First Then Boards¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 3 claims (2 for, 1 mixed) · 8 studies (3 review, 2 causal, 2 quant-synthesis, 1 theoretical), q1–q4 · 2 of 8 report an effect size

Description¶

A First Then board is a two-part visual display (pictures, icons, or written words) that shows the learner what must happen first (typically a non-preferred or required task) and what happens next (typically a preferred activity or reinforcer). It is carried out by presenting the board before the task begins, verbally referencing it ("first worksheet, then blocks"), and delivering the "then" activity immediately upon completion. It is a foundational visual support in special education and applied behavior analysis, functioning as a miniature visual schedule for a single transition.

Design Implications¶

First Then boards work by making the contingency between effort and reward explicit and visible, reducing the working-memory and language-processing demands of verbal directions Chunking reduces working memory load. [+M]. By limiting the visible future to exactly two events, they prevent the overwhelm of an entire day's schedule at once Cognitive overload degrades learning. [+S]. The board also functions as a promise: because the "then" activity is delivered contingently and immediately, the board builds trust and increases persistence on non-preferred tasks [~S].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A genuinely motivating "then" activity, identified through preference assessment
• Visuals the learner can actually interpret (photographs or icons matched to the learner's symbolic level, not text for pre-readers)
• Immediate, reliable delivery of the "then" activity — the board loses all meaning the first time it is not honored
• Consistent language across adults ("first ___, then ___") so the phrase itself becomes a cue

Constraints¶

• If the "then" activity is delayed, negotiated away, or delivered without task completion, the contingency collapses and the board becomes noise [-S]
• Ineffective if the "first" task is far beyond the learner's ability; the board clarifies expectations but does not reduce task difficulty — pair with Accommodations or task chunking
• Overuse of highly preferred reinforcers can undermine intrinsic motivation for the task itself Autonomy supports intrinsic motivation. [~M] — fade the board and shift toward natural task completion as tolerance grows
• Learners with strong language skills may find the board infantilizing; use written or self-managed versions instead

Implementation Variability¶

• Object level: actual objects (first cup, then ball) for learners not yet responding to pictures
• Written level: a sticky note or agenda line ("First: draft paragraph. Then: break") for older or mainstream learners
• Learner-managed: the learner moves the icon or checks off the "first" item themselves, building self-monitoring and autonomy
• Expanded sequences: grows into a visual schedule (First–Next–Then) as the learner tolerates longer chains

Target Learners¶

• Autistic learners and learners with intellectual or developmental disabilities, for whom visual supports outperform verbal-only directions [~S]
• Learners with receptive language delays or ADHD who need transitions made concrete and immediate
• Early-childhood learners generally; the same structure works as a lightweight routine cue in mainstream settings
• Older learners benefit from the structure but need age-respectful formats (written agendas, not cartoon icons)

Target Learning Goals¶

• Behavioral: increasing tolerance and task completion for non-preferred activities
• Executive function: learning that effort precedes reward; building transition skills
• Self-regulation: progressing toward learner-managed sequencing and delayed gratification

Instructions¶

1. Identify a high-preference activity through observation or a preference assessment; this becomes "then."
2. Select the target task ("first") and represent both with visuals matched to the learner's symbolic level — see Advance Organizers for the general principle of previewing what comes next.
3. Present the board immediately before the task, pair it with the consistent verbal script, and point to each icon.
4. Start the "first" task; use Chunking to keep it short enough that completion is achievable within a few minutes.
5. Deliver the "then" activity immediately and contingently upon completion — no negotiation, no delay.
6. Fade systematically: lengthen the "first" task, add intermediate steps, then transfer the board to learner management.

Related Strategies¶

• Visual Schedules — the full-day extension of the same two-part logic
• Token Economies — a more abstract contingency system; First Then boards are often the entry point
• Choice Boards — complements the board by giving the learner control over which preferred activity follows
• Premack Principle — the behavioral principle (high-probability behavior contingent on low-probability behavior) that First Then boards operationalize

Examples¶

• Early-intervention ABA programs: a therapist shows "first puzzle, then bubbles," requiring puzzle completion before blowing bubbles, then gradually extending the number of puzzle pieces per session.
• Inclusive elementary classrooms: a teacher places a two-icon card on a student's desk — "first: writing, then: iPad" — so the transition is visible without adult prompting.
• Secondary settings: a written agenda line on the board ("First: lab data table. Then: 5-minute phone break") applies the same contingency in an age-respectful format.

Key Sources¶

• Premack, D. (1965). Reinforcement theory. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 13, pp. 123–180). University of Nebraska Press.
• Mesibov, G. B., Shea, V., & Schopler, E. (2004). The TEACCH Approach to Autism Spectrum Disorders. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-306-48647-0
• Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.
• Knight, V., Sartini, E., & Spriggs, A. D. (2015). Evaluating visual activity schedules as evidence-based practice for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(1), 157–170. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2201-z