A responsive Tier 2 process for a middle school student with behavior problems

McDaniel, Sara C.; Bruhn, Allison L.; Mitchell, Barbara S.

doi:10.1080/1045988x.2016.1275503

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on these data, decisions can be made to (a) intensify or adapt the intervention for nonresponders, or (b) continue intervention as is or fade intervention for responders. Across the Tier 2 interventions, CICO, self-management, and social skills instruction, adaptations may include but are not limited to raising or lowering goals (McDaniel & Bruhn, 2016), increasing or decreasing dosage (Bruhn, Vogelgesang, Fernando, & Lugo, 2016), changing reinforcement contingencies (Miller, Dufrene, Sterling, Olmi, & Bachmayer, 2014), adding or removing components (McDaniel, Bruhn, & Mitchell, 2017), and incorporating function-based supports (Campbell & Anderson, 2008;. Regardless of the adaptation to intensify or fade, the point of DBI is these decisions are based on data and differentiated by how a student is responding to the validated Tier 2 intervention.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Data-Based, Individualized Interventions for Behavior

Bruhn

Rila

Mahatmya

et al. 2018

Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Data-Based, Individualized Interventions for Behavior

Bruhn

Rila

Mahatmya

et al. 2018

Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SDQ forms validated for ages 4 to 10 were used (a) to confirm participants’ elevated risk and (b) as a broad measure of overall emotional and behavioral risk (McDaniel & Bruhn, 2016; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Mitchell, 2017; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Troughton, 2017). The SDQ has 25 items focusing on children’s behaviors that teachers completed using paper and pencil for each student.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CICO has been established as a socially valid Tier 2 intervention through past evaluation (Campbell & Anderson, 2011; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Mitchell, 2017; Swoszowski, McDaniel, Jolivette, & Melius, 2013), so we focused on evaluating the social validity of CP as a Tier 2 intervention. The Therapeutic Alliance Scale for Children (TASC; Shirk & Saiz, 1992) is a valid, reliable measure evaluating therapeutic satisfaction with forms for children, their caregivers, and therapists (Accurso, Hawley, & Garland, 2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Late Elementary School: A Comparison of Two Targeted Interventions

McDaniel

Lochman

Tomek

et al. 2018

Behavioral Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early indicators of risk correspond with behavioral disorders in childhood and beyond (Webster-Stratton & Reid, 2003). One early indicator of future negative short-and long-term outcomes is early school failure, which predicts compounded mental health issues, problem behavior and peer problems, exclusionary discipline (suspension, expulsion), grade retention, substance abuse, arrest and adjudication, and school dropout (Crews et al., 2007; Nelson, Stage, Trout, Duppong-Hurley, & Epstein, 2008). Longterm negative school and postschool outcomes affect community and family structures negatively, and reactive interventions to address these effects are costly (Walker & Sprague, 1999). Although many risk factors such as poverty status are not amenable to change with exposure to preventive interventions or early-onset treatments, many deleterious outcomes stemming from these complicating risk factors can be addressed. Integrated, comprehensive models of prevention and intervention can address multiple areas of risk and measured deficits, even prior to indicators of school failure or during the early onset of school failure indicators. One critical time point for these interventions is between the lower and upper elementary grades. As students progress through formal schooling and acquire literacy and mathematics skills in the lower grades, achievement gaps for students at risk widen. Therefore, assessment, identification, and responsive interventions need to be put in place during this time, prior to transition to secondary education. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) PBIS is an evidence-based framework for improving school climate, reducing problem behaviors, and maximizing instructional time. This three-tiered framework improves student outcomes through integrating systems, data, and 747595B HDXXX10.

show abstract

“…As such, the TFI Tier 2 subscale requires “multiple Tier II (2) interventions with documented evidence of effectiveness matched to student need.” Following the emphasis on intervention matching, a concerted effort has been made to establish the (a) efficacy of matching and (b) schools’ abilities to offer varied evidence-based Tier 2 interventions that are matched to student need. For example, several studies have utilized the subscale scores from the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 1997) to initially match intervention to students’ areas of identified risk (McDaniel & Bruhn, 2016, 2019; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Mitchell, 2017; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Troughton, 2017). With the use of a matching process, individual students receive interventions targeted to their specific area of need.…”

Section: Tier 2 Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, students exhibiting chronic hyperactivity and inattentiveness are known to benefit from self-monitoring interventions (Bruhn et al, 2015), whereas students with low prosocial behavior or high peer problems may benefit from additional social skills or problem-solving instruction (McDaniel, Bruhn, & Troughton, 2017). The SDQ has been used to match students to intervention, and the effects of those interventions have been tested in multiple single-case design studies (e.g., Bruhn et al, 2017; McDaniel & Bruhn, 2016; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Mitchell, 2017; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Troughton, 2017).…”

Section: Tier 2 Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Tier 2: Critical Issues in Systems, Practices, and Data

Bruhn

McDaniel

2020

Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of Tier 2 positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) is to address identified social, emotional, and behavioral needs with efficient, targeted interventions. Although only 10% to 15% of each school’s population will require Tier 2 supports, without effective systems, practices, and data, students will continue to demonstrate unwanted behavior, which may lead to increased rates of exclusionary discipline (e.g., office discipline referrals and suspension). This article extends the logic of Tier 1 PBIS, which is founded in systems, practices, and data, by addressing research related to implementation issues of systems, practices, and data in Tier 2. First, we present current research and practice in systems with a specific focus on Tier 2 teaming, resources, and professional development (i.e., initial training and coaching). Second, we discuss Tier 2 practices and the need to consider intervention matching, as well as initial and in vivo intervention adaptations to improve acceptability and effectiveness. Third, we present Tier 2 data considerations for informing intervention design, progress monitoring, and treatment fidelity. Across Tier 2 systems, practices, and data, we offer recommendations for future research.

show abstract

A responsive Tier 2 process for a middle school student with behavior problems

Cited by 9 publications

References 18 publications

The Effects of Data-Based, Individualized Interventions for Behavior

The Effects of Data-Based, Individualized Interventions for Behavior

Reducing Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Late Elementary School: A Comparison of Two Targeted Interventions

Tier 2: Critical Issues in Systems, Practices, and Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About