You’ve been using errorless learning for weeks and your student still needs constant prompting. Or maybe you’re doing error correction but progress has stalled. Sound familiar? You might be dealing with prompt dependency—something I’ve seen a lot in classrooms.

Sometimes it happens because we are presenting materials in a way that gives cues we don’t realize; sometimes because we are missing relevant cues (like those I describe below); and sometimes because we are in a hurry and aren’t paying enough attention. Whatever the reason, I’ve got some signs for you to look for in your students’ performance and ways to overcome it.

What Is Prompt Dependency and Why Does It Matter?

Let me start by saying that prompt dependency is very poorly named. Because the problem actually lies with us, as the teacher, not with a failure by the student.

Prompt dependency happens when students become dependent on the teacher’s response or material presentation rather than learning the actual discrimination you’re teaching.

We call it “prompt dependency,” but really the problem lies with us figuring out our instruction rather than the student. They aren’t learning the discriminations you’re trying to teach. Instead of learning to read the sight words you’re presenting, they’re learning to watch your reaction and wait for the prompt. They are attending to the wrong cues.

Students with autism in particular are susceptible to prompt dependency because of their difficulty screening out stimuli. They may attend to your body language, your tone, or your proximity rather than the actual teaching materials.

Sign #1: Your Data Shows Tons of Prompting

If you’re seeing a ton of prompting in your data session after session, that’s a good sign you may be dealing with prompt dependency. Look at your discrete trial training data (or any instructional data) over the past week or two.

Are you still using the same level of prompting you started with? Have you been able to fade prompts at all? If the answer is no, prompt dependency is likely developing or already established.

Here’s what to watch for:

• consistent patterns where students only respond correctly with prompts,
• minimal or no progress in fading prompts over multiple sessions, or
• data sheets that show more prompted trials than independent trials week after week.

Sign #2: Students Wait for Your Cue Instead of Responding

This is one of the clearest behavioral indicators of prompt dependency. You give the instruction and your student just looks at you. They put their hand out. They wait.

They’ve learned that if they wait long enough, you’ll help them. And honestly? They’re right. That’s exactly what happens in errorless learning if we’re not systematically fading prompts.

Watch for students who consistently delay responding until you move closer, reach toward the materials, or make any other predictable movement. They’re not processing the instruction—they’re waiting for your prompt.

Sign #3: Success Disappears When You Step Back

Does your student nail it when you’re right there but fall apart the moment you step back? That’s prompt dependency showing itself clearly.

They’ve learned to rely on your proximity, your gestures, or your positioning as the cue for the correct response. When those cues disappear, so does their accuracy.

This is especially common when using errorless learning with positional prompts that haven’t been faded appropriately. Or when you’ve been hovering during error correction and your physical presence has become the prompt.

How Prompt Dependency Develops in Errorless Learning

Errorless learning is where you’re using some kind of prompt to keep the student from making a mistake and gradually fade your prompting out. The key phrase there is “gradually fade.”

When we use errorless learning but don’t systematically fade our prompts, students can become prompt-dependent. Here’s how it typically happens:

You start with the correct answer positioned closest to the student. They succeed repeatedly. But you don’t move it back into the array quickly enough or systematically enough. Weeks go by and you’re still using the same positional prompt.

The student has now learned “the answer is always the one closest to me” rather than learning to discriminate between the actual stimuli. That’s prompt dependency in action.

How Prompt Dependency Can Happen with Error Correction Too

You might think error correction avoids prompt dependency, but it doesn’t always. Prompt dependency can develop with any ABA teaching method if we’re not careful about fading prompts.

With the no-no-prompt procedure, students can learn “I just have to get it wrong a couple times and then they’ll help me.” They’ve learned to game the system. The prompt after two “no” responses becomes predictable and they start relying on it.

With single error correction and breakdown, if you’re consistently giving the same type of prompt after errors, students may start making intentional errors to access your prompt. Again—prompt dependency.

What Your Data Is Telling You About Prompting Strategies

Your data will show you patterns that guide your instructional decision making. You need to look beyond just “correct” or “incorrect” and examine your prompting patterns.

Track not just accuracy but also what level of prompt was needed for each correct response. Are prompts staying constant or fading over time? That’s the critical question.

Red Flags in Your Discrete Trial Training Data

Watch for these patterns that indicate prompt dependency:

• no change in prompt level needed over 2-3 weeks of instruction,
• students requiring more intrusive prompts over time (regression in independence), or
• high accuracy rates but all responses are prompted.

Also watch for students who are accurate during teaching but can’t generalize the skill to new people or settings. That often indicates they’re dependent on specific prompts from specific people.

When to Switch FROM Errorless Learning TO Error Correction

If you’re using errorless learning and seeing signs of prompt dependency, it might be time to switch approaches. Here are the indicators:

Progress has stalled—your student isn’t moving toward independence despite consistent prompted trials. You suspect prompt dependency because they only get it right when you’re hovering nearby. Your systematic instruction isn’t producing the independence you’re aiming for.

You’ve been fading prompts but students still wait for some cue from you before responding.

Making this switch means you’ll start letting students make errors and using error correction procedures instead. Yes, this might initially result in more errors, but it can break the prompt dependency cycle.

When to Switch FROM Error Correction TO Errorless Learning

Sometimes error correction isn’t the answer either, especially when teaching students with autism who have behavioral challenges with corrections. Watch for these signs:

• Problem behaviors are increasing during instruction sessions.
• Your student is making the same errors repeatedly despite corrections.
• Frustration is visible and interfering with learning.
• Your student has stopped attempting responses and just waits for you to tell them the answer.

In these cases, switching to errorless learning with a very systematic fading plan can help. The key is that fading plan—you need to know from day one how you’ll reduce prompts.

Breaking Prompt Dependency: Your Action Plan

If you’ve identified prompt dependency, here’s how to address it:

Step 1: Stop using the prompts that aren’t being faded. If positional prompts aren’t working, try a different prompt type. If gestural prompts have become the cue, switch to a different modality.

Step 2: Build in prompt fading from the start. Create a specific schedule for fading prompts. For example: 3 trials with full prompt, 3 trials with partial prompt, 3 trials with minimal prompt, then probe for independence.

Step 3: Use data-driven instruction to monitor progress. Don’t wait three weeks to look at your data. Check it daily or at minimum after every week. If prompts aren’t fading within a week, adjust your approach.

Step 4: Increase the power of your reinforcement. Sometimes students become prompt-dependent because getting the answer right isn’t worth the effort of thinking. Make sure your reinforcers are strong enough to motivate independent responding.

The Power of Mix and Vary to Prevent Prompt Dependency

Whether you’re using error correction or errorless learning, mix and vary is your secret weapon against prompt dependency. We don’t give students burrito, burrito, burrito, burrito unless we’re doing that intentionally.

Mix in 50% mastery trials like we do in Pivotal Response Training (PRT). This keeps students engaged and gives them opportunities to respond independently on skills they’ve already mastered.

When students are succeeding independently on some trials and getting prompts on others, it’s less obvious which trials will have prompts. This unpredictability can actually help prevent prompt dependency because students can’t just wait for your cue—sometimes there isn’t one.

Matching Prompting Strategies to Student Needs

Different students need different approaches when it comes to fading prompts and preventing prompt dependency. Here’s how to decide between error correction and errorless learning based on your student’s learning profile:

For students who are highly prompt-dependent: Try error correction with mix and vary. Let them make mistakes on new skills but mix in lots of mastery trials where they can succeed independently. This breaks the pattern of waiting for prompts.

For students with behavioral challenges: Use errorless learning but with a written fading schedule you follow religiously. Set a timer if you need to—fade those prompts on schedule whether students seem “ready” or not.

For students who are perfectionists: Error correction might increase problem behavior. Consider errorless learning but use the probe-then-prompt system so you’re systematically reducing prompt levels based on data.

Special Considerations for Teaching Students with Autism

Students with autism often have difficulty screening out irrelevant stimuli. This makes them particularly vulnerable to prompt dependency because they may attend to our prompting behaviors rather than the relevant features of the task.

When using systematic instruction with students with autism, be especially vigilant about: using varied prompts so students don’t key into one specific cue, fading prompts more quickly than you think necessary, building in opportunities for independent responding from early in instruction, and checking for generalization frequently.

If students can do the skill with you but not with other teachers or in other settings, that’s a sign they’re dependent on specific prompts you’re giving—even if you don’t realize you’re giving them.

How to Decide Between Error Correction and Errorless Learning

Here’s a quick decision-making guide for choosing between these ABA teaching methods:

Choose errorless learning when: the skill is brand new, the student has a history of problem behavior with corrections, or previous error correction hasn’t led to progress. But commit to systematic fading from day one.

Choose error correction when: the student handles corrections well (check your data), the skill is partially mastered, or you need efficiency and your student isn’t making excessive errors. Use mix and vary to prevent frustration.

Watch out for prompt dependency regardless of which approach you choose. Error correction doesn’t automatically prevent it, and errorless learning doesn’t automatically cause it. Your fading plan and data monitoring make all the difference.

You Can Change Your Approach

Here’s the good news about instructional decision making: you’re not married to one approach forever. If your data shows prompt dependency developing, switch approaches.

Start with errorless learning for new or challenging skills, especially if your student has a history of problem behavior with corrections. Then fade to error correction as they become more successful and you see signs they can handle corrections.

Or start with error correction if your student handles it well and the skill isn’t brand new. If you start seeing prompt dependency or behavioral issues, you can always add more systematic prompting and shift toward errorless learning.

The key really is looking at your data and making decisions based on individual students, just like everything else we do. That’s where data really informs your instruction.

Your Next Steps for Data-Driven Instruction

Look at your current students and their data right now. Are you seeing signs of prompt dependency? Get honest about whether your prompts are fading or staying constant.

For any student where prompts aren’t fading: create a written fading schedule today, try a different type of prompt if current ones aren’t working, or consider switching from errorless learning to error correction (or vice versa).

Track prompt levels in your data, not just accuracy. You need both pieces of information to make good instructional decisions and prevent prompt dependency from developing.

And remember: prompt dependency isn’t a student problem—it’s an instruction problem. We can fix it by adjusting our teaching strategies and being more systematic about fading prompts.

Looking for Help Avoiding Prompt Dependence?

Want More Help?

Come Join the Special Educator Academy!

You’ll get 6 whole courses and tons of 5-minute and 15-minute videos!! 

Grab Your Free Trial