Positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS; Sugai & Horner, 2006) is an application of multitiered systems of support logic that establishes interventions to address student behavior within the school. PBIS is a popular intervention framework used in more than 20,000 schools across 45 states (Bradshaw, Waasdorp, & Leaf, 2015; Simonsen, Myers, & Briere, 2011). At the Tier 1 level, a school-wide PBIS system is implemented in which all students are taught basic behavioral expectations and are rewarded for meeting those expectations (Sugai & Horner, 2006). At Tier 2, check-in/check-out (CICO; Hawken & Horner, 2003) is perhaps the most common intervention strategy within a PBIS framework (Bruhn, Lane, & Hirsch, 2014; Debnam, Pas, & Bradshaw, 2012) and is thought to bridge the gap between Tier 1 and Tier 3 services (Wolfe et al., 2016). Description of CICO CICO is a mentor-based behavioral intervention that is comprised of five core treatment components. Specifically, CICO includes (a) a daily check-in meeting with an adult, during which behavioral expectations are introduced and defined; (b) the use of a daily progress report (DPR) that the student carries throughout the day to monitor behavior; (c) teacher provided feedback on the DPR about the student's behavior at regularly scheduled intervals; (d) a daily checkout which often includes reinforcement contingent upon appropriate behavior; and (e) home-school communication, typically using the DPR (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010; Mitchell, Adamson, & McKenna, 2017). CICO has been identified as highly effective for reducing problem behavior and somewhat effective for increasing appropriate behavior in recent systematic reviews (e.g., Maggin, Zurheide, Pickett, & Baillie, 2015; Wolfe et al., 2016). Yet, Maggin et al. (2015) and Wolfe et al. (2016) noted that CICO was less effective or ineffective for students whose problem behavior was maintained by a function other than adult attention, a finding that has been reported in previous CICO research. For example, McIntosh, Campbell, Carter, and Dickey (2009) found that CICO produced large, desirable effects on problem behaviors (d = 1.04), office discipline referrals (d = 0.78), and prosocial behavior (d = 0.99) for 778032P BIXXX10.
Common universal screening methods for determining math risk in middle school grades may not result in optimal diagnostic accuracy. We evaluated current screening practices and several potential modifications for predicting math proficiency on an end-of-year state test in a suburban school district. Previously, the district used the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) to determine student risk in fall. Creating local cut scores for the preceding-year state test scores and the MAP resulted in the most accurate and efficient methods of assessing risk. Multiskill computation and application curriculum-based measures added little relative value to the combination of MAP and preceding-year state test scores. Results suggest schools could improve their screening practices by first evaluating their current procedures and, if unacceptable, determining whether local cut scores provide the desired improvements to accuracy before considering the adoption of additional measures.
Practitioners supporting the implementation of behavior interventions must be aware of the relevant legal and ethical considerations pertinent to these services. The purpose of this chapter is to provide readers with a review of the ethical and legal issues that must be considered regarding the implementation of school-based behavior interventions. First, the chapter reviews relevant laws governing the use of school-based behavior interventions. Second, it reviews the ethical codes of three professional organizations to highlight considerations for providing behavior interventions. Third, it identifies broad ethical and legal issues that are relevant across several aspects of service delivery. Fourth, it provides a more comprehensive review of the ethical and legal considerations for four issues that may be the most pertinent for practitioners. Fifth, the chapter discusses ethical decision-making and reviews a systematic problem-solving model. Finally, it reviews ethical challenges reported by practitioners in previous empirical work that are related to behavior interventions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.