The conceptual elements of strong interventions in school settings.

Abstract

A conceptual model of strong school-based interventions is presented. Strong interventions are ecological in nature, naturalistic in scope, contain elements from the research base that are predictive for success, and incorporate the constructs of social validity in a practical manner. The latter concept relates to the ideas of treatment acceptability and socially important outcomes, and is important for insuring treatment integrity. While there exists a robust research data base for effective school interventions, generalization to regular school settings without the overriding influence of researcher/consultant is difficult. Thus, all of these concepts must be practically utilized if strong interventions are to be applied to school problems. Suggestions and implications for school psychology practitioners are discussed.

The Effects of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation Results of a 4-Year Investigation

“…Integrity of intervention procedures is a critical area in need of careful attention (Gresham, 1989;Lentz, Allen, & Ehrhardt, 1996;Noell, Witt, Gilbertson, Ranier, & Freeland, 1997). In this study, consultees were asked to self-monitor their implementation of intervention steps, and these self-report or other permanent product data are available for approximately 71% of cases.…”

Preservice training in response to intervention: Learning by doing an interdisciplinary field experience

“…Based on literature reviews (Batsche et al, 2005;Fuchs, 2003;, many competencies were found that would increase the likelihood of RTI success for students and schools. Broadly, these include (a) collaboration and consultation; (b) elements of RTI, evidence-based prevention, instruction, and intervention; and (c) data-based decision making (including technical adequacy) (Barnett et al, 1999;Lentz, Allen, & Ehrhardt, 1996). Table 1 outlines RTI foundation coursework occurring prior to the field experience and coursework occurring at the same time, oriented to the next professional training experience.…”

“…Across all tiers, the primary focus of instruction and intervention was to provide students with practice opportunities and increase their phonemic awareness and letter-sound correspondence skills. The interventions, collaboratively developed by the trainees and field supervisors, included the critical elements of effective instruction (Lentz et al, 1996). In Tier 1, the teacher conducted activities using a "lead-model-test" format where the teacher started the lesson by introducing the skill (e.g., segmenting).…”

School-based problem-solving interventions: the impact of training and documentation on the quality and outcomes

“…The degree to which the intervention is implemented as planned is often called "treatment integrity" Telzrow, 1995;Yeaton & Sechrest, 1981). Several authors (e.g., Elliott, Witt, & Kratochwill, 1991;Fuchs & Fuchs, 1989;Lentz, Allen & Ehrhardt, 1996;Reynolds et al, 1984;Taylor & Miller, 1997) have recognized the importance of treatment integriQr in the implementation of an intervention. Few studies in the behavioral literature, however, have assessed the treatment 18 integrity of the interventions examined Gresham, Gansle, & Noell, 1993;Peterson, Hommer, & Wonderlich, 1982).…”

“…In addition to meeting the needs of students in the most inclusive setting (i.e., general education) (Reschly, 1988), response or resistance to intervention is a critical special-education eligibility criterion (Gresham, 1991). Lentz, Allen and Ehrhardt (1996) define an intervention as "doing something different to solve some perceived problem" (p. 120). Yet, most authors have neglected to define what is meant by "intervention."…”