Data-Based Decision Making for Social Behavior: Setting a Research Agenda

Bruhn, Allison L.; Wehby, Joseph H.; Hasselbring, Ted S.

doi:10.1177/1098300719876098

Cited by 17 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Briesch et al ( 46 ), conceptual models for MTSS are often configured as a “double triangle,” encompassing tiered interventions to enhance both academic and behavioral competencies. During the actual implementation, however, the nature of guidelines for MTSS mainly was based on academic domains of services, which led educators to assume that procedures for addressing academic challenges are identically applicable to SEB domains as well ( 47 ). We should note that there are some critical differences between the actual implementation of MTSS in academic and SEB domains in terms of types of interventions, tools and frequency for assessments, and criteria for assessing response to interventions ( 46 , 48 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Profiles of Korean Adolescents in Relations With Contextual Factors: Implications for Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Kim

Lim

2022

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAlthough prior studies have supported the effectiveness of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) on addressing social, emotional, behavioral, and academic challenges faced by youth at-risk, educators using MTSS often do not consider contextual factors which may also influence youth at-risk and the interventions targeting them. This study thus aimed to identify youth at-risk who should be referred to targeted instructions within MTSS by examining the risk profiles of Korean adolescents. Based on the identified risk profiles, we also tried to investigate the effect of contextual factors on deciding youth at-risk and confirm whether and/or what contextual factors should be considered when implementing targeted interventions for them.MethodTo accomplish the research goal, a latent profile analysis on risk factors of Korean adolescents was performed, using the first year data of “Korean Children and Youth Panel Study (KCYPS) 2018.”ResultsFour risk profiles were identified, using low academic motivation, low academic behavior, attention deficit, aggression, social withdrawal, and depression as indicators: the high risk, M-SEB (Moderate-social, emotional, & behavioral) risk, M-ACA (Moderate-academic) risk, and low risk group. The covariates of this study, home and school environmental variables, worked as predictors of adolescents included in the high group.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest students in the high risk group (16.8%) should be given targeted instructions combining academic and SEB support within MTSS so as to prevent negative outcomes in the future among all adolescents. Those instructions need to be planned with consideration of contextual factors accompanied by teacher's careful understanding of social dynamics surrounding each student.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Profiles of Korean Adolescents in Relations With Contextual Factors: Implications for Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Kim

Lim

2022

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a recent article on data-based decision making for social behavior, Bruhn, Wehby, and Hasselbring (2019) described the understudied and unresolved issues on this topic. In addition to the need for further psychometric studies on existing tools, they posited that dedicated research is needed to establish a set of rules or a protocol to help Tier 2 teams make sound instructional decisions, much like the ones that exist for academic progress monitoring (Filderman et al, 2018).…”

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

“…As part of the ongoing assessment process to determine if students are progressing toward their behavioral goals and responding to these interventions, data are collected on a regular basis (e.g., daily, weekly). Frequently, assessment data include direct behavior ratings, indirect rating scales, or systematic direct observations (Bruhn et al, 2020). Interventions and assessments are typically managed by special education teachers (SETs) who oversee the IEP and consistently have direct contact with students daily.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Educators Serving Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Hirsch

Bruhn

McDaniel

et al. 2021

Behavioral Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this descriptive study, we analyzed survey data regarding communication, instruction, and assessment strategies school personnel in K-12 settings reported using during the COVID-19 pandemic for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). Results indicate, whether instructional continuity was mandated or not, support personnel serving students with EBD reported using a variety of communication, instruction, and assessment strategies. Several strategies special educators reported using were significantly different than those provided by related service providers (e.g., school psychologist, counselor) during school site closures. Implications for future planning, policy, and research are discussed.

show abstract

Data-Based Decision Making for Social Behavior: Setting a Research Agenda

Cited by 17 publications

References 39 publications

Risk Profiles of Korean Adolescents in Relations With Contextual Factors: Implications for Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Risk Profiles of Korean Adolescents in Relations With Contextual Factors: Implications for Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

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

A Survey of Educators Serving Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About