HLP910.pdf

McLeskey, J., Barringer, M-D., Billingsley, B., Brownell, M., Jackson, D., Kennedy, M., Lewis, T., Maheady, L., Rodriguez, J., Scheeler, M. C., Winn, J., & Ziegler, D. (2017, January). High-leverage practices in special education. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children & CEEDAR Center. © 2017 CEC & CEEDAR 1

Effective special education teachers establish a consistent, organized, and respectful learning environment to support student success. To do this, they employ several practices that are critical in promoting student social and emotional well-being. First, effective teachers focus on increasing appropriate behavior by adopting an instructional approach that incorporates the explicit teaching of social skills and offers students multiple opportunities to practice appropriate social behaviors throughout the school day followed by positive specific feedback. Second, they implement evidence-based practices to prevent social, emotional,

and behavioral challenges and provide early intervention at the first sign of risk. Third, effective teachers provide increasingly comprehensive supports through a team-based problem-solving strategy, to match the intensity of student challenges guided by behavioral assessment. Finally, they implement all behavioral supports—even those in response to significant problem behavior—in a caring, respectful, and culturally relevant manner. Effective teachers recognize that academic and behavioral support strategies are more effective when delivered within the context of positive and caring teacher–student relationships.

HLP7 Establish a consistent, organized, and respectful learning environment.

To build and foster positive relationships, teachers should establish age-appropriate and culturally responsive expectations, routines, and procedures within their classrooms that are positively stated and explicitly taught and practiced across the school year. When students demonstrate mastery and follow established rules and routines, teachers should provide age-appropriate specific performance feedback in meaningful and caring ways. By establishing, following, and reinforcing expectations of all students within the classroom, teachers will reduce the potential for challenging behavior and increase student engagement. When establishing learning environments, teachers should build mutually respectful relationships with students and engage them in setting the classroom climate (e.g., rules and routines); be respectful; and value ethnic, cultural, contextual, and linguistic diversity to foster student engagement across learning environments.

Social/Emotional/Behavioral Practices: Research Syntheses

High-Leverage Practicesin Special Education

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Special educators cannot “make” students learn or behave; they can, however, create environments to increase the likelihood that students do both (Lewis, 2009). The foundation of any effective learning environment includes clear and consistent rules, routines, and procedures that keep students engaged and on track throughout the school day. All classroom procedures should be implemented in a proactive and positive manner in which the special educator is always the exemplar in treating students and other adults in a respectful and caring manner.

Rules should be stated positively (i.e., what the teacher wants students to do rather than does not want them to do) and kept to five or fewer. Examples and nonexamples of behavioral expectations should be directly taught and expectations should be practiced throughout the school year until students demonstrate mastery.

Routines such as entering and exiting the classroom, how to respond to the teacher’s attention signal, how to seek assistance, and expectations during activity transitions should be considered, as well as other daily routines. Critical steps to comply with procedures and routines should be task-analyzed and explicitly taught and practiced with students.

The conventional recommended ratio found in the professional literature is for every corrective statement a teacher makes, educators should look for at least four opportunities to acknowledge appropriate behavior (i.e., student demonstrations of classroom expectations). The goal is to

acknowledge student mastery of social-behavioral expectations and compliance with procedures, not to point out frequent errors.

Special educators should provide students with opportunities to respond to both social and academic requests throughout the day, and prompts should reflect the nature of the academic or social expectation (e.g., “who can tell me what voice level we use when we walk to lunch?”). The rate of opportunities to respond will vary across age and severity of disability, but should be a primary instructional strategy during acquisition and fluency building among all students.

Special educators should strive for a balance of direct instruction, multiple opportunities for students to practice with high rates of feedback, and high rates of student success (i.e., 80% or better proficiency on tasks) to promote high engagement time and low rates of off-task behavior. For every lesson, student learning progress should be carefully monitored and instruction, practice, and feedback adjusted accordingly.

Research Support

A clear body of evidence exists to support these classroom strategies, as well as several others (see Hattie, 2008, for a comprehensive review). Researchers have examined combinations of the above on both academic and social behavior effects (Armendariz & Umbreit, 1999; Blackwell & McLaughlin, 2005; Bowman-Perrott. 2009;

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Haydon et al., 2010; Lewis, Hudson, Richter, & Johnson, 2004; Spencer, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 2003; Sutherland, Wehby, & Yoder, 2002) and the essential features to increase teacher use of evidence-based practices (Simonsen, Fairbanks, Briesch, Myers, & Sugai, 2008; Simonsen, Myers, & DeLuca, 2010; Stichter et al., 2009; Wehby, Tally, & Falk, 2004). The Institute for Education Science’s What Works Clearinghouse has indicated these and several similar strategies as having moder-ate to strong empirical evidence at the elementary level (What Works Clearing-house, 2008).

Conclusion

Establishing a clear, consistent, and positive learning environment serves as the foundation for all other high-leverage practices (HLPs). It increases the likelihood of student academic and social behavior success, it increases educator opportunities to engage in effective instructional practices, and it fosters caring and respectful interactions between educators and students. Research over the past 50 years consistently reaffirms the effects that classroom management and instruction have on both academic and social performance (Hattie, 2008).

HLP8 Provide positive and constructive feedback to guide students’ learning and behavior.

The purpose of feedback is to guide student learning and behavior and increase student motivation, engagement, and independence, leading to improved student learning and behavior. Effective feedback must be strategically delivered and goal directed; feedback is most effective when the learner has a goal and the feedback informs the learner regarding areas needing improvement and ways to improve performance. Feedback may be verbal, nonverbal, or written, and should be timely, contingent, genuine, meaningful, age appropriate, and at rates commensurate with task and phase of learning (i.e., acquisition, fluency, maintenance). Teachers should provide ongoing feedback until learners reach their established learning goals.

Note. As discussed in the Preface, two research syntheses were developed for the practice of providing effective feedback; this item appears in both the Social/Emotional/Behavioral Practices HLPs and the Instruction HLPs.

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

There is a common misconception that high rates of positive reinforcement will do “harm” to students’ intrinsic motivation or “don’t work.” Positive reinforcement means that when the environment contingently follows a student’s behavior with an action, and that behavior maintains or increases, whatever followed the behavior is reinforcing to the student. Just like academic skill mastery, if teachers want students to build social behavior skill mastery they must provide specific, contingent feedback. If students make social behavior learning errors, (i.e., problem behavior), feedback should focus on what social skill the student should have used (Lewis, Jones, Horner, & Sugai, 2010). If students demonstrate the appropriate social skill, feedback should acknowledge student effort and include the classroom expectation or rule (e.g, “I see you are working hard to be a ‘respectful’ learner: You are working quietly so others can learn”).

The idea that students should always be moti-vated intrinsically simply is not possible. Activities that are intrinsically motivating are those that in and of them-selves are reinforcing to the individual (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Unfortunately, most students do not find writing reports or solving alge-bra problems intrinsically motivating. What special educators should do is use actions and activities that are extrinsically motivat-ing, but work toward student self-regula-

tion of those motivators. For example, the goal is for students to complete a difficult math assignment not because the assign-ment is intrinsically motivating (i.e., inher-ently fun and enjoyable) but rather because they choose to engage in the task (i.e., self-regulation) because they know it will lead to an outcome that is reinforcing (i.e., free time, acknowledgment from parents—both of which are extrinsic motivators; Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Research Support

From early seminal work such as the “good behavior game” (Medland & Stachnik, 1972) and Brophy’s (1981) work on key teacher behaviors within effective classrooms, there is a strong literature base to support the

use of positive specif-ic feedback to acknow ledge and increase aca-demic and social skill mas-tery (Alberto & Troutman, 2013; Darch & Kame’enui, 2004; Lewis et al., 2010; Nelson & Roberts, 2000;

Simonsen & Myers, 2105; Stichter & Lewis, 2006; Sutherland, Alder, & Gunter, 2003; Sutherland, Wehby, & Copeland, 2000; Sutherland et al,, 2002). The theoretical work to disprove the impact of acknowledgment is limited and often misinterprets concep-tual frameworks or demonstrates limitations of external motivators within constrained re-search methodology (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Just like academic skill mastery, if teachers want students to build social behavior skill mastery they must provide specific, contingent feedback.

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Conclusion

Confusion over terms such as intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, reinforcement, rewards, praise, and similar terms continues—often intentionally by authors wishing to push their theoretical view, and many times inadvertently by well-meaning educators. If educators want to teach skills to mastery

and have them maintained and generalized beyond the school day, specific positive feedback, as well as corrective instructional feedback when learning errors occur, is an essential and crucial element of the teaching and learning process. This simple yet highly effective element of learning environments promotes both academic and social success.

HLP9 Teach social behaviors.

Teachers should explicitly teach appropriate interpersonal skills, including communication, and self-management, aligning lessons with classroom and schoolwide expectations for student behavior. Prior to teaching, teachers should determine the nature of the social skill challenge. If students do not know how to perform a targeted social skill, direct social skill instruction should be provided until mastery is achieved. If students display performance problems, the appropriate social skill should initially be taught, then emphasis should shift to prompting the student to use the skill and ensuring the “appropriate” behavior accesses the same or a similar outcome (i.e., is reinforcing to the student) as the problem behavior.

An often noted concern regarding students with disabilities is their struggles to interact socially with adults and peers in appropri-ate ways. Regardless of disability category or overall emphasis of the student’s individualized education program, for most students special educators should include social skill instruction as part of their daily curriculum. Similar to academic skills, social skills should be taught through direct instruction, students should be given

multiple opportunities to practice targeted skills, and positive specific feedback should be given when targeted social skills are displayed (Sugai & Lewis, 1996). There are specific, empirically validated components of effective social skill instruction, including assessing and identifying students’ social skill patterns, using a “tell–show–practice” instructional format, and assessing students’ skill mastery and generalization across time and settings.

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Although there are several quality social skill curriculums widely available, most approach social skills as if the student has a skill “deficit”; that is, the student does not know how to display the appropriate social skill. For students with moderate to severe disabilities, including autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability, this might be the case. For most students with mild disabilities, however, social skill challenges are often “performance” problems. In other words, the student knows what social skill they should use under specific conditions (e.g., “count to 10 when I get angry”) but displays an inappropriate skill because it leads to outcomes that maintain the problem skill (e.g., “if I throw things, I am removed from the classroom and I am no longer angry”). It is essential to match the focus and outcome of each social skill lesson to the student problem type (i.e., deficit or performance).

Within each lesson, the special educator should first identify and define the social skill and when to use it (e.g., “When you are angry, the first thing you do is stop”). Second, after discussing what it means to be angry and a range of ways to “stop,” (tell), the teacher should demonstrate (show) a range of appropriate ways to stop and also inappropriate ways to stop (i.e., the non-example or social skills the student is currently using that have been labeled inappropriate). Following examples and non-examples, the student should practice using only the appropriate social skill through role plays.Teaching social skills within a small group format is generally straightforward and

successful; the challenge is promoting generalization and maintenance of learned skills. Strategies such as teaching directly within targeted settings, providing frequent prompts or reminders to use newly learned skills, and providing high rates of positive specific feedback are all empirically validated strategies to promote generalized responding over time.

Research Support

With hundreds of social skill instruction investigations conducted to date, the evidence of effectiveness for these strategies has long been established (Ang & Hughes, 2001; Beelman, Pfingsten, & Losel, 1994; Cook et al., 2008; Losel & Beelman, 2003; Gresham, 2002b; Mikami, Jia, & Na, 2014). As with all interventions as broad and encompassing as “social skill instruction,” contraindicated findings on effectiveness also exist (e.g., Quinn, Kavale, Mathur, Rutherford, & Forness, 1999). However, when intervention is matched to a presenting problem, sufficient treatment dosage is in effect, and contextual factors are programmed into instruction to promote generalized findings, social skill instruction continues to demonstrate improved social functioning among students with dis- abilities (Gresham, 2002a; Gresham, Sugai, & Horner, 2001).

Conclusion

The ability to interact with adults and peers and to manage one’s own behavior across settings is essential to student success.

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Unfortunately, students with disabilities often do not master these essential social skills in ways typically developing children do and therefore these must be explicitly taught. Social skill instruction has been found to improve social functional from preschool through adulthood, across

a variety of social skill challenges, and among a range of disabilities. The balance of the empirical evidence indicates that social skill instruction, paired with generalization strategies, can lead to im-proved social-emotional functioning of students with disabilities.

HLP10 Conduct functional behavioral assessments to develop individual student behavior support plans.

Creating individual behavior plans is a central role of all special educators. Key to successful plans is to conduct a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) any time behavior is chronic, intense, or impedes learning. A comprehensive FBA results in a hypothesis about the function of the student’s problem behavior. Once the function is determined, a behavior intervention plan is developed that (a) teaches the student a pro-social replacement behavior that will serve the same or similar function, (b) alters the environment to make the replacement behavior more efficient and effective than the problem behavior, (c) alters the environment to no longer allow the problem behavior to access the previous outcome, and (d) includes ongoing data collection to monitor progress.

Functional behavioral assessments (FBA) are routinely conducted—and in some instances required by Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; 2006) regulations—to determine what occasions and what maintains current patterns of student problem behavior. Using indirect methods such as rating scales, interviews, and archival data search (e.g., student file, discipline and attendance reports) and direct methods that involve a trained observer watching during

problematic periods, hypotheses regarding the possible function of the problem behavior are developed using the following format (Lewis, Mitchell, Harvey, Green, & McKenzie, 2015):

• When [conditions that trigger problem behavior, such as a worksheet that requires extensive writing],

• The student will [target problem behavior],

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

• To get or avoid [the outcome that maintains the behavior, such as getting peer attention or avoiding difficult tasks].

Once a hypothesis is developed, a behavior support plan to address the function of the problem behavior is developed which includes a plan to teach a pro-social replacement behavior that results in the same or similar outcome (e.g., get attention or avoid a difficult task; Scott & Kamps, 2007). The plan should also include classroom and other learning environmental modifications that ensure (a) that when the student demonstrates the replacement behavior, the same or similar outcomes occur at high rates (e.g., student raises hand, teacher immediately recognizes and reinforces the student to give high rates of attention); and (b) that if the student demonstrates the problem behavior, the hypothesized function of the behavior is not accessed (e.g., student calls out instead of raising hand, teacher ignores and attends to a peer who did raise hand; Scott & Kamps, 2007).

Research and Policy Support

Given the highly individualized nature of the FBA–behavior support plan process, the majority of research conducted to date has employed the use of single-subject designs. Since the early 1980s, FBA research has moved from clinical settings targeting young adults with severe cognitive impairments (Carr & Durand, 1985; Iwata, Dorsey, Slifer, Bauman, & Richman, 1982) to a variety of school, home, and comm-unity settings focusing on students with

mild disabilities (Lalli, Browder, Mace & Brown, 1993; Northup et al., 1981) as well as students at risk for disabilities (Kamps et al., 1995; Kern, Childs, Dunlap, Clarke & Falk, 1994; Lewis & Sugai, 1996a, 1996b; Umbreit, 1995). Since 1997, IDEA regulations have required FBAs be conducted if students with disabilities are removed from school due to disciplinary infractions 10 days or more (34 C.F.R. § 300.530), and a wide range of studies have been conducted across multiple groups of research teams (e.g., Gage, Lewis, & Stichter, 2012; Solnick & Ardoin, 2010; Wood, Blair, & Ferro, 2009). FBA-based interventions have been found to be more efficient and effective in reducing challenging behavior among students with disabilities and those at high risk than non-function-based interventions (Gage et al., 2012; Ingram, Lewis-Palmer, & Sugai, 2005; Liaupsin, Umbreit, Ferro, Urso, & Upreti, 2006; Newcomer & Lewis, 2004; Park & Scott, 2009; Payne, Scott, & Conroy, 2007; Stichter, Lewis, Johnson, & Trussell, 2004).

Conclusion

FBA-based intervention planning has a wide range of empirical work to support its use as an effective practice in addressing intensive challenging behavior. There is no clearly delineated set of practices that make up a comprehensive FBA, but the elements listed above are routinely cited in the rele- vant research. Although the nature of conducting FBA-based intervention research

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

does not lend itself to the current What Works Clearinghouse requirement for multiple randomized control trials, both the Institute of Education Sciences and the Council for Exceptional Children have created guidelines for the inclusion of

single-subject research to be considered in establishing evidence-based practices. Based on the studies cited here, as well as numerous others, the practice may be considered as meeting the minimal standards for being evidence-based.

References

Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2013). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Ang, R., & Hughes, J. (2001). Differential benefits of skills training with antisocial youth base on group composition: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Review, 31, 164–185.

Armendariz, F. & Umbreit, J. (1999). Using active responding to reduce disruptive behavior in a general education classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1, 152–158. doi:10.1177/109830079900100303

Beelman, A., Pfingsten, U., & Losel, F. (1994). Effects of training social competence in children: A meta-analysis of recent evaluation studies. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23, 260–271. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2303_4

Blackwell, A. J. & McLaughlin, T. F. (2005). Using guided notes, choral responding, and response cards to increase student performance. The International Journal of Special Education, 20, 1–5.

Bowman-Perrott, L. (2009). Class-wide peer tutoring: An effective strategy for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44, 259–267. doi:10.1177/1053451208330898

Brophy, J. H. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, 51, 5–32. doi:10.3102/00346543051001005

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Carr, E. G., & Durand, M. V. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126. doi:10.1901/jaba.1985.18-111

Cook, C. R., Gresham, F. M., Kern, L. Barreras, R. B., Thornton, S, & Crews, S. D. (2008). Social skills training for secondary students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders: A review and analysis of the meta-analytic literature. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 16, 131–144. doi:10.1177/1063426608314541

Darch, C. B., & Kame’enui, E. B. (2004). Instructional classroom management: A proactive approach to behavior management (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Gage, N. A., Lewis, T. J., & Stichter, J. P. (2012). Functional behavioral assessment-based interventions for students with or at-risk for emotional and/or behavioral disorders in school: A hierarchical linear modeling meta-analysis. Behavioral Disorders, 37, 55–77.

Gresham, F. M. (2002a). Best practices in social skills training. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 1029–1040). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Gresham, F. M. (2002b). Teaching social skills to high-risk children and youth: Preventive and remedial strategies. In M. R. Shinn, H. M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for academic behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches (pp. 403–432). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Gresham, F. M., Sugai, G. & Horner, R. H. (2001). Interpreting outcomes of social skills training for students with high-incidence disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67, 331–344.

Hattie, J. A. C. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.

Haydon, T., Conroy, M. A., Scott, T. M., Sindelar, P. T., Barber, B. R., & Orlando, A. (2010). A comparison of three types of opportunities to respond on student academic and social behaviors. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 18, 27–40. doi:10.1177/1063426609333448

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Ingram, K., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Sugai, G. (2005). Function-based intervention planning: Comparing the effectiveness of FBA indicated and contra-indicated intervention plans. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 224–236. doi:10.1177/10983007050070040401

Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1982). Toward a functional analysis of self injury. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3–20. doi:10.1016/0270-4684(82)90003-9

Kamps, D. M., Ellis, C., Mancina, C., Wyble, J., Greene, L., & Harvey, D. (1995). Case studies using functional analysis for young children with behavior risks. Education and Treatment of Children, 18, 243–260.

Kern, L., Childs, K. E., Dunlap, G., Clarke, S., & Falk, G. D. (1994). Using assessment—based curricular intervention to improve the classroom behavior of a student with emotional and behavioral challenges. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 7–19. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-7

Lalli, J. S., Browder, D. M., Mace, F. C., & Brown, D. K. (1993). Teacher use of descriptive analysis data to implement interventions to decrease students’ problem behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 227–238. doi:10.1901/jaba.1993.26-227

Lewis, T. J. (2009, June). Are we there yet? Mapping the PBS course for the long haul. Keynote presentation at the 4th Annual Missouri Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support Summer Institute, Osage Beach, MO.

Lewis, T. J., Hudson, S., Richter, M., & Johnson, N. (2004). Scientifically supported practices in EBD: A proposed approach and brief review of current practices. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 247–259.

Lewis, T. J., Jones, S. E. L., Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support and students with emotional/behavioral disorders: implications for prevention, identification and intervention. Exceptionality 18(2), 82–93. doi:10.1080/09362831003673168

Lewis, T. J., Mitchell, B. S., Harvey, K., Green, A., & McKenzie, J. (2015). A comparison of functional behavioral assessment and functional analysis methodology among students with mild disabilities. Behavioral Disorders, 41, 5–20. doi:10.17988/0198-7429-41.1.5

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1996a). Functional assessment of problem behavior: A pilot investigation of the comparative and interactive effects of teacher and peer social attention on students in general education settings. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 1–19. doi:10.1037/h0088918

Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1996b). Descriptive and experimental analysis of teacher and peer attention and the use of assessment based intervention to improve the pro-social behavior of a student in a general education setting. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 7–24. doi:10.1007/BF02110474

Liaupsin, C. J., Umbreit, J., Ferro, J. B., Urso, A., & Upreti, G. (2006). Improving academic engagement through systematic, function-based intervention. Education and Treatment of Children, 29, 573–591.

Losel, F., & Beelman, A. (2003). Effects of child skills training in preventing antisocial behavior: A systematic review of randomized evaluations. Annals, AAPSS, 857, 84–109. doi:10.1177/0002716202250793

Medland, M. B. & Stachnik, T. J. (1972). Good-behavior game: A replication and systematic analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 45–51. doi:10.1901/jaba.1972.5-45

Mikami, A. Y., Jia, M., & Na, J. J. (2014) Social skills training. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 23, 775–788. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2014.05.007

Nelson, J. R., & Roberts, M. L. (2000). Ongoing reciprocal teacher-student interactions involving disruptive behaviors in general education classrooms. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 27–37. doi:10.1177/106342660000800104

Newcomer, L. L. & Lewis, T. J. (2004). Functional behavioral assessment: An investigation of assessment reliability and effectiveness of function-based interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12, 168–181. doi:10.1177/10634266040120030401

Northrup, J., Wacker, D., Sasso, G., Steege, M., Cigrand, K., Cook, J., & DeRaad, A. (1991). A brief functional analysis of aggressive and alternative behavior in an outpatient clinic setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 509–522. doi:10.1901/jaba.1991.24-509

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Park, K. L., & Scott, T. M. (2009). Antecedent-based interventions for young children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 34, 196–211.

Payne, L. D., Scott, T. M., & Conroy, M. (2007). A school-based examination of the efficacy of functionbased intervention. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 158–174.

Quinn, M. M., Kavale, K. A., Mathur, S. R., Rutherford, R. B., & Forness, S. R. (1999). A meta-analysis of social skill interventions for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 7, 54–64. doi:10.1177/106342669900700106

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

Scott, T. M., & Kamps, D. M. (2007). The future of functional behavioral assessment in school settings. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 146–157.

Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 351–380. doiL10.1353/etc.0.0007

Simonsen, B., & Myers, D. (2015). Classwide positive behavior interventions and supports: A guide to proactive classroom management. New York, NY: Guilford.

Simonsen, B., Myers, D., & DeLuca, C. (2010). Teaching teachers to use prompts, opportunities to respond, and specific praise. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33, 300–318. doi:10.1177/0888406409359905

Solnick, M. D., & Ardoin, S. P. (2010). A quantitative review of functional analysis procedures in public school settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 33, 153–175. doi:10.1353/etc.0.0083

Spencer, V. G., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2003). Content area learning in middle school social studies classrooms and students with emotional or behavioral disorders: A comparison of strategies. Behavioral Disorders, 28, 77–93.

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Stichter, J., & Lewis, T. J. (2006). Classroom assessment: Targeting variables to improve instruction through a multi-level eco-behavioral model. In M. Hersen (Ed.), Clinician’s handbook of child behavioral assessment (pp. 569–586). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.

Stichter, J. P., Lewis, T. J., Johnson, N., & Trussell, R. (2004). Toward a structural assessment: Analyzing the merits of an assessment tool for a student with E/BD. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30, 25–40. doi:10.1177/073724770403000103

Stichter, J. P., Lewis, T. J., Whittaker, T. A., Richter, M., Johnson, N. W., & Trussell, R. P. (2009). Assessing teacher use of opportunities to respond and effective classroom management strategies: Comparisons among high- and low-risk elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 68–81. DOI: 10.1177/1098300708326597

Sugai, G., & Lewis, T. (1996). Preferred and promising practices for social skill instruction. Focus on Exceptional Children, 29(4), 1–16.

Sutherland, K., Alder, V. & Gunter, P. (2003). The effect of varying rate of opportunities to respond to academic requests on the classroom behavior of students with EBD. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 239–248. doi:10.1177/10634266030110040501

Sutherland, K., Wehby, J., & Copeland, S. (2000). Effect on varying rates of behavior-specific praise on the ontask behavior of students with EBD. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 2–8. doi:10.1177/106342660000800101

Sutherland, K. S., Wehby, J. H., & Yoder, P. J. (2002). Examination of the relationship between teacher praise and opportunities for students with EBD to respond to academic requests. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 5–13. doi:10.1177/106342660201000102

Social/Emotional/ Behavioral Practices: Research SynthesesHigh-Leverage Practices in Special Education

Umbreit, J. (1995). Functional assessment and intervention in a regular classroom setting for the disruptive behavior of a student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Behavioral Disorders, 20, 267–278.

Wehby, J. H., Tally, B. B., & Falk, K. B. (2004). Identifying the relation between the function of problem behavior and teacher instructional behavior. Assessment for Effective Instruction, 30, 41–51. doi:10.1177/073724770403000104

What Works Clearinghouse. (2008, September). Reducing behavior problems in the elementary school classroom: A practice guide (NCEE #2008-012). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/behavior_pg_092308.pdf

Wood, B. K., Blair, K. S., & Ferro, J. B. (2009). Young children with challenging behavior: Function-based assessment and intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29(2), 68–78. doi:10.1177/0271121409337951

HLP910.pdf

HLP910.pdf

Related posts

HW