Bradshaw, Catherine P.; Mitchell, Mary M.; Leaf, Philip J. (2010). Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, v12 n3 p133-148. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ889024
Reviewed: March 2022
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) Grade 5 reading Score |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
10.67 |
9.78 |
No |
-- | |
|
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) Grade 3 reading Score |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
20.45 |
19.11 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) Grade 5 Math Score |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
22.61 |
16.98 |
No |
-- | |
|
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) Grade 3 Math Score |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
14.58 |
17.89 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist (TOCA-C): emotion regulation |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
4.41 |
4.52 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Percent received counseling for social skills development |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
20.00 |
22.00 |
No |
-- | |
|
Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist (TOCA-C): aggressive and disruptive behaviors |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
2.01 |
1.94 |
No |
-- | |
|
Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist (TOCA-C): concentration problems |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
2.78 |
2.69 |
No |
-- | |
|
Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist (TOCA-C): prosocial behaviors |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
4.61 |
4.65 |
No |
-- | |
|
Percent received counseling for inappropriate behavior |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.00 |
16.00 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
School-level suspension rate |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
-3.64 |
3.58 |
No |
-- | |
|
Office Disciplinary Referrals |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist (TOCA-C): out-of-school suspension |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 4% | |
| Black | 45% | |
| Native American | 1% | |
| Other or unknown | 4% | |
| White | 46% |
| Hispanic | 4% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 96% |
The study took place in 37 Maryland public elementary schools from five rural and suburban school districts.
The sample of students included slightly more males (53%) than females (47%). Students identified as African American (45%) and White (46%). Just under half (49%) received free or reduced-price meals. Thirteen percent received special education services.
Schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports (Sugai & Horner, 2006) is a universal prevention strategy that aims to reduce disruptive behavior problems by targeting staff behavior, which in turn promotes positive change in student behavior. Each school forms a team comprising 5 to 6 members (e.g., teachers, administrators). The team attends annual training events, establishes an action plan to implement the strategies, develops materials to support program implementation, trains other staff members, and meets regularly to discuss behavior management procedures.
Comparison schools conducted business as usual, and provided assurances that they would not participate in schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports training during the study period.
Schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports teams attend an initial 2-day summer training and annual 2-day booster training events. All intervention schools receive at least monthly on-site support and technical assistance from a trained behavior support coach. Professional development and technical assistance were provided to the behavior support coaches through state-coordinated training events conducted four times each year.
Reviewed: February 2014
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Concentration |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grades 3-5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Emotion Regulation |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grades 3-5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Disruptive Behaviors |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grades 3-5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Office Discipline Referral |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grades 3-5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Office Discipline Referral |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Overall;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of students proficient in math |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grade 5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Percentage of students proficient in math |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grade 3;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of students proficient in reading |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grade 3;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Percentage of students proficient in reading |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grade 5,;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Prosocial behaviors |
Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports vs. Business as usual |
Four school years |
Grades 3-5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| White | 60% |
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