Kern, Lee; Delaney, Beth; Clarke, Shelley; Dunlap, Glen; Childs, Karen (2001). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, v9 n4 p239-47. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ637186
Reviewed: December 2016
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.
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please see Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions Intervention Report (977 KB)
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
The study took place at two public elementary schools in self-contained classrooms for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Both classrooms had 8–10 students, a teacher, and a paraprofessional. The study sessions took place during a journal activity for Art and handwriting activities for Benjamin. All classroom management procedures, including a point system providing awards for different behaviors, remained constant across all phases of the study.
Two students were part of the study sample. Both students were 11 years old and in the fifth grade. Art was diagnosed as having an emotional disturbance. He had poor task engagement and peer relations and demonstrated disruptive behavior and frequent noncompliance. Benjamin was diagnosed as having an emotional and behavioral disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. He displayed frequent disruptive behaviors and poor task engagement and peer relations.
Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) procedures for both students included direct observations of students and structured interviews with teachers, other school staff, and students. Based on the FBA, researchers hypothesized that problem behavior would decrease and task engagement would increase for both students if they could complete their work in a preferred writing medium. It was also hypothesized that Benjamin’s behavior would improve if his interests were incorporated into his tasks. Art’s FBA-based intervention involved using a preferred writing medium, a portable laptop computer, during journal assignments in which he could write about either a topic provided by the teacher or one of his own choosing. Benjamin’s FBA-based intervention required him to neatly copy four to five sentences from a photocopied handwriting sheet onto a blank sheet of paper. In the intervention condition, the handwriting sheets consisted of copies of pages from a Sega Genesis game booklet. For Benjamin, the study authors also examined another FBA-based intervention that involved giving him the choice of one of three media with which to complete his spelling assignments; the experiment used an ABACDC design for this comparison and does not meet WWC pilot single-case design standards because it did not include at least three attempts to demonstrate an intervention effect at three different points in time.
The study used a reversal-withdrawal design for both students. During the baseline/withdrawal condition, Art used traditional paper and pencil during journal assignments rather than a laptop. Art’s journal assignment required that he write about either a topic provided by the teacher or one of his own choosing. He was required to complete this assignment in a composition notebook. Benjamin was assigned sentences from a handout including topics such as dinosaurs, funny poems, or the solar system for his writing assignments. His daily assignment was to neatly copy four to five sentences from a photocopied handwriting sheet onto a blank sheet of paper. In all other ways, the assignments were identical to those in the intervention condition.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube