Study: 85502

IES Performance Measure

Review Details

Reviewed: December 2018

At least one finding shows promising evidence of effectiveness

At least one statistically significant positive finding

Meets WWC standards without reservations

For:

IES Performance Measure (findings for IES Funded Studies )

Using:

Research Design:

Randomized Controlled Trial

Rating:

Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.

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

Academic achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
Response contingent behavior per game	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	0 Weeks	Full sample; 71 students	18.31	4.76	Yes	50

Behavior outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Percent of learning trials with reinforcing consequence behavior	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	Full sample; 71 students	99.99	52.36	Yes	50
Response contingent behavior, counts	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	Full sample; 71 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	--
Concomitant child social-emotional behavior	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	Full sample; 71 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	--
Collateral child social-emotional behavior	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	Full sample; 71 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	--
Average non-prompted child behavior with reinforcing consequences per minute	IES Funded Studies vs. Other intervention	Full sample; 71 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	--

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: 48%
Male: 52%
- 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
South

Race
Other or unknown		100%

Study Details

Setting

The study included children and their families in three southeastern states in the United States. The intervention was delivered during home visits that practitioners made to children's homes.

Study sample

Practitioners visited children in their homes weekly or every other week for 8 weeks and, together with children’s parents, identified target behavior. The practitioners and parents also identified child-specific learning games related to these the target behaviors. Parents taught these learning games to their children during and between home visits. The only difference between the asset-based (intervention) and needs-based (comparison) groups was the manner in which target behaviors were identified—existing behaviors or “assets” were identified for the intervention group and missing behaviors or “needs” were identified for the comparison group. In the asset-based procedure used for the intervention group, parents and practitioners observed children’s daily home activities and parents provided feedback on the types of behavior their children used. Observations were guided by an investigator-developed checklist of behaviors. The parents and practitioners identified and focused on target behaviors that the children already used but had not used intentionally to produce social or learning interactions.

Intervention Group

The children in the comparison group had target behaviors identified based on a needs-based procedure. Through this procedure, children’s missing skills were identified using the Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming Systems. The skills identified were part of six domains: fine motor, gross motor, adaptive, cognitive, social-communication, and social.

Comparison Group

Practitioners visited children in their homes weekly or every other week for 8 weeks and together with children's parents, identified missing skills that needed to be taught. They also identified learning games in which the target behavior was taught. Children's parents taught these learning games to their children during and between home visits. The only difference between the intervention and comparison groups was the manner in which target behaviors were identified—existing behaviors or 'assets' were identified for the intervention group and missing behaviors or "needs" were identified for the comparison group. The children in the comparison group had target behaviors identified based on a needs-based procedure. Through this procedure, children's missing skills were identified using the Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming Systems (AEPS). The skills identified were part of six domains: fine motor, gross motor, adaptive, cognitive, social-communication, and social.

Support for implementation

Staff were taught the intervention practices over 2 months using an evidence-based procedure for adult learning. This procedure had four phases of learning: "1) acquiring information about and examples of the intervention practices; (2) authentic use of the interventions and evaluating the characteristics and outcomes of the practices; (3) reflecting on their overall understanding and mastery of the practices; and (4) identifying and participating in additional opportunities to learn to use their particular approach to intervention" (Raab et al., 2017). Staff learned what practices to identify using video examples and staff engaged in role playing and feedback to ensure they were consistent. These staff taught parents to use the practices in their homes using the same procedures.

Additional Sources

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

Raab, M., Dunst, C. J., & Hamby, D. W. (2017). Efficacy trial of contrasting approaches to the response-contingent learning of young children with significant developmental delays and multiple disabilities. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 7(1), 12-28.

Contrasting approaches to the response-contingent learning of young children with significant delays and their social–emotional consequences