Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4, 2018
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the extent to which two classroom-
wide instructional interventions, peer support and instructional choice,
were able to reduce escape-maintained off-task and problem behaviors. This
study also measured the extent to which these interventions, when coupled
with individually designed function-based interventions, reduced escape-
maintained problem behaviors. A multiple baseline across settings design
was used to measure the impact of the classroom-wide intervention and the
function-based intervention for one student in a self-contained special edu-
cation classroom and a general education classroom. Results indicated that
implementation of these strategies reduced the escape-maintained problem
behaviors. Practical applications of the results of this study include the ef-
fectiveness of providing both choices and one-to-one support during tasks
requiring higher levels of language and social involvement.
Keywords: classroom-wide interventions, functional behavior assessment,
emotional/behavioral disorder (E/BD)
Classroom-wide Interventions
Effective classrooms incorporate strategies and interventions that
encourage academic and social success for all students, including
Pages 507–532
508 TRUSSELL, CHEN, LEWIS, AND LUNA
Method
Table 1
Individual Behavior Interventions
Setting Event Strategies
1. Intensive reading instruction is given in the morning.
2. Video record his reading so that he can see and hear his own progress.
3. Provide a preview of materials for the upcoming week.
4. Review/reteach social skills in social skill’s class.
Antecedent Strategies
1. Break tasks into 30 minute intervals.
2. Provide pre-corrects for replacement behaviors.
Replacement Behaviors
1. Complete 2 problems correctly and then skip one.
2. Move around room to access information from peers and teacher.
Consequence Strategies
1. By using the replacement behaviors, Joshua will be able to escape part of the
assigned work in a socially and academically appropriate manner.
2. If a problem behavior continues, then the teacher will extend 5 minutes
working time incrementally until replacement behaviors are utilized and
work is complete.
and FBA. For this study, data collectors were trained using video-
taped samples. First, the researcher explained what partial-interval
recording was and how to record target behaviors. Second, the re-
searcher demonstrated how to record data using videotaped samples.
Third, data collectors were asked to record data individually at the
same time. Next, the researcher calculated the inter-observer agree-
ment (IOA), and shared the results with data collectors. Then, data
collectors were asked to compare their data and explain the possible
reasons for their differences on the data. Fourth, the third step was
repeated until the IOA reached 95%.
Measure of Student Behaviors
The targeted behaviors of the student (off-task and problem
behaviors) were directly observed during each phase of the study
(assessment, baseline, intervention, and post-assessment) using a
six-second partial-interval recording instrument. IOA data were col-
lected and expected above 80%. Direct observation data were plot-
ted and visually analyzed. The data in this study were evaluated
using visual inspection examining the intervention effects at differ-
ent points in time across settings. A graphic display of each observa-
tion session within baseline and each intervention phase was plotted.
Data analysis included inspections of levels of performance from one
phase to the next, the trend in performance across phase, the percent-
age of non-overlapping data (PND) between phases, and the rapidity
of behavior change with phases. The probe procedure was used to
assess the maintenance of intervention.
Results
wide interventions, the first three points occurred during the choice
intervention and exhibited an inconsistent pattern. When the class-
room intervention was changed to one-to-one with peer support,
there was a steady descending trend.
For math class in the self-contained classroom, baseline data
showed an increasing trend of off-task behaviors. The mean percent-
age of off-task behaviors was 23.4% with the range from 10.5% to 44%.
During the provision of the choice intervention, the data showed an
inconsistent pattern of off-task behaviors, although the overall mean
was below baseline levels (mean, 23.6%; range, 3% to 37%). The one-
to-one peer support intervention showed a descending trend of off-
task behaviors (mean, 5.7%; range, 0% to 11%). When analyzing the
results of the two classroom interventions, the provision of choices
displayed an inconsistent pattern. When the classroom intervention
was changed to one-to-one with peer support, although there were
only two observations points, there was a steady descending trend
when compared to both baseline and the first classroom intervention
level.
For science in the general education classroom, baseline data
showed an increasing trend of off-task behaviors. The mean percent
of off-task behaviors was 24% with the range from 3.5% to 47%. Dur-
ing the provision of choices intervention the overall data showed a
descending trend of off-task behaviors (mean, 7%; range, 3.5% to 14%).
The second classroom intervention, providing one-to-one peer sup-
port, showed a descending trend of off-task behaviors (mean, 2.1%;
range, 0% to 5%).
Problem behaviors. For reading class in the self-contained
classroom, the baseline data showed an increasing trend of problem
behaviors. The mean percentage of problem behaviors was 12%, rang-
ing from 0% to 29.5%. During the provision of the choices interven-
tion the mean percentage of problem behaviors was 48%, with a range
of 23.5% to 72%. The overall data showed an ascending trend of prob-
lem behaviors. The one-on-one peer support interventions showed a
descending trend of off-task behaviors (mean, 17.4%; range, 9.5% to
25.5%).
For math class, the baseline data showed a stable trend of prob-
lem behaviors with a mean of 20% and range of 2% to 29.5%. During
the choices intervention the mean percentage of problem behaviors
was 24.5% with a range of 2% to 50.5%. The overall data showed an
descending trend of problem behaviors. The peer support interven-
tions showed a descending trend of off-task behaviors (mean, 8.25%;
range, 2% to 14.5%).
Escape-Maintained Behavior 519
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
100
90
80
70
60 Math
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
100
90
80
70 Science
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Sessions
trends of problem behaviors in all three classes (see Figure 2). For the
Discussion
Inter-observer Agreement
Reading Math Science
Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range
Baseline 97% 95% — 99% 93% 85% — 99% 96% 95% — 100%
Classroom Interventions 96% 94% — 99% 97% 93% — 100% 99% 98% — 100%
Classroom & Individual Interventions 97% 90% — 100% 98% 98% — 99% 100% 100%
Probe 99% 99% — 100% 98% 97% — 99% N/A N/A
TRUSSELL, CHEN, LEWIS, AND LUNA
Escape-Maintained Behavior 523
with a range of .5% to 2.5%. These data suggest that there is strong
durability of FBA-based interventions.
Limitations
There are some limitations that should be noted. First, due to
competing priorities within public schools, including standardized
and benchmark assessments, there are several challenges to conduct-
ing applied research. First, during periods of assessments, students
are generally unavailable for observations, thus disrupting the se-
quence of observations sessions. During this study, only two data
points could be collected during the one-to-one peer support inter-
vention during math class. Second, special education faculty are often
called upon to administer certain types of assessments to students
with disabilities. For example, during this study the special educa-
tion teacher was not available on certain days in order to conduct
assessments.
The second limitation of this study is the small sample size.
There was only one student participating in this study, which causes
the problem of generalization. However, the single subject research
design has been applied and proven valid with repetition across sub-
jects, times and places. In addition, the student’s problem behaviors
in this study were maintained by escape/avoidance of tasks and FBA-
based behavioral interventions were designed to address the escape
function. However, past research has indicated that there are differ-
ent functions of behaviors including social attention seeking, tan-
gibles or preferred activities seeking, social avoidance and internal
stimulation seeking or escaping (Alberto, & Troutman, 2009; Ervin et
al., 2001; Gresham, Watson, & Skinner, 2001). Therefore, the results of
this study did not explore whether the same results will exist with
other functions of behaviors.
In addition, there were only two data points for math in the peer
support condition. A clear acknowledgement of change is arguably
difficult to defend with only two data points.
Implications for Future Research
There are several directions for future research. First, since
there was only one student in the present study, future studies should
recruit either more students with the same function of problem be-
haviors or different function of problem behaviors to increase the
reliability of the results. Further, future research could compare the
effectiveness of FBA-based interventions in different settings, includ-
ing structured classroom activities and unstructured settings, such
as the cafeteria and playground.
526 TRUSSELL, CHEN, LEWIS, AND LUNA
Conclusion
This study was able to demonstrate that classroom interventions
were able to reduce escape maintained problem behaviors in two self-
contained settings and one general education classroom. Specifically,
this study was able to implement these strategies as classroom-wide in-
terventions and achieve reductions in problem behaviors. Further, this
study established the extent to which classroom-wide interventions
coupled with individually designed function-based interventions re-
duced escape maintained problem behaviors.
References
Cole, C. L., Davenport, T. A., Bambara, L.M., & Ager, C. L. (1997). Ef-
fects of choice and task preference on the work performance
of students with behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 22,
65 – 74.
Conroy, M. A., & Stichter, J. P. (2006). Seeing the forest and the trees:
A more rigorous approach to measurement and validity in
behavioral disorders intervention research. In T. E. Scruggs
& M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Applications of research methodol
ogy: Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 19) (pp.
136 — 160). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Dunlap, G., de Perczel, M., Clarke, S., Wilson, D., Wright, S., White,
R., & Gomez, A. (1994). Choice making to promote adaptive
behavior for students with emotional and behavioral chal-
lenges. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 505 – 518. doi:
10.1901/jaba. 1994. 27 – 505.
Ervin, R. A., Radford, P. M., Bertsch, K., Piper, A. L., Ehrhardt, K. E.,
& Poling, A. (2001). A descriptive analysis and critique of the
empirical literature in school-based functional assessment.
School Psychology Review, 30, 193 – 210.
Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guadino, D., & Lathrop, M. (2007). Response
to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in
second grade. Exceptional Children, 73, 288 – 310.
Falk, K. B., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). The effects of peer-assisted learning
strategies on the beginning reading skills of young children
with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders,
26, 344 – 359.
Filter, K. J., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Function-based academic interven-
tions for problem behavior. Education and Treatment of Chil
dren, 32, 1 – 19.
Fox, J. J., & Conroy, M. A. (1995). Setting events and behavioral disor-
ders of children and youth: An interbehavioral field analysis
for research and practice. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 3, 130 – 140.
Gage, N. A., Lewis, T. J., & Stichter, J. P. (2012). Functional behavioral
assessment-based interventions for students with or at risk
for emotional and/or behavioral disorders in school: A hier-
archical linear modeling meta-analysis. Behavioral Disorders,
37, 55 – 77.
Gresham, F. M., & Elliot, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system. Circle
Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
528 TRUSSELL, CHEN, LEWIS, AND LUNA