Function-Based Interventions for Students Who Are Nonresponsive to Primary and Secondary Prevention Efforts: Illustrations at the Elementary and Middle School Levels
Lane, Kathleen Lynne; Rogers, Leslie A.; Parks, Robin J.; Weisenbach, Jessica L.; Mau, Ann C.; Merwin, Megan T.; Bergman, Wendy A. (2007). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, v15 n3 p169-183. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ775175
-
examining1Student, grades1-8
Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions Intervention Report
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2016
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please see Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions Intervention Report (977 KB)
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 50%
Male: 50% -
Rural
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Tennessee
Study Details
Setting
The study (for Aaron) took place in an eighth-grade science class in a rural Tennessee school district. The study (for Claire) took place in a general education classroom at an elementary school in a rural Tennessee school district. The district subscribed to a full inclusion model, and the schools used a three-tiered model of Positive Behavior Support (PBS).
Study sample
Two students were part of the study sample. Aaron was a 14-year-old male in eighth grade who had antisocial behavior and was at risk for an emotional and behavioral disorder classification. In the classroom, Aaron was highly noncompliant and also demonstrated impaired relationships with peers, a negative attitude, many problem behaviors, and poor academic achievement. Aaron had received special education services since fourth grade for a learning disability in written expression. The other student in the study sample was Claire, a 7-year-old first-grade student who had high levels of internalizing behavior and was at risk for emotional and behavioral disorder (EBD) classification. In the classroom, Claire seldom interacted with others, did not participate in class discussions, and struggled to respond to teacher questions. The authors used a changing criterion design to study the effects of FBA and the resulting FBA-based intervention on Claire’s social-emotional outcome (classroom participation). This experiment meets WWC pilot single-case design standards without reservations; however, the social-emotional competence domain does not reach the threshold to include single-case design evidence in the effectiveness ratings in this report.
Intervention
Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) procedures, including teacher and parent interviews, behavior rating scales completed by teachers, and direct observations, determined that Aaron engaged in noncompliance to increase teacher attention and escape assigned tasks. Aaron’s FBA-based intervention involved providing him with a checklist of tasks to complete when responding to questions or assignments shown on the classroom work board. The teacher and special education aide in Aaron’s classroom gave positive reinforcement only after Aaron had successfully completed the work board assignment and the checklist. When Aaron exhibited the target behavior, the teacher or assistant gave a verbal redirect lasting no longer than 2 seconds; all other attention was withheld until Aaron had completed his work board assignment and checklist. FBA procedures, including teacher and parent interviews, behavior rating scales completed by teachers, and direct observations, determined that Claire’s nonparticipation typically occurred during instruction periods where students were asked to respond in front of their peers, and that Claire was anxious about providing wrong answers in front of her teacher and peers. Claire’s FBA-based intervention involved Claire and her teacher setting a goal each morning for the number of times she would participate during each whole-class activity. Examples of participation and nonparticipation were modeled to Claire until she could identify the two behaviors and demonstrate them on her own. Claire was allowed a break from participation and from teacher and peer attention once she met her daily goal, but was no longer allowed to escape teacher and peer attention by displaying nonparticipation.
Comparison
The study used a reversal-withdrawal design for Aaron. The baseline/withdrawal sessions took place in Aaron’s classroom and consisted of regular classroom practices. The study used a changing criterion design for Claire; the baseline condition consisted of regular classroom practices.
Support for implementation
Researchers provided Aaron’s teacher with training about the specific components of the intervention, including the reinforcements, and how each of the components was to be implemented correctly. Aaron’s teacher agreed to provide the checklist each day and sign the checklist following Aaron’s completion of tasks. Claire’s teacher participated in an initial 6-hour training workshop that provided explicit instruction and examples of the FBA procedures, followed by 1-hr weekly follow-up meetings. Claire’s teacher was also trained to implement reinforcement and elimination of nonparticipation.
Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2008
Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom Practice Guide- Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom Practice Guide Review Protocol 1.0
- Review Standards 1.0
- Key Criteria Used in WWC Reviews of Single-Case Design Research
- Understanding WWC Intervention Reports That Summarize Single-Case Design Research
- The study is ineligible for review because standards for the study design were not available at the time of review
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).