Christensen, Lynnette; Young, K. Richard; Marchant, Michelle (2004). Education & Treatment of Children, v27 n3 p199-234. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ727413
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.
| Hispanic | 100% |
The study was conducted in an urban elementary school. The school’s student population was 53% Caucasian, 40% Hispanic, and 7% other ethnicity; 67% of the students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch. Eduardo’s intervention took place in a third-grade general education classroom with 23 students.
The study sample included two 8-year-old boys, Eduardo and Justin, who were determined to be at risk for an emotional and behavioral disorder. Eduardo demonstrated high rates of disruptive and off-task behavior in the classroom. He had recently arrived at the school from Ecuador, but spoke English and no longer qualified for English as a second language services. He performed below grade level in math and reading and received daily tutoring in those subjects. The experiment for Justin did not meet WWC pilot single-case design standards because it does not include at least three attempts to demonstrate an intervention effect at three different points in time; thus, this experiment is not described in this report or included in the ratings of effectiveness.
Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) procedures, including a teacher interview, observations conducted across different academic subject times, identification of problem behaviors and alternative positive behaviors, and a survey to identify potential reinforcers, determined that Eduardo’s problem behavior was caused by the lack of attention he received in his classroom. Specifically, there was a low rate of reinforcement, especially attention-based reinforcement by the teacher and peers, for appropriate behavior. The study examined the effects of an individualized FBA-based intervention called Positive Behavior Support that was directly aligned to Eduardo’s needs and included self-monitoring, peer and teacher support and attention, and reinforcement for appropriate behavior, using tokens and praise.
The study used a reversal-withdrawal design. During the baseline/withdrawal condition, there was no formal behavior management system in place in the classroom. Observations revealed that the teacher would occasionally praise students or call out to the class that they were doing well. Consequences for inappropriate behavior were inconsistent.
Eduardo’s classroom teacher was trained by a behavior specialist, who presented an overview of the intervention plan and the role of the peer partner. The teacher also learned about the process for providing reinforcement and praise. Eduardo’s teacher then trained the student pair (Eduardo and his peer) in her class, through two 1-hour sessions. A training checklist was used by the teacher to verify the mastery of items.
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