Ecobehavioral Analysis of Classroom Instruction

Greenwood, Charles R.; Carta, Judith J.; Kamps, Debra; Arreaga-Mayer, Carmen

doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3336-7_2

Cited by 69 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Observations of classroom behaviors were made during 50 minute instructional periods using the Ecobehavioral Assessment software for the Mainstream Version of the Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response (MS-CISSAR; Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, & Delquadri, 1997; Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, Terry, & Delquadri, 1994). Using this program, behaviors or activities for each of three observational targets (child, teacher, and classroom) are coded in 20-second intervals in repeating 1-minute cycles on a laptop computer.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term classroom functioning and its association with neuropsychological and academic performance following traumatic brain injury during early childhood.

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The present study utilized ecobehavioral assessment to examine classroom functioning several years following early childhood traumatic brain injury (TBI) or orthopedic injury (OI) and its association with injury factors, neuropsychological abilities, and academic performance. Method Participants included 39 children with moderate to severe TBI and 51 children with OI sustained between ages 3 and 7 years. At 7.2 (±1.3) years post injury, ecobehavioral assessment was used to examine classroom functioning. Additional outcomes included neuropsychological tests, parent and teacher ratings of dysexecutive behavior, and teacher ratings of academic performance. Groups were compared on measures controlling for demographic characteristics, and associations among outcomes were examined using linear regression. Results Children with TBI showed lower academic engagement relative to children with OI, as well as more frequent individual teacher attention for children with more severe injuries. For children with TBI, difficulties in classroom functioning were associated with lower cognitive flexibility and higher parent and teacher ratings of dysexecutive behavior. Lower scores on a test of fluid reasoning and a greater frequency of individual teacher attention were also associated with lower academic performance in children with TBI. Conclusions Difficulties in classroom functioning are evident several years after early childhood TBI and were associated with greater injury severity, neuropsychological weaknesses, and poorer academic performance. Children with impaired cognitive flexibility and fluid reasoning skills were at greatest risk for these difficulties and associated weaknesses in academic performance. Instructional interactions may be a potential target for intervention to promote academic progress in at-risk children.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term classroom functioning and its association with neuropsychological and academic performance following traumatic brain injury during early childhood.

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SFAT is a structural assessment tool that was developed based on the ecobehavioral (Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, & Arreaga-Mayer, 1990;Logan, Bakeman, & Keefe, 1997) and structural analysis (Stichter, Hudson, & Sasso, 2005;Stichter et al, 2004) literature to help address ongoing limitations in assessing classroom-based antecedent variables on a larger scale (Stichter & Conroy, 2005). This ecobehavioral assessment tool includes multiple environmental and instructional antecedent variables that have regularly been indicated as pivotal effective teaching literature for typically developing and at-risk students (Brophy & Good, 1986;Greenwood, Hart, Walker, & Risley, 1994;Kern & Clemens, 2007;Sutherland, Alder, & Gunter, 2003).…”

Section: Assessment Protocolmentioning

confidence: 98%

Instructional practices and behavior during reading: A descriptive summary and comparison of practices in title one and non‐title elementary schools

Stichter

Stormont

Lewis

2008

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing achievement for all students is a focus of general and special education reform today. Especially in the area of reading, there are many children who are at risk for failure. The purpose of this study was to describe teachers' use of instructional time during literacy with students at schools with (Title One) and without (non-Title) high percentages of students in poverty. Teachers and students from 35 classrooms were each observed for approximately 5 hours, for a total of 175 observation hours. Teachers identified the time when they consistently taught literacy and were observed in 1-hour increments across 5 days. The Setting Factors Assessment Tool was used to measure the instructional context, teacher behavior, and student behavior. Main results from descriptive and statistical analyses indicate that teachers spent the majority of literacy time in whole group (40%) and independent work (32%). Only small percentages of instructional time were spent in peer work (8%), small-group work (8%), and transition (8%). When comparing Title One and non-Title classrooms, teachers in Title One classrooms used significantly more noninstructional related talk, had more instructional down time, and a higher number of student exits during instruction. A discussion of the limitations of this study and need for future research to extend these findings follows. C 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…The purpose of this paper is to describe the ecobehavioral observational approach developed over the years by this author (Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, & Arreaga-Mayer, 1990; Morris & Midgley, 1990) and others to address these and other related questions about the structure and function of classroom instruction in RTI schools. Structure refers to those units of the ecology that organize activity in RTI schools; function is used to refer to the probabilistic association between the activities of these ecological units and individual student behaviors occurring within ecological units.…”

Section: Purposementioning

confidence: 99%