Location
Philadelphia
Start Date
11-5-2016 1:00 PM
Description
The purpose of the present study was to examine elementary (K-6)teacher acceptability of a positive behavioral intervention described in jargon terms and in non-jargon terms during the process of behavioral consultation, measured by the Usage Rating Profile – Intervention Revised (URP-IR). Specifically, the study evaluated whether employed elementary (K-6) teachers’ acceptability ratings differed on a positive behavioral intervention described in jargon versus non-jargon terms. In addition, this study determined whether differences in acceptability existed when considering type of classroom taught (i.e., general education versus special education versus specialized classrooms). One hundred one elementary (K-6) teachers participated in the study. Results indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between elementary (K-6) teacher acceptability of a positive behavioral intervention when described in either jargon versus non-jargon terms. Specifically, the use of jargon did not significantly influence acceptability ratings of the same intervention. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference when examining the type of classroom taught and acceptability of the positive behavioral intervention when described in jargon or non-jargon terminology. These findings replicate those of Witt, Moe, et al. (1984) and Rhoades and Kratochwill (1992) who found no difference in acceptability between jargon and non-jargon described interventions. The results provide important implications for consultant interaction with teachers and the use of jargon during the process of behavioral consultation.
Watch your language! Does jargon matter?
Philadelphia
The purpose of the present study was to examine elementary (K-6)teacher acceptability of a positive behavioral intervention described in jargon terms and in non-jargon terms during the process of behavioral consultation, measured by the Usage Rating Profile – Intervention Revised (URP-IR). Specifically, the study evaluated whether employed elementary (K-6) teachers’ acceptability ratings differed on a positive behavioral intervention described in jargon versus non-jargon terms. In addition, this study determined whether differences in acceptability existed when considering type of classroom taught (i.e., general education versus special education versus specialized classrooms). One hundred one elementary (K-6) teachers participated in the study. Results indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between elementary (K-6) teacher acceptability of a positive behavioral intervention when described in either jargon versus non-jargon terms. Specifically, the use of jargon did not significantly influence acceptability ratings of the same intervention. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference when examining the type of classroom taught and acceptability of the positive behavioral intervention when described in jargon or non-jargon terminology. These findings replicate those of Witt, Moe, et al. (1984) and Rhoades and Kratochwill (1992) who found no difference in acceptability between jargon and non-jargon described interventions. The results provide important implications for consultant interaction with teachers and the use of jargon during the process of behavioral consultation.