) — Continuous reinforcement for each correctly-completed step during acquisition.
Pair the terminal reinforcer with the natural consequence of the completed task (e.g., clean hands, clean dishes, completed routine).

## Mastery Criteria
Chain self-initiated from the appropriate antecedent (no verbal prompt to begin) across 3 consecutive opportunities.

## Data Collection
Per-step data: each step is scored for independence / prompt level on every trial. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full chain across 3 different settings and with 3 different adults. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a systematic desensitization / toleration program for the following.

Skill: tolerating tooth brushing by caregiver
Curriculum: AFLS Basic Living Skills
Learner Level: Adolescent Learner
Baseline: Developing

The learner currently refuses or exhibits safety behaviors during the activity; the program should build tolerance gradually.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: tolerating tooth brushing by caregiver
- Curriculum: AFLS Basic Living Skills
- Learner: Adolescent Learner
- Current mastery: Developing
- Approach: Toleration / systematic desensitization (caregiver-delivered activity)

This program builds tolerance for tooth brushing performed by caregiver through systematic shaping. The learner is not being taught to perform the skill independently — the goal is to allow the caregiver or staff to perform it across an incrementally increasing duration, without refusal, crying, self-injurious behavior, or aggression.

## Toleration End Goal
full 2-minute tooth-brushing routine completed by caregiver without refusal, crying, SIB, or aggression

## Shaping Progression
Teach by moving through these shaping steps in order. Advance to the next step only when the current step is tolerated for 3 consecutive sessions without safety behaviors.

1. 1-second toothbrush contact with teeth
2. 3 seconds of brushing
3. 5 seconds of brushing
4. 15 seconds of brushing
5. 30 seconds of brushing
6. 60 seconds of brushing
7. Full 2-minute brushing routine

Current shaping step: At the developing stage, begin at shaping step 2 ("3 seconds of brushing") and advance through step 3 across sessions as tolerance stabilizes.

## Antecedent Strategies
- Pre-warn the learner before the activity begins (verbal or visual schedule).
- Offer a preferred item or sensory tool to hold during the activity.
- Where possible, offer a choice of position, location, or starting point.
- Keep the environment calm and predictable; avoid other demands immediately before or after.

## Reinforcement
Deliver high-magnitude, high-preference reinforcement contingent on successful toleration of the target duration. Pair with effusive praise. Reinforcement is continuous (CRF) during acquisition of each shaping step.

## Refusal and Safety Procedures
- If the learner refuses or turns away: pause briefly (5–10 seconds), re-present the activity at the current or previous shaping step.
- If problem behavior (crying, property destruction, SIB, aggression, peer aggression) emerges: stop the activity immediately, implement the facility crisis plan, and document the incident.
- Do NOT remove the activity contingent on safety behaviors in a way that establishes an escape-maintained pattern — consult supervising BCBA for the specific escape-extinction protocol appropriate to this learner.

## Mastery Criteria
End-goal duration tolerated across 3 consecutive sessions with no safety behaviors (refusal, crying, SIB, aggression, property destruction).

## Data Collection
Per-trial: duration tolerated before refusal, presence / absence of safety behaviors (crying, property destruction, SIB, aggression), staff support level, and shaping step attempted. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe the full routine across 3 different settings and with 3 different adults (including the primary caregiver if relevant). Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a Discrete Trial Training program for the following.

Skill: tacts familiar people by name
Curriculum: Tact L1
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Mastered at current level

Include the full DTT trial structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: tacts familiar people by name
- Curriculum: Tact L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What is this?"
Variations: "Tell me what you see"; "What's that?"; "Name this"
Presentation: Present the target stimulus within visual field and ask while pointing to it.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Graduated Guidance
Sequence: hand over hand full -> hand over hand light -> shadow -> independent
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: scissors, crayon, brush
Distractor stimuli: car, apple
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Return to previous prompt level that produced success -> successful response -> re-attempt at target prompt level.

## Reinforcement Schedule
Token economy — Tokens delivered per correct response; exchanged at session end for a back-up reinforcer appropriate to the learner (for children: candy, cookies, brief leisure-time access, preferred activity, screen time, or a favorite sensory item). Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: identifies coins by name
Curriculum Reference: Math L2
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Near mastery
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: identifies coins by name
- Curriculum: Math L2
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Near mastery

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What number is this?"
Variations: "Which number?"; "Tell me the number"
Presentation: Present the numeral card.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Least-to-Most
Sequence: independent -> gestural -> positional -> partial physical -> full physical
Current prompt level: At the near mastery stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: ball, towel, glue
Distractor stimuli: book, blanket, apple, plate
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Return to previous prompt level that produced success -> successful response -> re-attempt at target prompt level.

## Reinforcement Schedule
VR-3 (variable ratio 3) — Average of every 3rd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Demonstrated use in natural environment across 3 independent instances.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Interpret the following behavioral session log. Provide clinical concerns, pattern classification, behavior function hypothesis (if applicable), programming recommendations (antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis), escalation level, confidence, and data-supported rationale.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-5737
Profile: Adolescent Learner (13–17 years)
Curricula: Community + Self-Care + Tolerating Denied Access
Date range: Sessions 1–11 across 22 days (2026-08-07 to 2026-08-29)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. ordering in a restaurant (Community)
   Method: Task Analysis
2. washing hands independently (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied (Tolerating Denied Access)
   Method: FCT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Non-compliance — function hypothesized: escape
2. Property destruction — function hypothesized: escape

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-08-07 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 12/15 correct (77%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×9
  washing hands independently: 7/9 correct (81%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 12/15 correct (82%); latency 2.1s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×5, I×5
  Non-compliance: freq 2
  Property destruction: freq 3

Session 2 — 2026-08-09 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 7/10 correct (72%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  washing hands independently: 8/10 correct (76%); latency 2.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×0, I×9
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 6/8 correct (78%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  Non-compliance: freq 2
  Property destruction: freq 4

Session 3 — 2026-08-11 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 6/10 correct (62%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×2, I×2
  washing hands independently: 5/8 correct (62%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×2, I×4
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 8/11 correct (70%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×9
  Non-compliance: freq 2
  Property destruction: freq 3

Session 4 — 2026-08-13 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  ordering in a restaurant: 58% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  washing hands independently: 59% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 61% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  Non-compliance: freq 2; IOA 97% agreement
  Property destruction: freq 5; IOA 97% agreement

Session 5 — 2026-08-15 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 6/13 correct (43%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×4, G×3, I×3
  washing hands independently: 7/15 correct (50%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×5, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/8 correct (58%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×0, I×8
  Non-compliance: freq 3
  Property destruction: freq 4

Session 6 — 2026-08-17 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 6/15 correct (39%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×1, I×7
  washing hands independently: 3/8 correct (41%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 9/15 correct (57%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×10
  Non-compliance: freq 3
  Property destruction: freq 5

Session 7 — 2026-08-19 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 3/10 correct (28%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×4
  washing hands independently: 3/10 correct (34%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 4/9 correct (43%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  Non-compliance: freq 3
  Property destruction: freq 4

Session 8 — 2026-08-21 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 4/15 correct (23%); latency 5.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×4, I×4
  washing hands independently: 3/10 correct (30%); latency 4.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×1, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 3/8 correct (43%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×5
  Non-compliance: freq 3
  Property destruction: freq 4

Session 9 — 2026-08-23 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 1/8 correct (15%); latency 5.6s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  washing hands independently: 4/13 correct (27%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×1, I×7
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 5/13 correct (40%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×4, PP×0, G×3, I×6
  Non-compliance: freq 4
  Property destruction: freq 6

Session 10 — 2026-08-25 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 2/15 correct (10%); latency 5.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×4, G×3, I×6
  washing hands independently: 2/12 correct (18%); latency 5.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×8
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 4/13 correct (32%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×8
  Non-compliance: freq 4
  Property destruction: freq 7

Session 11 — 2026-08-27 — 51 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 1/9 correct (10%); latency 5.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  washing hands independently: 1/12 correct (10%); latency 5.7s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×1, I×6
  wait calmly when access to preferred item is denied: 3/11 correct (31%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×5
  Non-compliance: freq 5
  Property destruction: freq 7

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Aggression attempt directed at staff (hit, kick, or scratch toward adult)
- Self-injurious behavior onset during task difficulty (self-biting, hair-pulling, head-hitting)
- Elopement from the work area
- Vocal refusal ('no', 'I don't want to')

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Regression identified**: accuracy has declined from 77% to 10% across 11 sessions.
- Accompanying behavior data suggests the decline may be function-related.

## Pattern Classification
regression

Previously-established responding has declined across recent sessions, warranting review of environmental and reinforcement variables.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Non-compliance: escape
  Evidence: behavior occurs in the context of demand presentation and terminates contingent on task removal.
Property destruction: escape
  Evidence: behavior occurs in the context of demand presentation and terminates contingent on task removal.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Conduct reinforcer assessment to identify current high-preference items.
- Review recent environmental or schedule changes that may be affecting performance.
- Return temporarily to a previously-mastered prompt level and re-fade systematically.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- If problem behavior accompanies regression, strengthen replacement-behavior training for the hypothesized function.

### Consequence strategies
- Increase reinforcement magnitude and schedule temporarily (return to CRF if needed).
- Implement more frequent maintenance probes (at least weekly) after re-mastery.

### Crisis plan
- If regression co-occurs with severe behavior (SIB, aggression, property destruction) reaching the learner's safety threshold: pause all skill-acquisition programming, implement environmental safety measures (clear the area of hazards, move peers to safe distance), and contact the supervising BCBA.
- Staff should first attempt verbal de-escalation and least-restrictive strategies; physical intervention is used only as a last resort and only by staff currently certified in the facility's crisis-prevention framework (e.g., Safety-Care, CPI, or equivalent).
- Physical intervention is applied only when specifically authorized in this learner's BIP. Many learners have contraindications (medical conditions, developmental or age-related factors, trauma history, or explicit BIP restrictions) that rule out restrictive procedures — in those cases the crisis plan defaults to verbal de-escalation, environmental safety measures, and immediate supervisor / emergency contact without physical intervention.

## Escalation Level
3 — Supervisor review

Combination of performance decline and/or behavior data warrants supervising BCBA review within 24–48 hours.

## Confidence
high

Pattern is well-supported: 11 sessions of data, low variance, and IOA evidence confirm reliability.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 11 sessions: 39.7%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 77%, last session: 10%).
- Non-compliance: mean 3.0/session (early-window mean 2.0 -> late-window mean 4.3).
- Property destruction: mean 4.7/session (early-window mean 3.3 -> late-window mean 6.7).
- IOA data: 97% agreement on IOA session — adequate.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: traces basic shapes (circle, cross)
Curriculum Reference: Writing L1
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Emerging
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: traces basic shapes (circle, cross)
- Curriculum: Writing L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Emerging

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "Write the target."
Variations: "Trace this"; "Copy this"; "Write {word}"
Presentation: Provide pencil and paper; deliver a clear verbal instruction naming the target letter or word.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Stimulus Fading
Sequence: exaggerated stimulus -> moderate fade -> minimal fade -> natural stimulus
Current prompt level: At the emerging stage, begin at higher prompt levels (full-physical or partial-physical) with systematic fading.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: oval, rectangle, triangle
Distractor stimuli: square, star
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Re-present SD -> provide effective-level prompt -> reinforce prompted response -> distractor trial -> re-present SD independently.

## Reinforcement Schedule
CRF (continuous reinforcement) — Every correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Fluency criterion: correct responses within 3-second latency at 90% accuracy.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: matches upper-case letters
Curriculum Reference: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L2
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Generalization phase
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: matches upper-case letters
- Curriculum: Visual Perceptual Skills & Matching-to-Sample L2
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Generalization phase

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "Match"
Variations: "Find the same"; "Put with same"
Presentation: Present the sample stimulus and an array of comparison stimuli simultaneously.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Stimulus Fading
Sequence: exaggerated stimulus -> moderate fade -> minimal fade -> natural stimulus
Current prompt level: At the generalization stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 5 (target + 4 distractors)
Target stimuli: Z, O, W
Distractor stimuli: K, P, R, A
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
"No, watch me" -> model -> re-present SD -> differential reinforcement for correct response.

## Reinforcement Schedule
VR-3 (variable ratio 3) — Average of every 3rd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
90% accuracy across 3 consecutive sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a DTT program for this skill.

Target: matches words to identical words
Curriculum: Reading L1
Learner: Early Learner
Mastery Status: Mastered at current level

Please include the SD, prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, error correction procedure, reinforcement schedule, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: matches words to identical words
- Curriculum: Reading L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What word?"
Variations: "Read this word"; "What does it say?"
Presentation: Present the sight-word card and deliver the SD.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Graduated Guidance
Sequence: hand over hand full -> hand over hand light -> shadow -> independent
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: key, apple, car
Distractor stimuli: book, brush
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Return to previous prompt level that produced success -> successful response -> re-attempt at target prompt level.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
Fluency criterion: correct responses within 3-second latency at 90% accuracy.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 3 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
I need a NET program for this skill.

Target: spontaneously uses social phrases appropriately
Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L2
Learner: School-Age Learner
Mastery Status: Approaching mastery

Please include the MO arrangement, natural opportunity, prompt strategy, natural reinforcer, generalization tactics, and mastery criteria.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: spontaneously uses social phrases appropriately
- Curriculum: Spontaneous Vocal Behavior L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Approaching mastery

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Create a small environmental change (new item, familiar item in new location, surprise event) that invites a verbal comment or question.
Primary natural context: activity setup.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's activity setup routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Time Delay
Wait a brief interval (0->2->4 s) for independent response before delivering a model or verbal prompt.
Current prompt level: At the approaching mastery stage, use time delay (0 s -> 2 s -> 4 s) before delivering any model prompt; reinforce independent responses differentially.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: adult attends to the comment with matching affect.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 5 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Fluent exchange (response within 3 s of MO / opportunity) with appropriate topography, 80% of opportunities across 3 sessions.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 4 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.

spontaneously uses social phrases appropriately


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: describes recent events in sequence
Curriculum Reference: Intraverbal L2
Learner Profile: School-Age Learner
Current Mastery: Near mastery
Teaching Method: NET (Natural Environment Teaching)

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: describes recent events in sequence
- Curriculum: Intraverbal L2
- Learner: School-Age Learner
- Current mastery: Near mastery

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Engage the learner in a naturalistic conversation on a topic of demonstrated interest. Pause at natural turn boundaries to invite the target response.
Primary natural context: transition conversation.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's transition conversation routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Model + immediate fade
Deliver a vocal/gestural model if no response within the motivated moment; fade to expectant look over sessions.
Current prompt level: At the near mastery stage, use expectant look only; avoid direct prompts. The MO itself should be sufficient to occasion the response.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: conversation continues with adult's naturally matched reply.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 4 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 2 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use of target response across 3 natural opportunities per day for 3 consecutive days.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 5 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Design a Natural Environment Teaching program for the following.

Skill: engages in social games (peek-a-boo, tickle)
Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
Learner Level: Early Learner
Baseline: Developing

Include the full naturalistic teaching structure.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: engages in social games (peek-a-boo, tickle)
- Curriculum: Social Behavior & Social Play L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Developing

This NET program teaches the target skill through naturalistic embedding — capturing motivated moments within the learner's routine rather than using contrived massed trials.

## Motivating Operation (MO) Arrangement
Arrange a shared activity with one or more peers where the target response is naturally occasioned (turn-taking game, shared snack, collaborative task).
Primary natural context: circle time.

## Natural Opportunity
Embed the teaching opportunity within the learner's circle time routine. Deliver the opportunity when the MO is evident (learner oriented to the relevant stimulus, approaching the materials, or demonstrating interest).

## Prompt Strategy
Strategy: Expectant look (pause)
Deliver no prompt — maintain eye contact and hold the preferred item until the learner responds.
Current prompt level: At the developing stage, begin with a model prompt delivered during the motivated moment; fade to expectant look across sessions.

## Natural Reinforcer
Natural reinforcer: peer engages back; activity continues with both.
Avoid contrived consequences — the functional outcome IS the reinforcer.

## Generalization Tactics
- Program multiple exemplars across 3 different stimuli or peers.
- Rotate between 2 different natural settings.
- Rotate across 3 different adults during the teaching phase.

## Mastery Criteria
Independent use across 3 different adults and 2 different settings within 2 weeks.

## Data Collection
Opportunity-based data recording: each naturally-occasioned trial is scored for independence and topography. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe across novel peers, settings, and materials. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly. Fade adult-delivered prompts before declaring mastery.

engages in social games (peek-a-boo, tickle)


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Here is a multi-session behavioral log for a learner. Analyze it and provide your clinical interpretation using the structured format.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-2769
Profile: Adolescent Learner (13–17 years)
Curricula: Home Skills + Mand + Reading + Self-Care
Date range: Sessions 1–8 across 16 days (2026-10-11 to 2026-10-27)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. requesting preferred items using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
2. meal cleanup after eating (Home Skills)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. reads 10–20 sight words (Reading)
   Method: DTT
4. indicating 'all done' with a step or activity (Mand)
   Method: NET
5. dressing (pants, shirt) (Self-Care)
   Method: Task Analysis

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Aggression — function hypothesized: attention

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-10-11 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 11/15 correct (76%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×3, G×5, I×5
  meal cleanup after eating: 10/15 correct (70%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×5, PP×1, G×5, I×4
  reads 10–20 sight words: 6/8 correct (75%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 6/8 correct (73%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  dressing (pants, shirt): 7/9 correct (77%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  Aggression: freq 2

Session 2 — 2026-10-13 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 9/13 correct (72%); latency 2.5s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×11
  meal cleanup after eating: 7/12 correct (62%); latency 3.2s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×3, I×5
  reads 10–20 sight words: 7/9 correct (76%); latency 2.4s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×5
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 8/11 correct (73%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 7/10 correct (69%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×5
  Aggression: freq 3

Session 3 — 2026-10-15 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 9/13 correct (71%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×8
  meal cleanup after eating: 5/10 correct (53%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  reads 10–20 sight words: 7/10 correct (69%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 6/10 correct (60%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/10 correct (65%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  Aggression: freq 4

Session 4 — 2026-10-17 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 6/11 correct (57%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  meal cleanup after eating: 5/10 correct (45%); latency 4.2s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  reads 10–20 sight words: 6/8 correct (70%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×1, I×4
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 4/8 correct (53%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×3
  dressing (pants, shirt): 7/11 correct (62%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  Aggression: freq 3

Session 5 — 2026-10-19 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 8/15 correct (53%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×5, I×2
  meal cleanup after eating: 5/15 correct (34%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×3, I×11
  reads 10–20 sight words: 5/8 correct (56%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×5
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 4/8 correct (52%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/9 correct (58%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×3
  Aggression: freq 4

Session 6 — 2026-10-21 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 4/10 correct (43%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×5
  meal cleanup after eating: 4/15 correct (26%); latency 4.6s; prompts FP×4, PP×5, G×3, I×3
  reads 10–20 sight words: 4/8 correct (54%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×0, I×4
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 3/8 correct (38%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×1, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 5/10 correct (55%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×0, I×8
  Aggression: freq 5

Session 7 — 2026-10-23 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 6/13 correct (42%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×9
  meal cleanup after eating: 3/13 correct (27%); latency 5.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×2, I×10
  reads 10–20 sight words: 4/8 correct (51%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×2, I×5
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 4/11 correct (39%); latency 4.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  dressing (pants, shirt): 6/13 correct (49%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×0, I×8
  Aggression: freq 5

Session 8 — 2026-10-25 — 60 min — 1 observer
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 4/13 correct (30%); latency 4.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×0, I×9
  meal cleanup after eating: 2/14 correct (11%); latency 5.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×0, G×3, I×9
  reads 10–20 sight words: 5/9 correct (51%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×0, I×6
  indicating 'all done' with a step or activity: 4/13 correct (33%); latency 4.3s; prompts FP×4, PP×2, G×3, I×4
  dressing (pants, shirt): 7/14 correct (47%); latency 3.9s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×9
  Aggression: freq 6

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Self-stimulatory behavior increase during demand periods
- Vocal refusal ('no', 'I don't want to')
- Aggression attempt directed at staff (hit, kick, or scratch toward adult)
- Attempts at property destruction (throwing materials, swiping items off the surface)

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Frustration pattern**: declining accuracy (76% -> 30%) with escape-indicator behaviors.
- Risk of learned helplessness and escape-maintained behavior if not addressed.

## Pattern Classification
frustration_pattern

Declining accuracy co-occurs with escape-indicator behaviors, consistent with frustration and escape-maintained responding to demand.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Aggression: attention
  Evidence: behavior occurs during low-attention periods and results in social attention contingently.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- **Immediately** reduce task difficulty — drop back 1–2 prompt levels or present previously-mastered targets.
- Intersperse easy (mastered) tasks with acquisition targets at a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio.
- Shorten session length and increase break frequency.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- Teach a replacement response ('break please', 'wait please', 'all done') and reinforce it at the function of the problem behavior.
- Pair the replacement response with short, predictable escape windows.

### Consequence strategies
- Do NOT remove demand contingent on tantrum / escape behavior — this reinforces the escape function.
- Provide brief break contingent on independent replacement response instead.

### Crisis plan
- If aggression toward staff, peer aggression, SIB, or property destruction exceeds the learner's safety threshold: first use verbal de-escalation and environmental safety measures (clear the area, move peers to safe distance, remove hazards).
- If behavior continues to pose imminent risk, follow the facility's tiered crisis-intervention protocol — only staff currently certified in the facility's training (e.g., Safety-Care, CPI, PMT, or equivalent) may implement physical intervention, and the least-restrictive option appropriate to the risk level is used. Physical intervention is applied only when specifically authorized in this learner's BIP; for learners with contraindications (medical, developmental, trauma history, or explicit BIP restrictions), the plan stops at de-escalation + environmental safety + supervisor contact.
- Notify the supervising BCBA immediately; pause the skill-acquisition program until the BIP is reviewed. Document the incident (antecedent, topography, duration, staff response, post-incident state) per facility and BACB Ethics Code (2020, Section 3.05) requirements.

## Escalation Level
4 — Safety immediate

Safety-critical signals require immediate cessation of current program and direct BCBA contact; consider crisis-plan activation.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 8 sessions of data; no IOA session included.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 8 sessions: 55.6%.
- Trend direction: downward (first session: 76%, last session: 30%).
- Aggression: mean 4.0/session (early-window mean 2.5 -> late-window mean 5.5).
- No IOA session in this log; reliability of measurements cannot be independently verified.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You help
Board Certified Behavior Analysts and staff design teaching programs for
individuals with autism. Your responses are clinically accurate, individualized
to the learner profile, follow BACB ethical guidelines, and reference no real
client data. Select the appropriate teaching method (DTT, NET, Task Analysis,
FCT, BST, PRT) based on the skill target and learner profile.

[User]
Generate a teaching program for the following target.

Skill Target: tracks print left to right
Curriculum Reference: Reading L1
Learner Profile: Early Learner
Current Mastery: Mastered at current level
Teaching Method: DTT

Provide the full program structure appropriate to the selected method.

[Assistant]
## Program Overview
- Target skill: tracks print left to right
- Curriculum: Reading L1
- Learner: Early Learner
- Current mastery: Mastered at current level

This DTT program establishes stimulus control over the target skill through structured discrete trials with a defined prompt hierarchy, stimulus array, and systematic error-correction procedure.

## Discriminative Stimulus (SD)
Primary SD: "What letter is this?"
Variations: "Read this letter"; "What does this say?"
Presentation: Present the letter or word on a flashcard.

## Prompt Hierarchy
Strategy: Time Delay (progressive)
Sequence: 0s delay -> 2s delay -> 4s delay -> 6s delay -> independent
Current prompt level: At the mastered stage, use minimal prompts (positional or verbal hint) only when needed; expect independent responding.

## Stimulus Array
Array size: field of 3 (target + 2 distractors)
Target stimuli: towel, shoe, toothbrush
Distractor stimuli: hat, phone
Rotation: Randomize position of target across trials to prevent position bias.

## Error Correction Procedure
Model correct response -> lead (do together) -> test (independent) -> distractor -> retest.

## Reinforcement Schedule
FR-2 (fixed ratio 2) — Every 2nd correct response reinforced. Provide differential reinforcement: higher-quality reinforcement for independent correct responses than for prompted correct responses.

## Mastery Criteria
80% accuracy at independent prompt level across 3 sessions.

## Data Collection
Trial-by-trial data recording prompt level and response accuracy. IOA scheduled every 3 sessions minimum; target agreement ≥ 80%.

## Generalization & Maintenance Plan
Post-mastery: probe with novel stimuli, across 2 additional therapists, and in at least 3 natural contexts. Maintenance probes weekly for 4 weeks, then monthly.


[System]
You are an expert ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) clinical assistant. You
analyze multi-session behavioral session logs for individuals with autism and
produce structured clinical interpretations that identify patterns, hypothesize
behavior functions when applicable, and recommend programming adjustments
structured along BIP lines (antecedent strategies, replacement behaviors,
consequence strategies, crisis plan). Your interpretation also includes an
escalation level and a confidence expression. Every recommendation is grounded
in the data provided. Follow BACB ethical guidelines and reference no real
client data.

[User]
Review this session log and produce a structured clinical interpretation.

LEARNER PROFILE
Synthetic ID: SYN-1818
Profile: Adolescent Learner (13–17 years)
Curricula: Community + Home Skills + Mand + Writing
Date range: Sessions 1–7 across 14 days (2026-03-17 to 2026-03-31)

ACCELERATION PROGRAMS
1. ordering in a restaurant (Community)
   Method: Task Analysis
2. making the bed (Home Skills)
   Method: Task Analysis
3. requesting preferred items using AAC device (Mand)
   Method: NET
4. copies simple words from model (Writing)
   Method: DTT
5. identifying community safety signs (Community)
   Method: DTT

DECELERATION TARGETS
1. Tantrum — function hypothesized: tangible

SESSION DATA

Session 1 — 2026-03-17 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 8/15 correct (52%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×2, I×7
  making the bed: 5/8 correct (60%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×2, G×2, I×2
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 8/13 correct (62%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×1, I×9
  copies simple words from model: 6/12 correct (53%); latency 3.6s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×10
  identifying community safety signs: 10/15 correct (64%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×3, PP×5, G×1, I×6
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 8m total

Session 2 — 2026-03-19 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 8/14 correct (56%); latency 3.5s; prompts FP×4, PP×3, G×3, I×4
  making the bed: 8/15 correct (55%); latency 3.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×2, I×8
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 7/11 correct (63%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×0, PP×3, G×1, I×7
  copies simple words from model: 7/13 correct (54%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×4, I×5
  identifying community safety signs: 7/12 correct (62%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×4, I×7
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 4m total

Session 3 — 2026-03-21 — IOA SESSION — 2 observers
  ordering in a restaurant: 56% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  making the bed: 55% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 69% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  copies simple words from model: 48% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  identifying community safety signs: 65% (primary); IOA 97% agreement
  Tantrum: freq 7, duration 14m total; IOA 97% agreement

Session 4 — 2026-03-23 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 6/10 correct (57%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×1, G×3, I×3
  making the bed: 7/11 correct (61%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×2, I×5
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 8/11 correct (73%); latency 2.9s; prompts FP×2, PP×1, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 8/13 correct (58%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×1, G×3, I×8
  identifying community safety signs: 7/10 correct (73%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×1, I×3
  Tantrum: freq 7, duration 28m total

Session 5 — 2026-03-25 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 8/12 correct (67%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×1, PP×4, G×3, I×4
  making the bed: 9/15 correct (61%); latency 3.0s; prompts FP×4, PP×5, G×3, I×3
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 11/15 correct (73%); latency 2.6s; prompts FP×2, PP×5, G×3, I×5
  copies simple words from model: 5/9 correct (54%); latency 3.8s; prompts FP×0, PP×2, G×1, I×6
  identifying community safety signs: 5/8 correct (69%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×0, PP×1, G×0, I×7
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 6m total

Session 6 — 2026-03-27 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 8/13 correct (64%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×1, I×8
  making the bed: 9/15 correct (60%); latency 3.1s; prompts FP×5, PP×4, G×4, I×2
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 8/11 correct (74%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×0, G×1, I×9
  copies simple words from model: 7/13 correct (53%); latency 3.4s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×1, I×7
  identifying community safety signs: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×1, PP×3, G×0, I×5
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 8m total

Session 7 — 2026-03-29 — 36 min — 1 observer
  ordering in a restaurant: 6/9 correct (67%); latency 2.7s; prompts FP×1, PP×2, G×2, I×4
  making the bed: 7/10 correct (66%); latency 3.3s; prompts FP×3, PP×0, G×3, I×4
  requesting preferred items using AAC device: 11/14 correct (78%); latency 2.2s; prompts FP×3, PP×2, G×3, I×6
  copies simple words from model: 6/12 correct (51%); latency 4.0s; prompts FP×0, PP×4, G×1, I×7
  identifying community safety signs: 7/10 correct (75%); latency 2.8s; prompts FP×3, PP×3, G×0, I×4
  Tantrum: freq 2, duration 6m total

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS (across sessions)
- Attempts at property destruction (throwing materials, swiping items off the surface)
- Self-injurious behavior onset during task difficulty (self-biting, hair-pulling, head-hitting)
- Peer aggression (hitting or pushing peers during group activities)
- Pushing materials away from the work area

Please include: (1) clinical concerns, (2) pattern classification, (3) function hypothesis for any target behaviors, (4) recommendations structured as antecedent / replacement / consequence / crisis, (5) escalation level and confidence, (6) data-supported rationale.

[Assistant]
## Clinical Concerns
- **Extinction burst** observed: temporary increase in problem behavior consistent with an extinction procedure.
- This is an expected phase of behavior change and typically indicates the intervention is working.

## Pattern Classification
extinction_burst

Mid-log spike in problem-behavior frequency followed by recovery is consistent with a planned extinction procedure.

## Behavior Function Hypothesis
Tantrum: tangible
  Evidence: behavior occurs when preferred items are restricted and is followed by access to the item.

## Programming Recommendations

### Antecedent strategies
- Maintain current antecedent arrangements — do not add extra demand.

### Replacement behavior (FCT)
- Ensure replacement response is available and reinforced at high magnitude during the burst.

### Consequence strategies
- **Maintain current protocol** — consistency during extinction bursts is critical.
- Ensure all team members are trained on the procedure.

## Escalation Level
2 — Adjust next session

Programming adjustments indicated at next session; no immediate safety concern.

## Confidence
moderate

Pattern is supported but alternatives cannot be fully excluded: 7 sessions of data with IOA evidence.

## Data-Supported Rationale
- Mean accuracy across 7 sessions: 60.1%.
- Trend direction: upward (first session: 52%, last session: 67%).
- Tantrum: mean 3.4/session (early-window mean 2.0 -> late-window mean 2.0).
- IOA data: 97% agreement on IOA session — adequate.