Runninghead: Check In Check Out Program

Preferred Practice: Check In Check Out Program Linh Nguyen University of British Columbia

2 Check In Check Out Program

Introduction The Check In Check Out (CICO) program, also referred to as the Behavior Education Program (BEP), is a school based program that addresses the Tier II intervention level of behavioral needs by providing daily support and monitoring to students at risk of developing serious problem behavior. It is intended to be one piece of a larger school-wide behavior support system with the function of improving the efficiency of the school-wide procedures and reducing the number of individualized interventions that are needed (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010). The CICO program incorporates many of the principles from positive behavior support , including; clearly defined expectations, instruction on appropriate social skills, increased positive reinforcement for following expectations, contingent consequences for problem behavior, increased positive contact with an adult in the school, improved opportunities for selfmanagement, and increased home-school collaboration (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010). Aside from being a preventative approach to recurring problem behavior, CICO also enhances communication among teachers, improves school climate, increases consistency among staff, and helps teachers to feel supported. The CICO program is based on a daily check-in/check-out system that provides the student with immediate feedback on their goals with the use of a teacher rated daily progress card and increases positive adult attention. Collaboration between home and school is carried out by sending home a copy of the daily progress report for the parents to sign and students to bring back to school the next day. An important component of the CICO program is the use of data obtained from the daily progress card to evaluate its effectiveness in changing the students behavior. The points earned on the daily progress card are recorded on a summary graph as a visual display for the student to advise them of their progress. The data is reviewed by the schools behavior support team to make decisions to continue, modify, or fade out the CICO intervention. The program is efficient to implement as there is no lengthy assessment conducted prior to the student receiving the intervention. The program can be used by all school personnel for up to 30 students at a time and implementation can begin within 3 to 5 days of identifying a

3 Check In Check Out Program problem and requires only about 5 to 10 minutes of the teachers time per day (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010). Students who would benefit from the CICO program are those fail to respond to school-wide corrective approaches and are exhibiting low level problem behavior such as task avoidance, inappropriate attempts to seek adult attention, talking out, work completion, or minor class disruptions. Their problem behavior occurs across multiple locations and they have received several office disciplinary referrals (ODR) per year. The success of the CICO program is a result of the program meeting the needs of both the student and the school. For the student, the program can be applied in all school locations and also extends to the students home using a self-monitoring technique which empowers the students to be responsible for their own behavior. It also focuses acknowledgment for appropriate behavior through the use of positive feedback. For the school, the program requires minimal resources, time, and effort from its staff and teachers. The CICO program can be easily modified to meet the needs of multiple students and incorporates data-based evidence to help guide decision making. Implementation Prior to the implementation of the CICO program, roles and responsibilities must be put in place to include: the CICO coordinator, behavior support team (BST) members, students, and parents. The Coordinator role is to oversee the program, maintain records, and organize team meetings. The BST members should include an administrator, a diverse sample of teachers and school staff, a counselor, and the special education teacher. It is also helpful to have someone who is knowledgeable on the topic of behavioral issues and has previously worked with students with challenging problem behavior. The size of the support team may vary depending on the size of the school, but a maximum limit of eight people would allow for easier decision making and planning (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010). The team should meet at least once every two weeks to review the data for each CICO student, look at new referrals and identify students who may benefit from the program, monitor its implementation, evaluate its effectiveness, and modify or fade as needed (Michigans Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative, 2013). Within the team, members can assign one person to be responsible for the morning and

4 Check In Check Out Program afternoon check-ins and outs with one or two back up people should the main person be absent. The person who carries out the morning and afternoon check-in and check-out should be enthusiastic, positive, and friendly as they will likely set the tone of the day for the student. Also, if the student looks forward to seeing this person then the student will more likely carry out their check-in and out regularly. The students responsibility is to carry out their daily check in/check out and obtain teacher feedback on their progress card which the parents need to sign at the end of the day. A referral system needs to be in place outlining clear criteria for identifying students who would benefit from the CICO program. Referrals can come from class teachers, parents, or through school-wide screening of students with behavior problems. The BST would meet to determine which students would benefit from the program and to obtain parental permission prior to the implementation of the intervention. A contract should also be developed which will state each persons role in the program, the students goals, an approximate time period the program will run, and the rewards available (short term and long term) to the student should they meet their goals. A location for the check-in and check-out procedure needs to be determined. This location should be central in the school and easily accessible for the student (i.e. library, counselors office, or any classroom that would work for the school). I would avoid the office as most students do not have a positive association to this environment. Finally, a name should be given to the program that fits the culture of the school. Example of Check In Check Out Daily Routine School Starts at 8:50 Step1: Check-in 8:20 - 8:45 Billy gets off the school bus or gets dropped off by his parents at 8:30 Goes to see Ms. Swan in the library to check in. If Ms. Swan is with another student Billy knows to wait on the couch as each student is met with privately so they feel comfortable and safe. When its Billys turn, he goes to receive a copy of his Check & Connect Card for the day and return yesterdays copy signed by his parents. Ms. Swan goes over each goal with Billy and reminds him that his goal of points to earn today is 80% or higher. Daily questions are asked to ensure student get off to a great start (may vary depending on the student): Are these goals reasonable? Are they doable? Can you do it? Did you have breakfast?

5 Check In Check Out Program Enough Sleep? Take medication? Do you have all your supplies? Are you ready for the day or do you still need a little time? Ms. Swan sends Billy off with a High 5, smiles, jokes, positive comment and encouragement. Step 2: At the beginning of each class, Billy gives his Check & Connect card to his teacher. The teacher provides encouragement and reminds him of the behavior they are working on, for example, Yesterday you had a difficult time staying on task and completing your work. Lets try harder today. Step 3: At the end of the class, the teacher rates Billy on a scale of 0-2 (2= Yes, 1= So-so, 0= No) based on how well he did on his individual goals. Billy repeats this with all his teachers throughout the day. - Teachers should explain their choice of rating to the student and provide specific feedback on what the student can do differently next time if they did not successfully meet their goal. - If students did meet all their goals, teachers are encouraged to provide praise or another form of positive reinforcement (i.e. stickers and high 5s). Step 4: Check-Out 3:30 - 3:45 Billy leaves his last class of the day and reports to Ms. Swan in the library. Ms. Swan totals his daily points and percentage for the day. Once the percentage is calculated, Ms. Swan and Billy discuss and celebrate his success. - If Billy scored 80% or higher, he gets to pick a sticker or a small prize. - If Billy scored 80% or better every day for the week, he gets to choose from his reward list. Ms. Swan sends Billy home with praise and positive encouragement for a successful day. Step 5: Billy brings his card home for his parents to sign and also acknowledge his success. He returns the card to school the next morning during his check-in. Positive reinforcers should be in place to reward students when they meet their goals, which were set by the BST. These can be daily rewards (i.e. stickers or 5-10 minutes free time) to weekly rewards (i.e. special access to privileges or activities, time with preferred adult, or a desired object). It is important to choose rewards that are perceived as truly reinforcing by the students themselves. Carrying out reinforcer inventories, observations, and interviews with the student will help determine a reward that will help to reinforce the behavior we want to see in the student. Social Skills class may also be required to teach the students appropriate replacement behavior for the problem behavior. Resources that will assist in starting the CICO program at your schools are the book, Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools (2nd ed.) and the Behavior Education Program: A Check-In, Check-out Intervention for Students at Risk DVD which complements the book. Both resources will help in the development and implementation of the program and can be purchased on Amazon ($36.33 for the book & $81.15 for DVD). Additional resources that will be needed are rewards for the students. As this is to be a school-wide initiative and should involve at least one administrator, funds can be provided out of the

6 Check In Check Out Program schools account. This will also include release time for teachers and staff to attend training which can be provided at the district level by the Behavior Consultant who has prior experience with the program and background knowledge working with students with problem behavior. Criteria to determine whether a school is ready to implement the CICO program can be addressed with the following question: Does the school have a school-wide positive behavior support system in place? Is 80% of the staff committed and supportive of the program? Is there administrative support? Are there any major upcoming or current changes in the school or school system that may affect the success of the program (i.e. school strike or high turnover of administration and teaching staff)? Will CICO implementation be one of the schools top three priorities for this school year? (Michigans Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative, 2013). To get student and staff buy-in, the program should have a high profile in the school and needs to be promoted as positive support and not punishment. Teachers referring students should be collaboratively involved in the CICO process and regular feedback to staff, students, and families are crucial. The success of the program can be seen by the decrease in problem behavior and consistent feedback and responses from teachers and parents on the daily progress card. Research In the research article by Filter et al. (2007) they assessed the fidelity of implementation and effectiveness of the Check in/ Check out program in reducing problem behavior when program training and implementation was managed by district staff. The participants in the study included 19 students and 17 teachers from three elementary schools (K-5 grades) in the Pacific Northwest. The three schools were nominated by the district behavior support coordinator based on the school staff having completed a four hour training in CICO program implementation and their willingness to complete the evaluation process. The students were chosen because they had been in the school for at least 6 week without behavior support during the 2002-03 academic year, had participated in the CICO program for at least 6 weeks during the same year, and consented to participate in the study. Each school had 1 administrator and a total of 11 teachers and 3 classified staff participating in the study.

7 Check In Check Out Program The study aimed to examine three areas (1) the implementation fidelity of the CICO program, (2) change in the rate of formal office discipline referrals (ODR), and (3) whether the staff perceived the program as effective and efficient. To measure program fidelity, a 5-item implementation checklist was given to the 17 personnel during their meeting. Each individual was asked to circle yes, no, or dont know for each question based on their general experiences in the program. In order to examine the change in office discipline referrals, data was collected from students ODRs before and during participation in the CICO program. All three schools used the web-based School Wide Information System database (SWIS) to record their ODRs. Finally, during the same regularly scheduled behavior support team meeting in which fidelity data was collected, teachers, staff, and administrators were asked to complete a survey on whether they perceived the CICO program as being effective and efficient. Using the Likert scale from 1to 6 they were asked their opinion of the program based on (1) ease of implementation, (2) time and effort required relative to other behavior interventions, (3) student progress, (4) level of change in behavior relative to time and effort involved, and (5) importance of observed changes in behavior. In the area of implementation fidelity, all three schools stated they used the daily check in and check out components of the program and used the data gathered from the program to help guide their decision making. All participants responded that their schools completed the daily check in and check out and 16 of 17 participant reported that the students took the CICO card to each teacher to obtain feedback. Only 41% of participants indicated that the family feedback component was implemented. Results for the ODRs showed that students had significantly fewer referrals per week in both major and minor ODR when participating in the program. Examples of major ODRs included defiance, aggression, and vandalism. Minor ODRs were rule violation, minor inappropriate language, and failure to complete an assignment. Two of the three schools did not make a distinction between major and minor ODRs when collecting data while the third school had a separate database of major and minor ODRs. Of the 19 students, 13 showed a decrease in major ODRs and two students showed an increase in major ODRs. A

8 Check In Check Out Program total of 8 out of the 12 students for whom minor ODR data were available showed a decrease with one student showing an increase when in the program. The range of the Likert scale rating on effectiveness and efficiency of the CICO program ranged from 4.19 to 5.06 and behavior change received the highest rating. All questions were rated 4.00 or higher with the exception of ease of implementation, which received an average of 3.00 from the administrators. The result would suggest that school personnel saw the CICO program as being effective and efficient. Although this study showed that CICO program can be implemented with fidelity by school personnel and has a positive effect on the behavioral change of students, there were several limitations. First, the rating scales used to gather information on fidelity and effectiveness limits the participants response or explanation of the results. The use of interviews and open ended questions will allow for more detailed information on the programs successes and challenges. A second limitation is the small sample size used in the study. Only 19 students from three schools participated in the study which limits external validity. Finally, there are still questions of validity when using ODR data in program evaluation and since no analysis was carried out to determine the reliability and validity of ODRs in this study we need to be mindful of our interpretation of the results. Further research is needed to help predict which students would respond positively and negatively to the program. We also need to carry out comparative analyses of the function of students problem behavior who respond to the program compared to those who do not as research has shown that the program is more effective for students whose problem behavior is maintained by attention. Finally, future research needs to evaluate the CICO program on overall school discipline by conducting pre and post comparisons on overall level of ODRs based on CICO implementation.

9 Check In Check Out Program References Crone, D. A., Hawken, L. S., & Horner, R. H. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The behavior education program. New York: Guilford Press. Filter, K.J., McKenna, M. K., Benedict, E. A., Horner, R. H., Todd, A. W., & Watson, J. (2007). Check in/check out: A post-hoc evaluation of an efficient, secondary-level targeted intervention for reducing problem behaviors in schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(1), 69-84. Michigans Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative. (2013). Retrieved from http://miblsi.cenmi.org/MiBLSiModel/Implementation/ElementarySchools/TierIISupports/Behavior/Targ etBehaviorInterventions/CheckInCheckOut.aspx