In this article, we examined predictive validity of Student Risk Screening Scale—Internalizing and Externalizing (SRSS-IE) scores for use with elementary-age students ( N = 4,465) from 14 elementary schools. Results indicated elementary school students with high levels of risk according to fall SRSS-IE scores—especially those with externalizing behaviors—were more likely to have lower oral reading fluency scores, lower Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) reading scores, more nurse visits, and more days spent in in-school suspension compared with students at low risk for externalizing or internalizing behaviors. Educational implications, limitations, and future directions are presented.

No abstract

No abstract

Active supervision is a proactive, low-intensity strategy to minimize challenging behaviors and increase desired behaviors. To examine the evidence base of this strategy, we applied the Council for Exceptional Children’s (CEC) Standards for Evidence-Based Practices in Special Education to the body of research exploring the impact of active supervision with Pre-K–12 students in traditional school settings. In this systematic literature review, we identified seven peer-reviewed, single-case design, treatment-outcome studies meeting inclusion criteria. All studies met a ≥80% weighted criterion of CEC’s quality indicators. These seven studies included 15 cases aggregated at the school, classroom, or grade level, collectively involving 1,686 participants. Three studies included three or more cases and demonstrated positive effects across primary dependent variables (with one study showing neutral effects on a secondary dependent variable). Based on available evidence and using CEC criteria, we determined active supervision to be a potentially evidence-based practice. We discuss implications, limitations, and future directions.

We provide results from a district-wide survey of 253 certified educators to determine (a) the degree to which they reported implementing components of their school’s comprehensive, integrated, three-tiered (Ci3T) model of prevention in the current year and (b) the areas in which educators might benefit from continued professional learning. The purpose of this study was to develop a data informed professional learning plan to continue to support implementation at the conclusion of an Institute for Education Sciences (IES) -funded practitioner-researcher partnership grant. At least half of educators reported a high level of implementation for all Tier 1 features. Tier 2 and Tier 3 behavioral and social supports for students were reported as less fully implemented than academic interventions, yet still well-above the scale midpoint. For every component, elementary educators indicated statistically significantly higher levels of implementation relative to secondary educators. Over half of respondents indicated a high level of implementation of eight of 20 research-based practices and supports examined, with a statistically significant relation between ratings of currently implemented practices and the desire for support in four practices: small-group self-determination instruction, peer-mediated support strategies, check-in/check-out, and strategies for internalizing behaviors. In terms of preferred professional development avenues, educators rated in-district during-school workshops, courses for college credit (on-line), and brief “good practice” guides most favorably. We close with a discussion of implications, limitations, and future directions.