The Effects of Data-Based, Individualized Interventions for Behavior

Abstract

Data-based individualization (DBI) is a systematic process used to guide teachers in making decisions related to students’ responsiveness to intervention. Whereas this process has been used extensively with academic interventions, far less is known about DBI used within the context of behavioral interventions. In this study, elementary general and special education teachers (a) implemented a technology-based, self-monitoring intervention with students exhibiting challenging behavior; and (b) used DBI to evaluate student progress and make intervention adaptations accordingly. Results of multilevel modeling indicated students improved their positive behavior significantly ( p < .001) from baseline to intervention. For most students, once they began intervention, positive behaviors either maintained or increased gradually when teachers made adaptations to the self-monitoring intervention. In addition to these results, an analysis of the effects of different intervention adaptations (e.g., raising or lowering goals, increasing or decreasing interval length) and visual analysis of individual students’ response are discussed.

Causes, prevention, and interventions regarding classroom disruptions in digital teaching: A systematic review

“…Of the 16 articles considered for this review, 7 articles (Baker et al, 2016;Blundell et al, 2019;Boyaci, 2010;Charles, 2012;Kurz & Batarelo, 2010;Muir et al, 2013;Storch & Juarez-Paz, 2019) made use of a purely qualitative approach, and 3 (Heitink et al, 2017;Ho, 2004;Judge et al, 2013) chose a quantitative one, leaving 6 studies that utilized a mixed-methods approach (Bruhn et al, 2020;Homer et al, 2018;Hummel et al, 2015;Li & Titsworth, 2015;Moltudal et al, 2019;Rosen & Beck-Hill, 2012). In terms of the qualitative articles, content analyses based on written texts and semi-structured interviews were applied the most.…”

“…It is worth mentioning that every study included teachers somehow. Practicing teachers were part of 10 studies (Blundell et al, 2019;Bruhn et al, 2020;Charles, 2012;Heitink et al, 2017;Ho, 2004;Homer et al, 2018;Li & Titsworth, 2015;Moltudal et al, 2019;Rosen & Beck-Hill, 2012;Storch & Juarez-Paz, 2019), and 6 studies mentioned beginning/pre-service teachers (Baker et al, 2016;Boyaci, 2010;Hummel et al, 2015;Judge et al, 2013;Kurz & Batarelo, 2010;Muir et al, 2013). Combined with this, in 5 studies, students were also a part of the research design (Bruhn et al, 2020;Homer et al, 2018;Li & Titsworth, 2015;Moltudal et al, 2019;Rosen & Beck-Hill, 2012).…”

Curriculum Programming in the General Education Setting for Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Special educators utilize a DBI process that “individually [tailors] instruction for students with significant learning problems” (Fuchs et al., 2014, p. 16) which includes (a) validating intervention programs (VIPs), (b) monitoring student progress while using a VIP, (c) diagnosing error patterns through direct assessment, (d) applying adaptations to interventions, and (e) monitoring student progress while using the adapted intervention (see TEACHING Exceptional Children special issue published in 2014). This DBI approach has been used to intensify mathematics interventions (Powell & Stecker, 2014), behavioral interventions (Bruhn et al., 2020), and reading interventions (Filderman et al., 2018) for preK–12 students with behavioral disorders (Maggin et al., 2016), specific learning disabilities (Jung et al., 2018), and autism spectrum disorders (Solis et al., 2018).…”

A Comparison of Teacher and Student Ratings in a Self-Monitoring Intervention

“…In some cases, these data may be used to make decisions about student responsiveness to SM. In a recent study, 13 elementary teachers and one of their students completed ratings of students' behavior during one instructional classroom activity (Bruhn et al, 2019). The length of the time between ratings (e.g., every 5 min) and total session length varied by teacher (e.g., 45 min).…”