Applying Response to Intervention Metrics in the Social Domain for Students at Risk of Developing Emotional or Behavioral Disorders

Abstract

Response to Intervention (RtI) has become an important element of policy, practice, and research since the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In this article, five metrics recommended by Gresham (2005) were used to evaluate the progress of 127 students who were at risk of developing emotional disturbance and enrolled in a Tier 2 targeted group intervention. Student progress on a daily behavior report card was used to identify responders and nonresponders. Results suggest that percentage of change and effect size were the most useful metrics and identified 67% of the students as responders to the intervention. Additionally, 91% of the responders were not identified for special education, and over 50% reduced their problem behavior ratings on the Social Skills Rating System Teacher Form. These findings suggest that the intervention reduced the student's at-risk status and helped prevent the development of emotional and behavioral disabilities.

Goal-Setting Interventions for Students with Behavior Problems: A Systematic Review

“…In one singlesubject study, a functional relation was discussed by authors who indicated one could not be established due to the limitation of the design (i.e., AB design; Swoszowski, Jolivette, & Fredrick, 2013). Statistically significant effects were reported for students' classroom behavior (e.g., Fabiano et al, 2010;Simonsen et al, 2011); daily report cards (e.g., Cheney et al, 2008;Cheney et al, 2009); scores on the Social Skills Rating System (Gresham & Elliott, 1990;e.g., Cheney et al, 2008;Cheney et al, 2009), Teacher Rating Form (Achenbach, 2001; e.g., Cheney et al, 2009), and Behavior Assessment Scale for Children 2 (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004;e.g., McIntosh et al, 2009); academic productivity and success (e.g., Fabiano et al, 2010); and office discipline referrals (e.g., Hawken, O'Neill, & MacLeod, 2011;McIntosh et al, 2009).…”

Response-to-intervention (RTI) as a model to facilitate inclusion for students with learning and behaviour problems

“…All six students decreased problem behaviour and increased academic study skills. In a study by Cheney, Flower, and Templeton (2008), two-thirds of 127 students at risk for behaviour problems responded to Tier-2-targeted intervention. The intervention reduced the prevalence of emotional-behaviour disorders by 50%.…”

Jóvenes, fracaso escolar y programas de segunda oportunidad / Youth, academic failure and second chance training programmes

“…Tutors and entrepreneurs think that these young people show low self-confidence, low self-esteem, and low motivation, chiefly at the beginning of the training programme. They refer these features as disruptive behaviours as many authors do (Cheney, Flower y Templeton, 2008;Kazdin y Buela, 1994;Carrascosa y Martínez, 1998;Walker et al, 1996). But as these youths progress in the training programme, they improve this behavioural profile and increase their self-confidence, self-esteem, and motivations because they perceive that they are able to achieve the aims of this applied and personalized training programmes.…”