Reducing Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Late Elementary School: A Comparison of Two Targeted Interventions

Abstract

Early indicators of risk correspond with behavioral disorders in childhood and beyond (Webster-Stratton & Reid, 2003). One early indicator of future negative short-and long-term outcomes is early school failure, which predicts compounded mental health issues, problem behavior and peer problems, exclusionary discipline (suspension, expulsion), grade retention, substance abuse, arrest and adjudication, and school dropout (Crews et al., 2007; Nelson, Stage, Trout, Duppong-Hurley, & Epstein, 2008). Longterm negative school and postschool outcomes affect community and family structures negatively, and reactive interventions to address these effects are costly (Walker & Sprague, 1999). Although many risk factors such as poverty status are not amenable to change with exposure to preventive interventions or early-onset treatments, many deleterious outcomes stemming from these complicating risk factors can be addressed. Integrated, comprehensive models of prevention and intervention can address multiple areas of risk and measured deficits, even prior to indicators of school failure or during the early onset of school failure indicators. One critical time point for these interventions is between the lower and upper elementary grades. As students progress through formal schooling and acquire literacy and mathematics skills in the lower grades, achievement gaps for students at risk widen. Therefore, assessment, identification, and responsive interventions need to be put in place during this time, prior to transition to secondary education. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) PBIS is an evidence-based framework for improving school climate, reducing problem behaviors, and maximizing instructional time. This three-tiered framework improves student outcomes through integrating systems, data, and 747595B HDXXX10.

Introduction to the Special Issue of Behavioral Disorders: Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports

“…Results indicated that schools must initially establish strong Tier 1 systems and practices that promote universal mental wellness and prevent mental health concerns to efficiently and effectively affect students needing supplemental supports due to internalizing behaviors. Building on the need to identify students not responding well to Tier 1 supports, McDaniel et al (2018) examined the the effects of check-in/ check-out and Coping Power interventions as Tier 2 interventions and how to best match student deficits to appropriate evidence-based interventions. Whereas the targeted interventions produced positive behavioral change, results showed that without an intervention, students who were nominated and rated by their teachers as exhibiting high levels of problem behaviors did not decrease their level of risk without intervention.…”

Substance Use Outcomes from Two Formats of a Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention for Aggressive Children: Moderating Roles of Inhibitory Control and Intervention Engagement

“…Coping Power intervention effects on multiple indices of problem behavior have also been found with youth diagnosed with disruptive behavior disorders [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ], with students with behavior problems in dissemination and implementation studies in schools and community settings [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 ], and with children in other cultural environments [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. When Coping Power has been implemented as a treatment for children with disruptive behavior disorders, it may also have a subsequent preventive effect for adolescent substance abuse and delinquent behavior.…”