Response to Intervention for Social Behavior

Hawken, Leanne S.; Vincent, Claudia G.; Schumann, Joan

doi:10.1177/1063426608316018

Cited by 152 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This individualization is important because it may not make sense for all students receiving CICO to start off at a standard goal of 80%, but rather, some students may need to start lower than 80% and gradually increase the goal over time (e.g., Lane et al, 2012). However, given 15% of a school's population may require an intervention such as CICO (Hawken, Vincent, & Schumann, 2008), individualizing goals within CICO may pose a practical issue when a large number of students are participating. In other interventions, such as social problem solving, individualizing goals based on previous or current performance may be more manageable.…”

Section: Independent Variable and Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Bruhn

McDaniel

Fernando

2016

Behavioral Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students with persistent behavior problems, including those with or at risk for emotional or behavioral disorders, often struggle to be self-regulated learners. To improve self-regulation skills, numerous strategies have been suggested, including goal setting. Whereas goal setting has focused mostly on academic and life skills, behavioral goal setting has received less attention, particularly in terms of determining best practices for effective goal setting in school-based interventions. Thus, the purpose of this review was to examine the existing literature on interventions using behavioral goal setting alone and behavioral goal setting as part of a multicomponent intervention for students with persistent behavior problems. Findings from 40 studies are discussed in terms of participants, setting, design, measures, intervention components, and outcomes with a specific focus on directions for future research and implications for practice.▪ The term "self-determination" has been used to describe a multitude of behaviors and beliefs that help people live independent, self-directed lives (Wehmeyer & Field, 2007). Carter, Lane, Crnobori, Bruhn, and Oakes (2011) reviewed the literature on self-determination interventions aimed at improving this broad group of metacognitive skills for students with and at risk for emotional or behavioral disorders (EBD). Interventions in their review focused on a range of skills, including making choices and decisions, problem-solving activities, goal setting, promoting self-advocacy skills, self-awareness, self-knowledge, self-assessment, and self-regulation. The most commonly studied self-determination strategy, according to their review, was self-regulation.

show abstract

Section: Independent Variable and Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Bruhn

McDaniel

Fernando

2016

Behavioral Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These help to prevent problem behavior by prompting more appropriate behavior before a problem has occurred. Check-in/check-out (Fairbanks et al, 2007;Filter et al, 2007;Hawken et al, 2007;Hawken, Vincent, & Schumann, 2008), a frequently used Tier II intervention for students with disruptive or inattentive behavior, is a pointcard intervention that is aligned with the Tier I component of SWPBS (i.e., students earn points throughout the day for exhibiting behaviors aligned with the school's school-wide expectations). In check-in/check-out, students meet with an intervention coordinator at the beginning of the day to receive their point card and review behavioral expectations.…”

Section: Essential Features Of Tier II Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tier II Interventions within the Framework of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support: Essential Features for Design, Implementation, and Maintenance

Anderson

Borgmeier

2010

Behav Analysis Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To meet the complex social behavioral and academic needs of all students, schools benefit from having available multiple evidence-based interventions of varying intensity. School-wide positive behavior support provides a framework within which a continuum of evidence-based interventions can be implemented in a school. This framework includes three levels or tiers of intervention; Tier I (primary or universal), Tier II (secondary or targeted), and Tier III (tertiary or individualized) supports. In this paper we review the logic behind school-wide positive behavior support and then focus on Tier II interventions, as this level of support has received the least attention in the literature. We delineate the key features of Tier II interventions as implemented within school-wide positive behavior support, provide guidelines for matching Tier II interventions to school and student needs, and describe how schools plan for implementation and maintenance of selected interventions. Keywords: prevention, problem behavior in schools, school-wide positive behavior support, secondary interventions, Tier II interventions ABSTRACT T

show abstract

“…This study demonstrates that function-based components can be added to Tier 2 interventions to more appropriately match students' needs while maintaining efficiency. A critical issue in this regard is the need for empirically-based decision rules to guide staff in deciding when students require additional supports beyond the Tier 1 or 2 levels (Hawken, Vincent, & Schumann, 2008;Walker, Cheney, Stage, Blum, & Horner, 2005). Some decisions could be made based on DPR data.…”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some decisions could be made based on DPR data. For example, changes in a student's DPR data while on CICO may indicate a problem in the classroom before the student receives an ODR (Hawken et al, 2008). The team may decide to lower the student's goal and monitor the data (Crone et al, 2010).…”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Combining Tier 2 and Tier 3 Supports for Students with Disabilities in General Education Settings

MacLeod

Hawken

O’Neill

et al. 2016

JEI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secondary level or Tier 2 interventions such as the Check-in Check-out (CICO) intervention effectively reduce problem behaviors of students who are non-responsive to school-wide interventions. However, some students will not be successful with Tier 2 interventions. This study investigated the effects of adding individualized function-based support for four students with disabilities who were not successful in general education settings while receiving only a secondary level intervention. Results indicated that the combination of secondary and individualized function-based interventions effectively decreased problem behavior for all participants. Teachers and students rated the interventions as acceptable and effective. Research and practice implications are discussed.

show abstract

Response to Intervention for Social Behavior

Cited by 152 publications

References 38 publications

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

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

Tier II Interventions within the Framework of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support: Essential Features for Design, Implementation, and Maintenance

Combining Tier 2 and Tier 3 Supports for Students with Disabilities in General Education Settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About