|
| Applying Behavior Analysis to Group-Based Interventions |
| Tuesday, May 29, 2007 |
| 10:30 AM–11:50 AM |
| America's Cup AB |
| Area: EDC; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Cynthia M. Anderson (University of Oregon) |
| CE Instructor: Cynthia M. Anderson, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Recently, increased attention has been directed at analysis of effects of secondary level or targeted group interventions with students who require additional social behavioral and/or academic support. Although these interventions have been demonstrated to be effective in some situations, more research is needed. This symposium addresses this need by examining further variables that affect outcomes of secondary interventions. In sum, studies to be presented suggest that secondary level interventions play a critical role in preventing the development of more serious problem behavior in schools. In the first presentation, Rodriguez and colleagues present data from First Steps to Success, a secondary intervention designed for children who begin school exhibiting antisocial behavior. Rodriguez et al. present data useful for identifying variables affecting the success of the program and for identifying students likely toand not torespond to the intervention. The second presentation by Fairbanks et al focuses on data obtained from a response to interventions model of behavior support, summarizing results of three studies conducted across multiple elementary classrooms. In this study, students first received a general, classroom restructuring intervention. Students who were not successful received progressively more individualized and intensive interventions. Fairbanks et al. will discuss how such a tailored model of interventions requires fewer resources from a school and may lead to improved student outcomes. The third presentation, by MacLeod, et al presents the results of secondary level intervention, the Behavior Education Program (BEP) in two parts: Part 1 is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the BEP with approximately 37 elementary school children exhibiting behavioral challenges in school. Part 2 examines the effectiveness of function-based interventions with a subset of the students who did not respond to the BEP. The final presentation is by Kauffman et al., and evaluates effectiveness and stimulus fading in a secondary level intervention similar to the BEP, Check n Check out. Although there is a growing research base supporting the efficacy of this intervention, further examination of maintenance of effects is needed. This study looks at maintenance over time and evaluates as well effects of removing intervention components systematically. |
| |
| An Evaluation of Variables Affecting the Success of First Steps to Success. |
| BILLIE JO RODRIGUEZ (University of Oregon), Deborah Russell (University of Nevada, Las Vegas), Cynthia M. Anderson (University of Oregon), Robert H. Horner (University of Oregon) |
| Abstract: First Steps for Success is a “packaged” targeted intervention designed for children who begin school exhibiting signs of antisocial behavior. It is considered a packaged intervention because it consists of multiple components implemented in a standard format for all participating children. First Steps for Success may be used with children in grades k-3, but is used most often in in kindergarten and first grade. The intervention occurs primarily at school; initially a trained consultant works closely with the student, providing frequent feedback on the student’s behavior. The goal of this phase is to (a) bring student behavior under the antecedent control of a “red/green” card used to provide feedback, and (b) bring appropriate responding under control of reinforcement contingencies. When the student is successful in this phase, the consultant gradually transfers stimulus control to the teacher and the program systematically is faded until the student is responding to the same contingencies maintaining other student’s appropriate behavior. First Steps has been found to be successful with approximately 65% of students with whom it is applied. In this presentation we will present data evaluating variables that may contribute to successful and nonsuccessful outcomes including the function of the child’s behavior and fidelity of implementation. |
| |
| Integrating Levels of Behavior Support in the Classroom. |
| SARAH A. FAIRBANKS (University of Connecticut), George Sugai (University of Connecticut), Brandi M. Simonsen (Spectrum Center), Diane Marie Myers (University of Connecticut) |
| Abstract: This presentation will describe a social behavior response to intervention model of behavior support, by summarizing the results of three interconnected studies conducted across multiple elementary classrooms. The first study is an evaluation of classroom behavior management, specifically, establishing, explicitly teaching, posting and reinforcing classroom expectations across target students and comparison peers. The second study is an evaluation of a check-in and check-out intervention implemented across participants who were non-responsive to the classroom management intervention. The third study is an evaluation of the impact of implementing function-based behavior interventions across participants who were less responsive to the check-in check-out intervention. Results and implications for future research and practice, with regard to response to intervention systems at the classroom level, will be discussed (note. This study will be conducted over the next few months to fulfill requirements for a doctoral degree). |
| |
| Examining the Combined Effects of Secondary Level Interventions and Individualized Function-Based Support Strategies. |
| KATHERINE SANDRA MACLEOD (University of Utah), Leanne Hawken (University of Utah), Robert E. O'Neill (University of Utah) |
| Abstract: This session will examine the results of secondary level intervention, the Behavior Education Program (BEP) in two parts: Part 1 is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the BEP among approximately 37 elementary school children. Part 2 examines the effectiveness of function-based interventions with a sample of the students who have not been successful with the BEP. have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing problem behaviors among students who are not responding to school wide interventions. However, recent research has suggested that not all students are successful in secondary level interventions, in part due to maintaining functions of their problem behavior. It is proposed that functional assessment, a technology used to identify factors maintaining problem behavior, would be helpful in clarifying if the BEP is differentially effective depending on the function of the problem behavior. This would assist in identifying students who may benefit most from participation in the BEP. In addition, functional assessment may also benefit students who are not successful in the BEP by assisting in the development of an effective behavior intervention plan. |
| |
| Evaluation of Stimulus Fading in a Secondary Intervention. |
| AMY L. KAUFFMAN (University of Oregon), Cynthia M. Anderson (University of Oregon) |
| Abstract: Check in Check out (CICO) is a targeted group intervention that is designed to provide behavioral support for students who are at-risk for developing serious behavior problems. This intervention is designed to be efficient in delivery and cost effective so that multiple students may receive support. Check in Check out includes: a daily “check in” and “check out” with a school staff member, daily teacher feedback, a home-school component, and a reward system for desired behavior. Although there is a growing research base supporting the efficacy of this program, no studies have examined maintenance of reductions in problem behavior upon fading. The present study examines (1) if a functional relation exists between CICO and reductions in problem behavior, and (2) which components of CICO can be successfully faded with reductions in problem behavior maintaining. In addition, this study examines if teacher attention predicts successful fading of CICO. Clinical and conceptual implications of these results, methodological limitations, and future research directions will be discussed. |
|
| |