specialist-level portfolio internship year based on … · state approved internship in clermont...
TRANSCRIPT
SPECIALIST-LEVEL PORTFOLIO
INTERNSHIP YEAR
Based on 2010-2011 Training and Internship
in
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY
Angela E. Smits, M. Ed
University of Cincinnati
Smits, A., 1
Table of Contents
Introduction to the Internship Portfolio…………………………………………………………...2
Case Entry Overview……………………………………………………………………………...3
Professional Resume……………………………………………………………………………....5
A Tier 1 System Wide Change to Promote Consensus Building for Implementing a Response to
Intervention Model in an Elementary School………………………………………………........10
A Tier 1 Academic Intervention to Increase Reading Fluency and Comprehension Skills in a
Third-Grade Classroom……………………………………………………………………….…49
A Tier 2 Flashcard Intervention to Increase the Early Literacy Skills of First Grade
Students……………………………………………………………………………...……….......64
Tier 3 Support to Increase the Early Literacy Skills of a First-Grade Student………………..…93
A Tier 1 Class-Wide Intervention Utilizing a Token Economy and Response Cost to Reduce Off-
Task Behaviors of Second-Grade Students……………………………………………….…….113
Tier 2: Utilizing the Principles of Effective Classrooms and a Dependent Group Contingency to
Reduce Disruptive Behaviors in a Targeted Group of Kindergarten Students………………....133
Tier 3: Utilizing a Response to Intervention Model to Determine Eligibility for Special
Education Services for a Kindergartener with Aggressive Behaviors………………………….161
Smits, A., 2
Introduction to the Third Year School Psychology Internship Portfolio
This portfolio is based on the training and internship experiences provided through the
University of Cincinnati School Psychology Specialist-Level Program and a year-long 1500-hour
state approved internship in Clermont County, Ohio. The entries included in the portfolio reflect
the core components of my model of practice and represent a sample of my experiences as an
intern school psychologist. The portfolio includes 7 entries and meets the requirements of the
internship-year specialist-level portfolio as shown in Table 1.
Smits, A., 3
Case Entry Overview
Title of Entry Tier Brief Description Requirements Met
Resume Professional Resume
summarizing internship
experiences
A Tier 1 System
Wide Change to
Promote Consensus
Building for
Implementing a
Response to
Intervention Model
in an Elementary
School
Tier 1, System-Wide
intervention
Staff developments and
trainings were provided to
building to build
consensus for
implementation of a
Response to Intervention
Model
System-Wide Change
A Tier 1 Academic
Intervention to
Increase Reading
Fluency and
Comprehension
Skills in a Third-
Grade Classroom
Tier 1, class-wide
intervention
3rd grade teacher was
provided support in
implementing an
intervention to increase
reading skills of the
students
Tier 1 Academic
A Tier 2 Flashcard
Intervention to
Increase the Early
Literacy Skills of
First Grade Students
Tier 2, low-intensity
intervention
Word Family flashcard
intervention for 4 first
grade students to increase
early literacy skills
Tier 2 Academic
Tier 3 Support to
Increase the Early
Literacy Skills of a
First-Grade Student
Tier 3 individualized
intervention
A first grade student
received one-on-one
intervention support to
increase her early literacy
skills using research-
based interventions
Tier 3 Academic
A Tier 1 Class-Wide
Intervention
Utilizing a Token
Economy and
Response Cost to
Reduce Off-Task
Behaviors of
Tier 1 class-wide
intervention
A token economy was
implemented in a second
grade classroom to
increase the on-task
behaviors of the students
during independent work
time
Tier 1 Behavior
Smits, A., 4
Second-Grade
Students
Tier 2: Utilizing the
Principles of
Effective
Classrooms and a
Dependent Group
Contingency to
Reduce Disruptive
Behaviors in a
Targeted Group of
Kindergarten
Students
Tier 2 Class-wide
intervention to target
the behaviors of a
targeted group of
students
Behavior support was
provided to a
kindergarten classroom to
decrease disruptive
behaviors. The Tier 1
components were
modified and a Tier 2
mystery motivator
intervention was
implemented.
Tier 2 Behavior
Tier 3: Utilizing a
Response to
Intervention Model
to Determine
Eligibility for
Special Education
Services for a
Kindergartener with
Aggressive
Behaviors
Tier 3 High Intensity
Individualized
Intervention
A functional behavioral
analysis was completed
and interventions were
implemented to reduce
the disruptive and
aggressive behaviors of a
kindergartner. A
Response to Intervention
model was followed and
interventions were
intensified to eventually
lead to an evaluation and
determining eligibility for
special education
services.
Tier 3 Behavior
Determining Eligibility using
an RtI model
Functional Behavior
Assessment
Smits, A., 5
ANGELA ELIZABETH SMITS, M.Ed
1114 Aspen Pines Drive Wilder, KY 41071 | (859) 421-1439 | [email protected]
EDUCATION ________________________________________________________________
Education Specialist (Ed.S) University of Cincinnati; Cincinnati, OH
School Psychology Anticipated June 2011
Masters of Education (M.Ed) University of Cincinnati; Cincinnati, OH
School Psychology June 2009
• School Psychology Program (NASP approved, ABA approved, NCATE
accredited)
• completed a 1500-hour state approved internship
Bachelors of Science (B.S.) University of Kentucky; Lexington, KY
Psychology December 2007
• Graduated with honors (cum laude)
CERTIFICATION/LICENSURE _______________
Temporary Pupil Services License Ohio Department of Education
July 2010-June 2011
*Have applied for and anticipate professional licensure upon graduation in June 2011
ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE _______________
School Psychologist Intern Clermont County Educational Service Center; Batavia, OH
West Clermont and Batavia Local School Districts, pre-K-12
August 2010-present
• Facilitated collaborative problem solving to develop individual Tier 3 student
interventions for academics and behavior, including intervention for English
Language Learners
• Provided consultation for Tier 1 Positive Behavioral Support at the grade-level
• Initiated universal screening for math and a school wide math intervention; organized
and monitored math and reading tutoring groups
• Provided Tier 3 academic and behavioral case management for individual students
• Conducted initial multi-factored evaluations using a response-to-intervention
evaluation process
• Conducted evaluations of preschool and school-age students with high-incidence and
low- incidence disabilities
• Completed functional behavioral assessments and behavioral intervention plans for
challenging behaviors
Smits, A., 6
• Participated in numerous fall and winter data analysis meetings with grade-level
teams to identify students in need of targeted interventions and to match groups to
available personnel
• Analyzed building personnel schedules to identify staff available for Tier 3
intervention
• Currently planning and scheduling building-wide spring universal screenings
• Collaborated with building administrators to develop a school wide form and set of
procedures for better matching Tier 2 literacy skills group interventions to students’
needs
ELL Committee Member Clermont County Educational Service Center, Batavia, OH
October 2010-present
• Assisted in developing and revising the policies and procedures for English
Language Learners who are enrolled in Clermont County schools
FBA Web Course Developer Clermont County Educational Service Center; Batavia, OH
October 2010-present
• Co-developer of the curriculum for a 3 credit hour web course for teachers on
Functional Behavior Assessments and Behavior Intervention Plans
Crisis Response Team Member Clermont County Educational Service Center; Batavia, OH
September 2010-present
• Participated in crisis response training and provided support to staff and students
in schools impacted by a crisis
Olweus Leadership Team Batavia Middle School; Batavia, OH
August 2010-present
• Served on the building-level team to help organize the implementation of the
Olweus Bully Prevention Program
Practicum Student Withamsville-Tobasco Elementary School; Cincinnati,
OH
September 2009-May 2010 Northern Kentucky Head Start, Newport, KY
• Provided teacher and student support by collaborating, problem solving, and utilizing
a tiered approach to develop, implement and progress-monitor academic and
behavioral interventions at the class-wide and individual level
• Supported the intervention process through research, design, implementation, and
evaluation stages for academic and behavioral referrals
• Facilitated intervention review meetings with teachers regarding student academic
and behavioral progress
• Created and presented staff professional development presentations and parenting
skill groups
• Participated in school-wide universal screenings (DIBELS 6th Edition)
Behavioral Consultant Winton Woods Primary School North, Cincinnati, OH
February 2010-May 2010
Smits, A., 7
• Conducted a functional behavior assessment of a preschool student with down-
syndrome; analyzed the data and developed a hypothesis and intervention
recommendations
Social Skills Group Facilitator Withamsville-Tobasco Elementary School; Cincinnati,
OH
February 2010-April 2010
• Planned and co-facilitated an eight week social skills group (Tier II) with fifth grade
students.
Literacy Tutor Academy of World Languages; Cincinnati, OH
September 2008-May 2009
• Provided intervention through small groups for fifth through eighth grade students to
increase literacy skills
RELATED EXPERIENCE _______________
Fernside Grief Group Facilitator Fernside; Cincinnati, OH
October 2010-present
• Coordinate and facilitate discussions and activities and provide support for fourth and
fifth grade students who have lost someone significant in their lives
Fernside Respite Counselor Fernside; Cincinnati, OH
July 2010
• served as a volunteer camp counselor for elementary aged children who have lost
someone significant
Nanny for Children with Disabilities Cincinnati, OH; Lexington, KY
January 2005-present
• Provided assistance and child care for children with disabilities including Autism,
Aspergers, Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, Sensory Processing Disorder, ADHD, and
learning disabilities
Student Instructor University of Kentucky; Lexington, KY
August 2005-December 2006
• Served as the student facilitator for freshman orientation classes (UK 101).
Collaborated with university professors to develop lessons, teach, and facilitate group
discussions.
PRESENTATIONS/PUBLICATIONS _______________
Smits, Angie. RTI: Bogus, Buzzword, Beneficial? Batavia Local School District. October
2010.
Smits, Angie. Dibels Next Training. Batavia Elementary School. October 2010.
Smits, A., 8
Smits, Angie. Strategies for Struggling Math Students. Batavia Elementary School. November
2010.
RESEARCH EXPERIENCE _______________
Research Assistant University of Kentucky; Lexington, KY
August 2007 – April 2008
• Educational Psychology Lab (Drs. Robert and Elizabeth Lorch); Assisted in trying to
identify the most effective way to teach fourth grade students about science
experiments
• Social Psychology Lab (Dr. C. Nathan DeWall); Assisted in research experiments
considering the effect of bullying and social rejection on academic performance
Research Assistant University of London; London, England
May 2007-August 2007
• Developmental Baby Lab (Dr. Schlottmann and Dr. Ray); recruited participants,
observed in lab, ran an adult study, entered and analyzed data using SPSS
RELEVANT SKILLS/ TRAINING/PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ______
Dibels Next/ Dibels Database
Data Map
Crisis Prevention and Intervention Training (CPI)
Grief Support for Children
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS _______________
National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
Ohio School Psychologists Association (OSPA)
HONORS/AWARDS _______________
September 2008-present University Graduate Scholarship
December 2007 Graduated with Honors (Cum Laude)
August 2003-May 2007 KEES Scholarship
REFERENCES _______________
Kendra Herdtner, Ed.S West Clermont Local School District; Cincinnati, OH
Intervention Psychologist
(513) 309-3605
Mindy Snider , Ed.S Batavia Local School District; Batavia, OH
School Psychologist
(513) 910-1162
Renee Hawkins, PhD University of Cincinnati; Cincinnati, OH
Professor of School Psychology
Smits, A., 9
Program Co-director
(513) 304-2990
Dave Barnett, PhD University of Cincinnati; Cincinnati, OH
Professor of School Psychology
(513) 961-5045
Randy Siler, PhD Clermont County Educational Service Center; Batavia, OH
Supervisor of School Psychologists
(513) 702-4213
Smits, A., 10
A Tier 1 System Wide Change to Promote Consensus Building for Implementing a
Response to Intervention Model in an Elementary School
At the beginning of the school year the literacy coach requested a meeting with the
school psychologist intern to discuss Response to Intervention (RtI). Response to Intervention is
a multi-tiered approach which includes universal, targeted and intensive interventions. It has
documented success, emphasizes prevention, and effectively organizes the delivery of school
psychology services to meet the needs of all children (Ysseldyke, et al, 2008). The district was
currently not following a Response to Intervention model, and the district administrators had
discussed implementing a new model in all buildings to target the needs of all students in the
district. The literacy coach at the elementary school wanted more information about Response to
Intervention. The intern’s training and model of practice emphasized prevention and
intervention and following an RtI model. The literacy coach revealed that the school was
currently implementing interventions for struggling students through an intervention assistance
team (IAT); however, she expressed concern about the quality of interventions being
implemented, adherence to the interventions, lack of progress monitoring, and data-based
decisions.
The intern and literacy coach met with the building administrator and school psychologist
to confirm these concerns. The school psychologist provided information that the number of
initial referrals for evaluations had increased over the past few years. Additionally, the school’s
data for students identified with disabilities revealed that over the last 3 years the number of
identified students had increased from 11%-15%. The team decided to collaboratively work
together to collect data and information and to determine steps to begin changing the building’s
intervention process. Implementing a Response to Intervention Model involves many key
Smits, A., 11
stakeholders at the building and district level and takes several years to fully implement. The
implementation of RtI usually proceeds through three stages at the district and school-level
(Kums and Tilly, 2008). They are: consensus building, infrastructure building, and
implementation. Consensus building is where RtI concepts are communicated broadly to
implementers and the foundational “whys” are taught, discussed, and embraced (Batsche, 2007).
The school psychologist intern participated on the building level team. This report describes the
components contributed by the school psychologist intern to promote consensus building for the
implementation of a Response to Intervention Model.
Methods
Participants
Building-Level team. The elementary school developed a building-level team to review
the school’s current procedures and resources, and to develop a plan to begin the process of
implementing a response to intervention (RtI) model. The building-level team met throughout
the school year to collaborate and develop action steps. The team consisted of the literacy coach,
building principal, assistant principal, the school psychologist, and the school psychologist
intern. The intern’s primary contributions to the system-wide change included promoting
consensus building by collaborating and providing information to the team about RtI, creating
resources binders, developing and leading staff developments, and collecting and analyzing data.
The intern’s graduate school training emphasized the core principles and importance of a
Response to Intervention model on successful student outcomes. In addition, to the intern’s
strong foundation of knowledge about Response to Intervention, the intern also had experiences
Smits, A., 12
with implementing interventions at all three Tiers and was interning in a district that had
successfully been implementing a RtI model.
The school psychologist was responsible for collaborating and contributing to the team
meetings and supervising the intern. The literacy coach was responsible for collecting and
analyzing data, attending professional developments, developing surveys for baseline data, and
communicating with the school staff about RtI. The building administrators were responsible for
collaborating with the team, reviewing data, and developing an implementation plan. The
district’s superintendent and other building administrators from the district also collaborated with
the team throughout the year.
School Staff. All teaching-staff in the elementary school were expected to attend the
staff developments, provide information, and contribute ideas. Consensus among all staff is
essential for successful implementation of RtI. The elementary school served students grades K-
4. The staff at school was comprised of 37 general education teachers, 6 intervention specialists
(special education), 6 special area teachers, 5 Title 1 teachers, and 11 paraprofessionals.
Additional building staff included the principal, assistant principal, literacy coach, counselor,
psychologist, and speech and language pathologist.
Student Population. According to the 2009-2010 data, the elementary school had
approximately 856 students in grades K-4. 88.9% of the students n the building were Caucasian,
7% were multi-racial, and 2.2% were African-American. Batavia also had a large population of
economically disadvantaged students (52%). The percentage of students identified with a
disability was 15% (11% excluding students with speech and language disability only).
Setting
Smits, A., 13
The system-wide change to begin implementing a Response to Intervention model
occurred at an elementary school in the Greater Cincinnati Area. The initial phase began in
September of 2010 and would continue until all components were successfully implemented.
The first year was designated to increasing data-based decision making throughout the school,
building consensus, analyzing data and current resources, and determining action steps.
Baseline Conditions
The baseline data about the school was compiled by the school psychologist intern from
the power user reports on the Ohio Department of Education website .
(http://ilrc.ode.state.oh.us/PublicDW/asp/Main.aspx?server=mstris2&project=ILRC&evt=3002&uid=guest&pwd=&
persist-mode="8") The data gathered was baseline data from the previous three years on the
school’s enrollment, performance index, state indicators, adequate yearly progress, and
discipline. The data is summarized in Table 1.
2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010
% of state indicators met 100% 100% 80%
Adequate yearly progress Not Met Met Not Met
Performance Index
Below Basic 4.20% 4.40% 4.30%
Basic 8.30% 11.40% 13.90%
Proficient 42% 36.80% 31%
Accelerated 30.20% 27.40% 28%
Advanced 15% 19.90% 23.00%
Enrollment
students with disabilities 11% 13% 15%
economically disadvantaged 42.60% 46.40% 52%
% of students with cognitive
disability who are also
economically disadvantaged no data no data 92.30%
% of students with learning
disability who are also
economically disadvantaged 74.30% 71% 76.30%
All Disciplinary Actions per
100 students 4.20% 3.40% 6.30%
Smits, A., 14
The data provided from the power user report indicated that the percent of state indicators
had decreased and the school did not meet adequate yearly progress during the 2009-2010 school
year. The performance index percentages provided valuable information. The percentage of
students scoring below basic on state-wide testing remained about the same over the three year
period. The students scoring basic increased and the percentage of students scoring proficient or
accelerated decreased. The number of students scoring within the advanced range increased.
The performance index data ideally should see increases in the proficient, accelerated, and
advanced groups and there should be a decrease in the below basic and basic groups.
The enrollment data indicated a high population of economically disadvantaged students.
The percent of students with disabilities was 15% during the 2009-2010 school year which was a
4% increase over the 3 year period. Ideally in a Response to Intervention framework, 5% or less
of the students should be identified as needing intensive support. 92.3% percent of the students
identified as having a cognitive disability and were also economically disadvantaged. 76.3% of
the students identified with a learning disability were economically disadvantaged. These high
percentages suggest an overrepresentation of students who are economically disadvantaged and
are identified with a disability.
This data supported implementing a Response to Intervention model to better meet the
needs of all students to increase proficiency and decrease the number of students identified as
having a disability. The data compiled from the power user reports would be used as baseline
data for the entire system-wide change of implementing RtI.
Smits, A., 15
To measure the effectiveness of the components the school psychologist intern
contributed to the system-wide change, the intern created a survey (Appendix A) for the teachers
to complete. Out of the 43 general and special education teachers in the building, only 6 of the
surveys were completed. The surveys completed provided information that the teachers did not
know the difference between RtI and the school’s Intervention Assistance Team. Two out of the
six teachers said that they progress monitor the students receiving intervention using the Dibels
progress monitoring passages; however, they did not indicate how they determine if the
intervention is effective. The other teachers said they progress monitor with weekly tests and
Accelerated Reader Tests. The teachers indicated some research based interventions but also
listed Title 1 and progress monitoring as interventions. The completed surveys provided some
insight into the teacher’s knowledge of Response to Intervention, but it was determined to not be
very representative baseline data since only 14% of the teachers completed it.
For additional baseline data the school psychologist intern attended IAT meetings for 4 students
in grades 1, 2, and 3. The school psychologist intern developed a checklist with core
components of RtI (Appendix A) . The checklist was utilized to demonstrate which of the
components were observed at the IAT meetings. The data is summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. RtI components observed being implemented.
Core Component
Research-Based Intervention x
Reliable Measurable Goal x x
Frequency/Duration stated x x x x
Progress Monitoring Data x x x
Intervention aligns to skill deficit x
student demonstrates reaching goal x
decision rules are used
interventions are modified based on decision rules
intervention is explicitly defined
Smits, A., 16
frequency of progress monitoring x
review date is set x x x X
baseline data x x x X
Percent of components demonstrated 67% 42% 42% 25%
The school had 5 Title 1 teachers who were responsible for leading the IAT meetings for
each grade level. The data demonstrates that the interventions being implemented were not
research based. The information further suggested that the teachers were not utilizing data to
make decisions. This baseline data was utilized to develop strategies to inform the staff about
Response to Intervention and to build consensus for implementing the three-tiered service
delivery model within the school.
Goal Setting
The goal set by the team for the end of the year was for 80% of the staff to be
knowledgeable in the core components of RtI. This would be determined through an end-of-year
survey and a teacher would be considered knowledgeable if 85% or more of the questions were
answered correctly. The school psychologist intern also developed social validity surveys to
measure how important the staff felt the components of RtI were after various parts of the
intervention were completed.
Decision Rules
It was difficult to determine and aim-line due to the lack of reliable baseline data. The
team decided that at the end of the year the teachers did not demonstrate knowledge of RtI or
consensus with implementation then it would continue into the following school year.
Intervention Components
Smits, A., 17
Teacher Training. The school psychologist intern led two teacher trainings in
September. The trainings covered the Dibels Next which had recently been adopted by the
school as the universal screening measure. The school psychologist intern developed a
presentation to review and teach the teachers about the Dibels Next measures. The training
utilized power point, modeling, videos, and opportunities to practice the skill. The teacher’s
adherence to scoring the various measures was checked by using videos and asking them to score
the measure. Additionally, the school psychologist intern discussed the importance of the data-
based decision making. The intern provided the teachers with information on how to analyze the
Dibels data. The Dibels database was introduced and the intern modeled how to use the
Database to find out information about a student, enter progress monitoring data, and develops
graphs. The goal of the teacher training was to increase the staff’s reliability with administering
the Dibels Next measures. The teacher training also provided the teachers an opportunity to
learn about the Dibels database to increase their knowledge and encourage them to use data to
make decisions.
District-Wide Professional Development. An important component of consensus
building is informing people about the core components of RtI and the benefits of the three tiered
model. The district and building administrators requested for the school psychologist intern to
develop a presentation to present at the district-wide professional development day. All teachers,
paraprofessionals and administrators in the district were invited to attend the presentation.
Between the two sessions, 65 people attended. Out of the 65 people, 5 were building
administrators, 14 were special education teachers, 36 were general education teachers, and 5
were paraprofessionals. The intern utilized research and information provided from her graduate
school training to compile an hour long presentation that was presented during 2 different
Smits, A., 18
sessions to the district on November 2nd. The presentation utilized power point and activities to
maintain the audience’s interest. The presentation covered the core components and research of
RtI and how implementation might look in a school. The presentation is included in Appendix
A. The district-wide staff development was developed to increase people’s awareness of
response to intervention and to allow them to brainstorm and reflect about their current practices.
Staff Development. On November 11th, the intern presented to all elementary teachers
during two different sessions. This staff development covered math strategies, collecting data,
and planning interventions. The training also discussed math universal screening. The intern
developed an interactive tool that included math interventions and scripts to match specific math
skills. The presentation utilized power point, modeling, group work and group discussion. The
goal of this staff development was to provide the teachers with research based interventions
aligned to specific math skill deficits, demonstrate how to set goals and collect data for math, and
examples of math universal screenings. The presentation is included in Appendix C.
Parent Training. As a result of the staff developments, many teachers were requesting
assistance for progress monitoring more frequently. The school psychologist intern and literacy
coach set up a parent training for the Dibels Next measures. The intern made slight
modifications to the power point that had been used for the teacher training. The parents were
introduced to the different measures, the intern modeled how to score each measure, and then the
parents watched a series of videos to practice scoring themselves. Each parent’s reliability was
also checked by the literacy coach and school psychologist intern. All of the parents were
determined to be reliable scorers. The goal of this parent training was to teach the parents how
to progress monitor to provide assistance to the teachers in the classroom, to increase the
Smits, A., 19
likelihood that teachers would begin progress monitoring their students receiving intervention
support.
Math Universal Screening. The school was already completing universal screening for
reading but there was no universal screener for math. The school psychologist intern researched
various math universal screening measures and presented them to the building team. The team
decided completing a math universal screening would be beneficial. Out of the suggestions
provided by the intern, the team decided to utilize Dibels Easy CBM. The Dibels Easy CBM
assessments were developed by the University of Oregon. Research was still being completed
for the benchmarks for each grade-level. The team decided to administer it since the school was
already paying to use this and it could be completed on-line. The team thought that although
benchmark levels were not available, administering it would give the teachers additional practice
with universal screening. The data could also be used to determine the lowest performing
students within the grade at the elementary. The school psychologist intern organized all of the
classes and entered them into the Dibels database. The intern led a staff training on January 6th
for all the teachers during two different sessions to introduce the Dibels Easy CBM screening
tool. This training utilized the website and the intern provided instructions and demonstrated
how to administer the assessment. The goal of organizing and implementing the math universal
screening was to familiarize the teachers with math universal screening assessments.
Additionally the math universal screening would provide information about the student’s
performance on various math skills compared to other students in their class. The data from the
student’s at the elementary would also be utilized by the University of Oregon to determine
benchmark scores.
Smits, A., 20
Results
Social Validity
The data and table 1 provides the mean rating for the social validity questionnaires
administered at the end of 3 of the staff developments the school psychologist intern
implemented. The ratings were on a scale of 1 to 5. A rating of 1 indicated “not at all” and a
rating of 5 indicated “Very much”.
Table 1. Average ratings on social validity surveys.
Dibels
Next
RtI
district
Math
Intervention
1. How beneficial was the information
provided today? 4.7 4.3 4.1
2. How likely are you to implement
any of the strategies discussed today? 5 3.5 3.9
3. How many of the things discussed
today are you already using in your
classroom? 3.5 4.2 4.4
4. How confident do you feel about
selecting interventions to match the
student’s skill deficit? 3.3 3.7 3.8
5. How confident are you that the
interventions you are implementing are
research-based? 2.8 3.3 3.5
6. How often do you review data to
plan instruction and interventions? 3.1 3.7 3.3
7. How beneficial do you think it
would be for the school to implement a
response to intervention model? 2.6 3.9 3.5
8. How knowledgeable did the
presenter seem about RtI? 4.2 4.9 4.8
The results of the social validity questionnaire indicate that the staff developments for
Dibels Next, Response to Intervention, and the Math intervention were perceived as beneficial.
In addition to the social validity surveys, the staff provided positive verbal feedback about the
sessions.
Smits, A., 21
The intern completed adherence checks at additional IAT meetings to see the percentage
of components being implemented towards the end of the school year. The data in figure 1
shows the percentage of RtI essential components demonstrated at the observed IAT meetings.
The data indicates that during 2 of the IAT meetings more than 85% of the core
components were observed; however, a majority of the components were still not being
implemented. The mean score during baseline was 44% (SD=17). After the staff developments
and resource folder were implemented the mean increased to 64.6% (SD=24.7). The effect size
was 0.44 and the PND was 50%. This data suggests that the teachers did not generalize the
information learned during the staff developments to implement the components or document it
appropriately on the IAT forms. The results of the survey will reveal if the school psychologist
intern’s contributions were beneficial in increasing knowledge of following a Response to
Intervention model.
Figure 1. Percentage of RtI components observed during IAT meetings.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
pe
rce
nta
ge
of
RtI
co
mp
on
en
ts
de
mo
nst
rate
d
IAT meeting number
Series1
goal=85%
Staff
developments
Smits, A., 22
The effectiveness of the school psychologist’s staff developments, trainings, and
participation on the building team to increase awareness and consensus for a response to
intervention model could not be determined at the time the report was compiled. The survey was
administered to teachers on April 25th and the data has not been returned. The school
psychologist intern will continue to work with the literacy coach and building administrators for
the remainder of the year to help develop action steps for next year.
Discussion
The building administrators and literacy coach indicated that the intern’s contributions
were extremely beneficial. The team is making plans to revise the schedule to implement skills
groups, determine more efficient ways to utilize intervention specialist and paraprofessional
time, and to set up monthly meetings to review data with the team. This provides evidence that
the intern’s contributions were effective in providing knowledge to key stakeholders to
implement RtI.
The goal of the intern’s interventions was to increase the knowledge and consensus of
staff. The adherence checks during IAT meetings provided evidence if the components were
being implemented; however, the staff developments and resource binders did not explicitly
teach generalization of the knowledge. A limit to this measure was the intern completed the
essential component checklists based on the IAT paperwork and the discussions at the IAT
meetings. The checklists were not explicitly reviewed with the IAT team members, therefore,
some of the interventions being implemented in Title 1 could have been research based but they
were not explicitly outlined in the IAT paperwork.
Smits, A., 23
Another limit to the system-wide change was the lack of baseline data. The baseline
survey should have been completed by every teacher. The surveys were sent through e-mail and
although follow-up e-mails were sent, it would have been better to administer the surveys
directly to the teachers.
Implementing a system-wide change was very beneficial to my professional
development. A system-wide change requires a lot of planning and collaboration among key
stakeholders. I learned the importance of taking time to gather necessary information. In the
future, I will utilize more efficient strategies to collect baseline data. I also further refined my
skills of advocating for change to promote more successful outcomes for children. I was able to
adhere to the core principles of my model of practice while providing knowledge and influencing
others. Being a part of the beginning stages of this large system-wide change was challenging
and exciting. My strong foundation in Response to Intervention allowed me to take on a
leadership and initiative role at the building and district level. I demonstrated leadership skills
by leading staff developments at both levels. These presentations allowed me to further refine
my leadership skills and also provided me with confidence to promote change in other districts I
work with in the future. Although the social validity ratings for the presentations were high, in
the future, I will utilize more hands on activities and will determine the pre-level of knowledge
the audience has about the topic. Being a part of the building team also allowed me the
opportunity to analyze a large amount of data which improved my skills to be a more effective
scientist-practitioner. I will continue to work with the building for the rest of the year and am in
the process of developing resource folders for the administrators to give to the teachers next year.
I will utilize the experience I had with participating in the beginning stages of this large system-
Smits, A., 24
wide change to help with other school districts that might not be implementing all components of
an RtI model.
Smits, A., 25
References
Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J.L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J.F., Prasse, D., et al. (2005).
Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Retrieved October
11, 2010.
Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy
Skills (Dibels Next). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational
Achievement. Available: /.
Herman, R., Dawson, P., Dee, T., Greene, J., Maynard, R., Redding, S., et al. (2008). Turning
around chronically low-performing schools: A practice guide. Institute for Education
Sciences, U. S. Department of Education
Kums, S., Tilly, W.D. (2008). Response to Intervention: Blueprints for Implementation (School
Building Level). Retrieved October 25, 2010.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How
leadership influences student learning. New York: Wallace Foundation.
Ysseldyke, J., Burns, M., Dawson, P., Kelly, B., Morrison, D., Ortiz, S., Rosenfield, S., Telzrow,
C., (2008). The blueprint for training and practices as the basis for best practices. In A.
Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology V, pp. 37-68. Bethesda,
MD
Appendix A. Consensus building action steps.
Smits, A., 26
Appendix A. Checklist to assess implementation of core components of RtI.
RtI Core Component
Research-Based Intervention
Reliable Measurable Goal
Frequency/Duration stated
Progress Monitoring Data
Intervention aligns to skill deficit
student demonstrates reaching goal
decision rules are used
interventions are modified based on decision rules
intervention is explicitly defined
frequency of progress monitoring
review date is set
baseline data
Percent of components demonstrated
Appendix B. Example of powerpoint from the Dibels Next staff development.
Smits, A., 27
Smits, A., 28
Smits, A., 29
Appendix C. Powerpoint from RtI presentation for the district.
Smits, A., 30
Smits, A., 31
Smits, A., 32
Smits, A., 33
Smits, A., 34
Smits, A., 35
Smits, A., 36
Smits, A., 37
Smits, A., 38
Smits, A., 39
Smits, A., 40
Appendix D. Power point from school-wide presentation on math.
Smits, A., 41
Smits, A., 42
Smits, A., 43
Smits, A., 44
Smits, A., 45
Smits, A., 46
Smits, A., 47
Smits, A., 48
Smits, A., 49
A Tier 1 Academic Intervention to Increase Reading Fluency and Comprehension Skills in
a Third-Grade Classroom
This report describes classroom support to target the reading skills of fluency and
comprehension in a third grade classroom. By the time a student is in the third grade, they are
expected to begin “reading to learn”. Reading fluency is an essential skill to develop because
research demonstrates that fluent readers are more likely to comprehend, more likely to choose
to read, and fluent reading requires less effort (Daly, Chafouleas, Skinner, 2005).
Comprehension is also an important reading skill that must be taught. Sources for
comprehension difficulties include limited knowledge of: vocabulary development and
background knowledge, strategic processing of text, and text structures (Gersten et al., 2002).
Many studies support utilizing story grammar as a basis for improving comprehension by
identifying the principle components of a story and using this as an organizational guide when
reading (Gersten et al., 2002). An important component when providing intervention is to
determine if the instruction being provided is matching the students’ needs.
At the beginning of the school year, the school psychologist intern and intervention
psychologist were given the responsibility to progress monitoring the student’s in Mrs. Clark’s
third grade class. The results of the progress monitoring and benchmark data revealed that
although the students were not significantly below benchmark, many of the students had not
increased their fluency over time. The school psychologist intern further reviewed the data,
which revealed the retell responses and quality of the response of the students were not
increasing. The school psychologist intern, discussed the progress monitoring results with the
third grade team and building principal. The building principal and third grade teacher, Mrs.
Clark, requested support for an academic intervention targeting reading fluency and
comprehension.
Smits, A., 50
A response to intervention model (RtI) was utilized in implementing a class-wide Tier 1
intervention. RtI is a multi-tiered approach which includes universal, targeted and intensive
interventions. It has documented success, emphasizes prevention, and effectively organizes the
delivery of school psychology services to meet the needs of all children (Ysseldyke, et al, 2008).
Across the tiers it is strongly recommended that educators implement empirically based
instructional methods with fidelity to increase the likelihood of student success. At Tier 1, the
universal Tier, the instruction should be aimed at meeting the needs of all students. The
instruction should be evidence based and align with the core-reading curriculum (Joseph, 2008).
Instructional effectiveness is defined as instruction that produces high rates of performing
an academic skill accurately (Skinner, Blefiore, and Watson, 2002). General interventions that
research supports for improving reading skills include direct instruction components of
modeling, prompting, correcting errors, opportunities to respond, repeated practice, and
shaping/reinforcing responses (Joseph, 2008).
The school psychologist intern worked collaboratively with the building principal,
intervention psychologist, and the third grade teacher to develop, implement, monitor, and
modify a Tier 1 Academic Intervention to increase the reading fluency and comprehension of all
the students in Mrs. Clark’s third grade class.
Method
Participants
The Tier 1 academic intervention to target reading fluency and comprehension was
implemented in a third grade classroom with 23 students. There were 10 girls and 13 boys in the
class. The problem-solving team consisted of Mrs. Clark (teacher), Mrs. Smith (principal), the
Smits, A., 51
intervention psychologist, and the school psychologist intern. The school psychologist intern
was responsible for researching and contributing ideas, distributing materials, collaborating and
frequently communicating with the team, assessing implementation, and progress monitoring.
The classroom teacher was responsible for implementing and adhering to the intervention plan,
providing feedback on the intervention and student progress, and collaborating with the team.
The principal and intervention psychologist were responsible for contributing ideas, assisting in
analyzing data, and providing supervision.
Setting
The intervention occurred in a third grade classroom at a public school in the Greater
Cincinnati area. The students attended the school Monday-Friday from 9:00am-3:30pm. The
intervention was implemented during the language arts time of 9:15-9:45 every school day. The
intervention was implemented in addition to the core curriculum instruction.
Target Variables
Through progress monitoring and universal screening data, observations, and team
collaboration, the target variables were selected. The progress monitoring data provided
evidence that the fluency and comprehension skills, of the students in Mrs. Clark’s class, were
not increasing. The end of year benchmark for reading fluency in third grade was 100 words
correct per minute. The data revealed that the class average from December to January had
decreased from 96 WCPM to 91 WCPM. Furthermore, the median had decreased and the range
of scores had increased. Although the median was not significantly below the goal of 100
WCPM there was concern about the number of students who fell below the goal and that the
progress had not increased over time. The comprehension measure of retell response and quality
Smits, A., 52
of response had also not increased. The team discussion further revealed concerns and supported
the evidence provided from the progress monitoring data. The school psychologist intern’s
observation in the classroom revealed that there were strategies that could be improved on to
increase fluency and comprehension. The target variables of words correct per minute (WCPM)
and accuracy were used to monitor fluency. The target variables of number of words and quality
of a retell response were used to monitor comprehension.
Goal Setting
The problem-solving team met in February to discuss interventions and to set goals. The
Dibels benchmark goals were reviewed to set the goals to measure fluency and comprehension.
Through discussion and collaboration the end of year benchmark goals for words correct per
minute, number of words in the retell response, and the quality of response were used. Research
demonstrates that a student should be able to increase his reading fluency by 2 words per week.
This rate of increase was taken into consideration when setting the fluency goal. The goals are
indicated in the table below.
Table 1. Dibels benchmark goals for third grade.
Dibels Measure
Baseline (class
median)
Goal (End of Year
Benchmark)
WCPM 92 100
Words in Retell 33 40
Quality of Retell 2 3
Hypothesis
Through collaboration the hypothesis for the flat-line trend for the reading fluency and
comprehension skills of the students in Mrs. Clark’s third grade classroom, was because of
Smits, A., 53
insufficient opportunities to practice and receive feedback, and lack of consistency in
implementing research based strategies to target the skills. An intervention was implemented
using “The Six Minute Solutions” (Sopris West) and “Reading Street: RtI toolkit for
Comprehension.” These packaged interventions utilized the principles of repeated readings, self-
monitoring, direct instruction, modeling, repeated practice and graphic organizers. The
implementation of this intervention was predicted to increase class-wide words correct per
minute, retell response, and quality of the retell response. Progress monitoring these variables
was predicted to be a valid assessment of fluency and comprehension skills.
Decision Rules
The team decided if the implementation of the intervention was not at 85% adherence or
above on 3 consecutive adherence checks then the team would meet to discuss and modify the
intervention. Student progress was monitored once per month, so the team decided if the median
score for words correct per minute, retell response, or retell quality remained the same or got
worse, then the intervention would be modified.
Progress Monitoring
The school psychologist intern and the intervention psychologist were responsible for
progress monitoring the students monthly. The Dibels Next Oral Reading Fluency passages
(https://dibels.uoregon.edu/) were utilized to progress monitor. These measures are standardized
reading achievement assessments that provide benchmark levels to identify students at-risk for
reading difficulties.
The target variables of words correct per minute (WCPM) and accuracy were used to
monitor fluency. During progress monitoring, the student was asked to read a fluency passage
Smits, A., 54
for one minute. WCPM was calculated by subtracting the total number of errors from the total
words read in one minute. An error was counted if the student mispronounced the word, skipped
the word, or if they were unable to produce the word within 3 seconds. The target variables of
number of words and quality of a retell response were used to monitor comprehension. The
retell response was measured by asking the student to provide as much information about what
they read and tracking the total number of accurate, relevant words provided in one minute. The
quality of response is a rating from 1-4. The rating is determined by specific criteria provided by
Dibels. The school psychologist intern and intervention psychologist reviewed the criteria for
each retell quality rating provided by Dibels, discussed, and explicitly defined what type of
answer would constitute each rating.
Inter-Observer/Inter-Scorer Agreement
Inter-observer agreement was not calculated during the baseline phase because of the
principal’s request to implement the intervention immediately. Inter-observer agreement was
calculated by agreement on adherence to the components of the intervention. Inter-observer
agreement was conducted between the school psychologist intern and a school psychologist
practicum student on 3/8/2011. The inter-observer agreement was 100%.
Inter-scorer agreement was conducted for words correct per minute (WCPM), retell, and
quality during the baseline phase and during the intervention phases. Inter-scorer agreement for
WCPM was calculated by agreement on the total number of words read in a minute. If the two
scores were within 2 words of each other, the scorer was considered to be reliable. Inter-scorer
agreement for retell was calculated by comparing the total number of words counted during the
Smits, A., 55
response. The scorer was considered to be reliable if the 2 scores were within 5% of the total
words counted.
Table 2. Inter-scorer agreement on target variables.
9/24/2010 9/24/2010 9/24/2010 11/15/2010 11/15/2010 2/8/2010 2/8/2010 3/15/2010
Retell Response:
number of words
aggremment on
occurance 100% 100 98 100 100 100 100 97
agreement on non 94 100.00% 100 100 100 93 100 100
disagreement on
occurance 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
disagreement on
non 6% 0 0 0 0 7 0 0
Agreement on
WCPM 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Agreement on
Retell Quality 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Accountability Plan
An A-B design was used to support increasing the reading fluency and comprehension of
the students in the third grade classroom. This design allows for assessment of intervention
effectiveness by comparing intervention levels to baseline levels.
Baseline Conditions
The monthly progress monitoring data for the students was used as the baseline data. The
baseline data indicated that the student’s words correct per minute, number of words in the retell
response, and retell quality had not increased. The data demonstrated a flat-line trend. The data
demonstrated a need for an intervention to increase the student’s performance on measures
targeting the reading skills of fluency and comprehension.
Intervention Procedures
Smits, A., 56
To increase the instructional effectiveness and better align with the students needs; the
school psychologist intern determined the resources available at the school and utilized them to
develop an intervention to implement in Mrs. Clark’s class. The student’s progress monitoring
scores indicated that their fluency and comprehension was not increasing. An Tier 1 intervention
was implemented and utilized “The Six Minute Solution (SMS)” (Sopris West, 2007) repeated
reading intervention to increase fluency. The students demonstrated an increase in their fluency
skills after the implementation of SMS. The students continued to demonstrate difficulty with
comprehension so phase 2 of the intervention added in using the “Reading Street: The Response
to Intervention Toolkit for Comprehension” (Pearson Education,2009).
The Six Minute Solution. The Six Minute Solution (SSM) is a packaged intervention
developed by Sopris West that is intended to increase reading fluency by utilizing peer-to-peer
repeated readings and self-monitoring. The program utilizes research based intervention
strategies of repeated reading and learning through peer interaction. Research has also
demonstrated the specific programs effectiveness with various grade-levels (Adams and Brown,
2007). At Tier 1 students are expected to read on grade-level to improve their fluency.
Reading Street Response to Intervention Toolkit. The RtI toolkit for Comprehension
(Pearson Education, 2009) is a supplemental book that aligns with the school’s core reading
curriculum, Reading Street. The toolkit is intended to provide instruction for grades 3-6 in each
of the five critical areas of reading. The lessons target core skills allowing teachers to focus on
specific skill deficits. Each lesson includes a scripted mini-lesson that utilizes direct instruction,
modeling, guided practice, and repeated practice. Each lesson also utilizes graphic organizers,
which provide a visualization to help with comprehension. Graphic displays can be helpful in
Smits, A., 57
providing a visual picture of the content and showing key linkages (Baker, Gersten, and Grossen,
2002). Semantic webs are a type of graphic organizer that can be used to describe characteristics
and definitions of a concept or word (Joseph, 2008). Story maps can also be used to facilitate
comprehension by having the student identify main details of the story (characters, setting,
theme, details, conflicts, etc).
Intervention Adherence
Adherence to the intervention was monitored by using the scripts provided with the
packaged interventions. The teacher’s retrospective report and lesson plans were also used to
demonstrate adherence. Table 2 summarizes the observed adherence to the checklist
components.
Table 2. Percentage of completed components of intervention.
Date
2/28/2011 100%
3/8/2011 100%
3/29/2011 100%
4/12/2011 100%
Results
The impact of the intervention on the overall fluency and comprehension skills of the
student’s in Mrs. Clark’s class is shown in Figures 1-3. The class-wide median for words correct
per minute (WCPM), retell response, and quality is graphed with the median, maximum, and
minimum. The distance between the median and maximum, and the median and minimum
indicates the number of students scoring within that range.
Figure 1. Third grade words correct per minute.
Smits, A., 58
Figure 2. Third grade number of words in retell response.
Smits, A., 59
Figure 3. Third grade retell response quality.
The class progress monitoring data was used as baseline. The median baseline scores for
WCPM from September to February were 84, 96, 97, and 91. The median score goal of 100
WCPM was exceeded during the March progress monitoring for almost every student in the class
which is demonstrated by both quartiles being above the goal line. During the April progress
monitoring, the median score slightly increased and remained above the goal at 132 WCPM.
Furthermore, both quartiles remained above the goal of 100 WCPM. The effect size for WCPM
was R²=0.47.
The target variable of fluency exceeded the goal with the implementation of the “Six
Minute Solution” intervention, but another intervention phase was implemented after the March
progress monitoring because the comprehension target variables (retell response and retell
quality) did not increase as a result of the “Six Minute Solution” intervention. The “Reading
Street RtI toolkit for Comprehension” was added as another component.
Smits, A., 60
The data in figure 2 represents the number of words provided in the retell response and
the data in figure 3 represents the quality rating of the retell response. The baseline class
medians for number of words in the retell response were 28, 37, 33 and 33. The baseline class
medians for quality of retell response were 2 for every point. After progress monitoring in
March, the results indicated that the number of words and quality of the retell response had not
increased. In March, the class median for number of words was 32. The median for the quality
of the response remained at 2. The intervention was modified and the use of graphic organizers
and repeated practice of reading passages and proving a retell was added. The median number
of words increased to 53 and the quality of the response increased to 3. The effect size for retell
response was 0.14 and the effect size for quality of response was 0.45. The results of the April
progress monitoring indicate that this addition to the intervention was successful in increasing
the number of words and quality of the retell response.
Discussion
The implementation of the repeated reading and self-monitoring interventions were
effective in increasing the class-median of words correct per minute which indicates an
improvement in their reading fluency skills. The addition of the repeated practice and graphic
organizers increased the students’ comprehension skills which is evident from the increase of the
number of words in the retell response and in the quality rating of the response. Furthermore,
teacher report indicated that the generalization of the skills was transferring to other subjects and
classroom based assessments.
In addition to teacher report, the high results of the social validity surveys indicated that
the support provided to the classroom was very beneficial. The teacher and the other third grade
Smits, A., 61
teachers reported they would use the strategies in the future. The principal also commented that
the data from this Tier 1 intervention would be used at staff developments to demonstrate the
effectiveness of matching the intervention to the specific skill deficit.
The intervention will continue to be implemented for the duration of the school year and
the fluency and comprehension variables will be assessed during the end of year benchmark
assessment.
This case provided me with a lot of knowledge and helped in refining my model of
practice. This case provided very useful information in how the Response to Intervention model
benefits all students and not solely the lowest performing students. The students in Mrs. Clark’s
third grade class were not the lowest performing third graders. Many of their progress
monitoring scores were not significantly below the benchmark level; however, the data
demonstrated that a majority of the students were not increasing in their skills to reach the
benchmark levels for a third grader. In the RtI model, when 80% of the students are not making
sufficient progress, then it is important to address the Tier 1 level of support. The interventions
were implemented as prevention which is a core component of the RtI model.
The experiences from working with the third grade classroom and the problem-solving
team provided me a stronger knowledge of successfully implementing Tier 1 interventions. I
became more proficient with analyzing a larger set of data, selecting target variables for a group,
and matching the intervention to target the skills. I also further refined my collaboration and
leadership skills by leading meetings, presenting data, making decisions, and discussing with the
teachers and members of the problem solving team. I utilized the important component of my
model of practice of being a child-advocate, by closely monitoring each student’s progress and
Smits, A., 62
expressing concerns for the students who continued to struggle despite the interventions. This
information was utilized to implement Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions for those students.
This Tier 1 academic case allowed me to utilize many of the theories and skills I learned
from my training and apply them to a classroom setting. My decisions were based on my model
of practice and the experiences from this case helped in making me a more proficient
practitioner.
Smits, A., 63
References
Adams, G., Brown, S., & Van Zant, S., (1999). Summer reading intervention program prepares
fifth grade students for middle school reading challenges. Educational Research Service
Successful School Practices, 22(1), 6-8. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service
Daly, E. J. III, Chafouleas, S, & Skinner, C. H. (2005). Interventions for reading problems:
Designing and evaluating effective strategies. New York: Guilford.
Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J. A.,Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., et al.
(2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multi-
tier intervention for reading in the primary grades (NCEE 2009–4045). Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education.
Grossen, B. (1991). Strategies for maximizing reading success in the regular classroom.
Interventions for achievement and behavior problems. Silver Spring, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Joseph, L. (2008). Best practices on interventions for students with reading problems. Best
Practices in School Psychology: V. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Skinner, C.H., Belfiore, P.J., & Watson, T.S. (2002). Assessing the relative effects of
interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of
Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 346-357.
Ysseldyke, J., Burns, M., Dawson, P., Kelly, B., Morrison, D., Ortiz, S., Rosenfield, S., Telzrow,
C., (2008). The blueprint for training and practices as the basis for best practices. In A.
Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology V, pp. 37-68. Bethesda,
MD: Author.
Smits, A., 64
A Tier 2 Flashcard Intervention to Increase the Early Literacy Skills of First Grade
Students
Early literacy skills are discrete and basic skills that are the foundation to becoming a
fluent reader. These skills are developed in the primary years. A student typically “learns to
read” by developing their early literacy skills during kindergarten, first and second grade. By
third grade, students begin “reading to learn.” At the beginning of the school year, the first grade
team, principal, intervention psychologist, and school psychologist intern met to review the
universal screening data for reading and develop the school-wide automatic skills groups for first
grade. At the meeting, the students falling within the lowest 20% were identified. Additionally,
a group of 5 students was identified for needing additional support to increase their skills. These
students were placed in a skills group to target letter names, sounding, and blending. The
principal requested the support of the school psychologist and school psychologist intern to
develop a low-intensity, at-home Tier 2 intervention to improve the early literacy skills of these
students.
Research indicates that both home literacy activities and direct instruction of reading
skills promote reading development (Haney and Hill, 2003). Parent-teaching of literacy skills is
an important contributor to the development of emergent literacy skills in young children. While
storybook reading has been found to be an important predictor of later reading skills more direct
parent literacy teaching experiences appear to play an important role in literacy development as
well (Haney and Hill, 2003).
Two skills that are strong predictors of reading achievement are phonological awareness
and letter knowledge. These skills make up alphabetic principle which is crucial to understand to
Smits, A., 65
becoming a fluent reader. Phonological awareness is developed through a hierarchy of skills.
These skills are: rhyme, alliteration, blending, segmentation, and manipulation. Beginning
phonological awareness includes identifying similar word beginnings and endings. Later
phonological awareness focuses on understanding and manipulating sounds.
The development of basic decoding skills is essential for successful reading (Snow et al.
1998). Students sometimes demonstrate difficulty with alphabetic principle because in the
English language it requires the understanding that letters can have different sounds in the
context of other letters (Daly, Chafouleas, Skinner, 2005). Research has confirmed the
effectiveness of decoding in typically developing first grade students (Bowey et al.,1998).
According to the National Reading Panel (2000), this process of acquiring phonics skills is
reflected in an approach that emphasizes having children focus on parts of words that they know
in order to decode similar but unknown words.
Research by Daly et al. (2004) demonstrated a positive effect of teaching students
phoneme segmenting and blending on increasing the number of generalization words read
accurately. Specifically, these researchers found that participants who were taught to identify
phonemes within nonsense words were able to accurately read these same phonemes within real
words. Teaching at the phonemic level resulted in substantially higher accuracy rates compared
to an intervention that focused upon sight word acquisition (Daly et al., 2004). Reading similar
words within word families facilitates the generalization process because it highlights critical
stimulus features such as phonological similarities (Fein et al., 2010).
Methods
Participants
Smits, A., 66
Problem Solving Team. The problem solving team consisted of the first grade teachers,
the building principal, a Title 1 reading teacher, the intervention psychologist, and the school
psychologist intern. The student’s parents were also involved in the problem-solving team
meetings for their children. The school psychologist intern was responsible for collaborating
with the team, developing the intervention, creating the materials and scripts, frequently
communicating with parents, and analyzing data. The intervention psychologist collaborated
with and provided supervision to the school psychologist intern and helped in developing the
intervention. The building principal helped analyze data, collaborated with the team, attended
and led the team meetings. The title 1 teacher was responsible for implementing the intervention
and adhering to the core components of the intervention. The teachers were responsible for
progress monitoring the students, collaborating with the team, and attending team meetings.
Target Students. The students identified to receive the at-home Tier 2 intervention were
the students in the lowest 20% on the school’s fall Dibels Next universal screening assessment.
Additionally, the students were identified by the teachers and building principal to receive
additional Tier 2 support beyond the automatic skills group to increase their nonsense word
fluency. The student’s performance on the benchmark assessment indicated that they met the
benchmark level for phoneme segmentation fluency which is a measure of phonemic awareness.
The students were able to sound out some nonsense words but were unable to read the nonsense
words as whole words. Nonsense word fluency is a measure of alphabetic principle. This
provided evidence that the identified students had obtained the skill for phonemic awareness but
needed to develop their accuracy and fluency and ability to generalize phoneme segmenting to
reading whole words. Parent permission was obtained for the students to receive additional
support through phone conversations and by having the parent sign Tier 2 forms explaining the
Smits, A., 67
intervention (Appendix A). There were 5 total students who participated in the word family
flashcard intervention; however, this report only summarizes the effect of the intervention on 4
of the students because parent permission was not obtained to include the student’s information.
This report includes the data for 3 boys and 1 girl that were in 2 different first grade classrooms
but were all in the same first grade reading skills group.
Setting
The intervention was implemented with students who attended an Elementary school in
the Greater Cincinnati area. The intervention was implemented at-home and was considered part
of the student’s homework. Each student’s parents were responsible for implementing the for 10-
15 minutes, 4 times per week. The intervention also occurred one time per week during the
reading skills group for 30 minutes. The skills group was led by a Title 1 Reading teacher,
included all 5 students occurred in a classroom.
Target variables
The Dibels Next measures are designed to assess the 5 big ideas of reading (phonemic
awareness, alphabetic principle, accuracy and fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). When a
student meets the benchmark level for a measure it indicates they have obtained the skill
assessed with the measure. The identified students had all met the benchmark level for phoneme
segmentation fluency but had not achieved the benchmark for nonsense word fluency. The
problem-solving team identified nonsense word fluency as the target variable to progress
monitor. Nonsense word fluency is a measure of alphabetic principle. It is necessary for a
student to master this skill in order to increase their future success with becoming fluent readers.
Smits, A., 68
Goal setting
After identifying the target variables, the team collaborated and developed an
intervention plan. The benchmark assessment data was used as baseline and a goal was set. The
goal was for all of the students to reach the winter benchmark level for nonsense word fluency
correct letter sounds (NWF-CLS) and whole words read (NWF-WWR) by the benchmark
assessment in January. The benchmark for CLS was 43 and the benchmark for WWR was 8.
The students were progress monitored weekly. The team planned to review and discuss the
student’s progress monthly during first grade team meetings.
Decision rules
The student’s baseline level and goal for the target variable of correct letter sounds and
whole words read were used to develop aim lines. An aim-line indicates the progress the student
should make in order to achieve the set goal. If the student’s progress monitoring scores
remained above the aim-line then the team could assume the intervention was effective in
increasing their progress at an expected rate to achieve the set goal. The team decided that if 3
consecutive scores fell below the aim-line then the intervention was not effective and that it
would need to be modified or intensified.
Hypothesis
The baseline data provided information that all of the students were able to sound out
nonsense words. All of the students obtained 10 or more correct letter sequences (CLS) for
NWF. The benchmark for CLS was 27. This indicated that the students in the group had
acquired the skill but needed additional practice to increase their performance and fluency with
sounding out words. All of the students in the group were able to sound out nonsense words, but
Smits, A., 69
they all obtained a score of 0 for being able to read the words as whole words. A score of 0 on
whole words read during the fall benchmark assessment indicated a need for Tier 2 support.
Through team discussion it was hypothesized that these students were performing low on their
nonsense word fluency because of a performance deficit with sounding out words. Additionally,
the team felt the students were unable to read the words as whole words because they had not
acquired the skill. An intervention was developed to provide them repeated practice with
sounding out words and teaching them to recognize phonemic patterns in words and be able to
read the words as whole words.
Accountability plan
A multiple-baseline A-B design was used for this intervention. An A-B design includes a
baseline phase and an intervention phase. This design allows for intervention effectiveness by
comparing the intervention levels to baseline levels.
Progress monitoring
Nonsense word fluency was progress monitored every week using the Dibels Next
progress monitoring materials. The fall and winter benchmark universal screening data for
nonsense word fluency was also reported. The classroom teachers were responsible for
collecting the progress monitoring data weekly. The nonsense word fluency measure yields two
scores: correct-letter sounds (CLS) and whole-words-read (WWR). A student only receives a
point for a whole-word-read, if they read it without sounding out any part of it. If they read it as
a whole word they also get 3 points for correct-letter-sounds. If the student sounds out any part
of the word, they are given 1 point for each correct sound.
Inter-scorer agreement
Smits, A., 70
Throughout the intervention the school psychologist intern also progress monitored the
students with the teachers for inter-scorer agreement to demonstrate reliability of the data. Inter-
scorer agreement was not collected during the baseline phase because the data was already
collected when the team reviewed it and the universal screening assessments utilize many adults
within the building to collect data. All of the individuals who collected the universal screening
data participated in training for Dibels Next and their reliability was checked with the school
psychologist and the school psychologist intern prior to the school-wide assessment. The
baseline scores were considered reliable. Throughout the intervention, inter-scorer agreement
was completed on 3 different occasions for all 4 students. The school psychologist intern
observed the intervention being implemented and also scored the measures along with the title 1
teacher during the weekly progress monitoring. The results of inter-scorer agreement are
summarized in Chart 1.
Chart 1. Inter-scorer agreement.
Date
Dibels
Measure
Agreement
Student 1
Agreement
Student 2
Agreement
Student 3
Agreement
Student 4
October 29 NWF-CLS 97% 93% 100% 82%
NWF-WWR 100% 100% 100% 78%
January 7 NWF-CLS 94% 98% 88% 100%
NWF-WWR 94% 100% 100% 89%
March 11 NWF-CLS 100% 100% 100% 95%
NWF-WWR 95% 100% 100% 100%
Baseline
All of the students attended the school for kindergarten, so the end of year benchmark
assessment data and the data from the fall universal screening for the students was used as the
Smits, A., 71
baseline data. The baseline data shows that all of the students achieved a score of 0 on whole
words read. They all demonstrated some ability to sound out nonsense words; however, 3 out of
the 4 students were also below benchmark for correct letter sounds during the fall assessment.
The baseline scores for each of the students are included in Table 1.
Table 1. Baseline data for nonsense word fluency.
Kindergarten-end of
year benchmark (May)
First grade beginning of
year benchmark (Sept)
NWF-CLS NWF-
WWR
NWF-
CLS NWF-WWR
Dan 30 0 26 0
Andrew 21 0 35 0
Hannah 13 0 11 0
Paul 17 0 15 0
Intervention procedures
Word-Family Flashcards Intervention. The intervention psychologist and school
psychologist intern worked collaboratively together to develop a flashcard intervention to
increase the student’s fluency with sounding out words, recognizing phonemic patterns in words,
and improving their ability read words as whole words. The flashcards were developed to align
with the 1st grade reading curriculum, Reading Street. A set of flashcards was created to go with
each Reading Street Unit and the flashcards included the word-families being introduced in the
unit. The flashcard intervention was implemented at home 4 times per week and also in the
reading skills group once per week. Every Monday the Title 1 teacher utilized the word family
flashcards during the skills group to continue practicing phonemic patterns that were not
mastered and to model and introduce the new phonemic patterns.
A folder was developed for each student for the at-home component of the intervention.
The folder included the word family script (Appendix A), a log for the parents to record when
Smits, A., 72
their student mastered the set of flashcards (Appendix B), and a sheet for home-school
communication (Appendix C). Each week the school psychologist intern was responsible for
communicating with the parents, checking the intervention folder, and providing the Title 1
teacher and the students the new set of flashcards.
The flashcards were implemented 4 times per week for 10-15 minutes as part of the
student’s homework assignment. Each week a new set of flashcards was sent home. These were
practiced and when they were mastered they were filtered into the previously learned cards. The
parents were encouraged to practice previous flashcards for retention and generalization of the
word-family. The weekly phone call or home-school communication log allowed the school
psychologist intern to know if the student had fallen behind. The weekly intervention session
during skills group also provided information to the Title 1 teacher about the students who had
mastered a certain set and the ones that continued to demonstrate difficulty.
During the skills group session, the Title 1 teacher presented the flashcards and modeled
saying the word families for the week. The students were then asked to say the different words.
Previous weeks flashcards were also reviewed if there was additional time in any of the skills
groups sessions; however, this was for additional practice and was not an essential component to
the intervention.
Fading Intervention. In February, the team met to review the benchmark assessment
data and to determine if the student’s had met the winter benchmark goal for nonsense word
fluency correct letter sounds and whole words read. The data revealed that 3 out of the 4
students had met the goal. The team decided to fade the intervention with these students. The
at-home intervention component was discontinued for 3 out of the 4 students. The parents were
Smits, A., 73
given all of the sets of flashcards to use as additional practice; however, the weekly
communication and having the intervention be a required part of the homework was
discontinued. The Title 1 teacher continued to utilize the flashcards once per week during skills
group. Hannah did not achieve the winter benchmark goal and her progress indicated that the
intervention was not working. There was concern that the intervention was not being adhered to
at home so the team decided to discontinue that at-home component with her as well and
implement additional practice at school with an intervention specialist. The intervention
specialist worked with Hannah 2-3 times per week and followed the same script as the at-home
intervention.
Intervention adherence
At-home component. The school psychologist intern made frequent phone calls to the
parents to determine if the intervention was being implemented as intended. Additionally, the
parents were encouraged to fill out an adherence sheet included in the folder to document when
the intervention was done. Communication with 3 out of the 4 parents occurred consistently;
however, there was some inconsistency with communication with Hannah’s parents. Despite
many efforts it was difficult to determine if the intervention was being implemented at-home
with Hannah. The progress of the other 3 students indicated that the intervention was being
implemented and was effective in increasing their skills. Table 1 includes the intervention
adherence from the weekly phone calls and intervention folder for Dan, Andrew, Paul.
Adherence to the script and specific components of the intervention could not be monitored
through observation; however, the main components were frequently reviewed and discussed
with the parents.
Smits, A., 74
Percent of days
the intervention
was implemented
(data from daily
log in folder)
Percent of Weeks
Parent
Communication
Occurred (by
phone or through
folder)
Dan 89% 81%
Andrew 95% 88%
Paul 98% 88%
School component. Adherence to the school component of the intervention was
determined through observations. The school psychologist intern observed during the skills
group. The intervention script was modified into a checklist (Appendix A) to determine if the
intervention was being implemented as intended. The observations provided evidence that all of
the main components of the intervention were being implemented as intended. Adherence to the
main components was greater than 95% on all observations. The results are summarized in
Table 1.
Results
Student Variables
Dan. The baseline data collected at the beginning of the year revealed that Dan was not at
the benchmark level for NWF correct letter sounds or whole words read. The data in figures 1
and 2 show Dan’s progress with nonsense word fluency after the implementation of the
intervention. Dan’s scores for both measures increased after the implementation of the
intervention. Dan met the fall benchmark for correct letter sounds after 2 weeks of the
intervention was implemented, and he met the benchmark for whole words read the first week.
Dan’s progress monitoring scores remained above the aim-line. Dan achieved the winter
benchmark goal for correct letter sounds during the second week of December. He achieved the
goal for whole words read during the fourth week of October. Dan’s progress remained above
Smits, A., 75
the winter benchmark level and he achieved the benchmark goal for the winter universal
assessment.
Figure 1. Dan’s progress monitoring data for nonsense word fluency.
Smits, A., 76
Figure 2. Dan’s progress monitoring data for oral reading fluency.
The intervention was faded at the beginning of February because Dan achieved the winter
benchmark for nonsense word fluency. The data in Figures 3 and 4 shows Dan’s Oral Reading
Fluency progress. The intervention was developed to target nonsense word fluency with the goal
that by mastering that skill the oral reading fluency would also increase. Dan was below the
winter benchmark goal of 23 WCPM during the benchmark assessment; however, his next
progress monitoring score at the beginning of February, was above the winter benchmark level.
The end of year benchmark for oral reading fluency is 47 WCPM. Dan achieved this score on
the progress monitoring administered the 4th week of March.
Dan’s progress indicates that the intervention was effective in increasing his nonsense
word fluency. As a result of mastering nonsense word fluency, Dan’s oral reading fluency was
Smits, A., 77
also at benchmark for the end of the year. Dan’s mean baseline score for NWF-CLS was 28.
This increased to a score of 52 (median of 3 points prior to fading) by February when the
intervention was faded. After the intervention was faded, Dan’s skill continued to increase to a
median score of 94 (median of last 3 scores). The effect size for CLS was 0.66 and the percent
of non-overlapping data (PND) was 100%. The effect size for WWR was 0.81 and the PND was
100%.
Andrew. The baseline data collected at the beginning of the year revealed that Andrew
was at the benchmark level for NWF correct letter sounds but not for whole words read. The
data in figures 5 and 6 show Andrew’s progress with nonsense word fluency after the
implementation of the intervention.
Figure 3. Andrew’s progress monitoring data for nonsense word fluency.
Smits, A., 78
Andrew’s progress monitoring scores for correct letter sounds were initially below the
aim-line; however, his whole words read remained above the aim-line. Although the team had
set the decision rules the intervention was not changed because Andrew was at benchmark for
correct letter sounds in the fall. Andrew also received speech intervention from the speech and
language pathologist. The team hypothesized that as he learned to blend the words together and
read them as whole words his correct letter sounds might decrease. The intervention was not
changed and when the data was reviewed again in December, his scores had increased above the
aim-line and he had achieved the winter benchmark goal for both CLS and WWR.
Figure 4. Andrew’s progress monitoring data for oral reading fluency.
Smits, A., 79
The intervention was faded at the beginning of February because Andrew achieved the
winter benchmark for both nonsense word fluency scores. The data in Figures 7 and 8 shows
Andrew’s Oral Reading Fluency progress. The intervention was developed to target nonsense
word fluency with the goal that by mastering that skill the oral reading fluency would also
increase. Dan was below the winter benchmark goal of 23 WCPM during the benchmark
assessment; however, many first graders district wide did not meet this winter benchmark. The
end of year benchmark for oral reading fluency is 47 WCPM. Andrew achieved this score on the
progress monitoring administered the 3rd week of April.
Andrew’s progress indicates that the intervention was effective in increasing his nonsense
word fluency and positively impacted his oral reading fluency skills. Andrew’s mean baseline
score for NWF-CLS was 28. This increased to a median score of 61 (median of 3 points prior to
fading) by February when the intervention was faded. After the intervention was faded,
Andrew’s skill continued to increase to a median score of 81 (median of last 3 scores). The
effect size for CLS was 0.64 and for WWR was 0.81. The PND for CLS was 74% and the PND
for WWR was 100%. Andrew’s improvement with his nonsense word fluency improved his
alphabetic principle skills which impacted his oral reading fluency. Andrew achieved the first-
grade end of year benchmark for oral-reading fluency.
Hannah. The baseline data revealed that Hannah was not at benchmark for CLS or
WWR. Her median baseline score was 12 CLS and 0 WWR. After the implementation of the
intervention her NWF-CLS immediately increased but her ability to read the words as whole
words did not increase.
Figure 5. Hannah’s progress monitoring data for nonsense word fluency.
Smits, A., 80
The team reviewed the data which revealed that more than 3 scores for whole words read
fell below the aim-line. Hannah’s CLS had increased to an average of 23.25. Her WWR
average score was a 0.3. The effect size for CLS was 0.73 and the PND was 100%. The effect
size for WWR was 0.3 and the PND was 25%. There was concern that the intervention was not
being implemented at home as it was intended. The school psychologist intern had difficulty
communicating with Hannah’s parents and the sheets in the folder were not completed to provide
information about adherence to the intervention. The team decided to modify the intervention by
having the Title 1 teacher work an additional 10-15 minutes with Hannah 2-3 times per week.
The at-school implementation of the intervention followed the same script as the at-home
intervention. After the intervention was modified for Hannah, the graphs demonstrate that her
scores increased above the aim-line for WWR.
Smits, A., 81
Hannah’s progress indicates that the intervention was effective in increasing her
nonsense word fluency. Hannah achieved the end of year benchmark of 58 CLS during the third
week of March. She achieved the end of year benchmark for WWR during the 4th week of
March. The implementation of the intervention at school was successful in increasing Hannah’s
NWF. The effect size was 0.73 for CLS and 0.81 for WWR. The PND for CLS was 67% and
for WWR was 89%.
Figure 6. Hannah’s progress monitoring data for oral reading fluency.
b
Smits, A., 82
Hannah’s oral reading fluency was also impacted by improving her nonsense word
fluency skills. Hannah reached the end of year goal of 47 WCPM during the third week of
March. After the intervention was modified to occur at school for Hannah, her nonsense word
fluency skills increased to where she was able to achieve the end of year benchmark.
Paul. During baseline, Paul’s nonsense word fluency scores were 15 correct letter sounds and 0
whole words read. After the implementation of the intervention, Paul’s skills rapidly increased.
Smits, A., 83
From December to January, Paul showed tremendous growth. His parents continued the
intervention throughout the two-week winter break. During the winter benchmark assessment,
Paul’s scores exceeded the end of year benchmark. Paul’s oral reading fluency was also at the
benchmark level. The flashcard intervention was withdrawn and Paul’s skills group was also
changed in January. The remaining sets of flashcards were sent home with Paul for his parents
to continue using with him; however, the school psychologist intern discontinued adherence
checks and reviewing his progress as frequently. The effect size was 0.82 for CLS and 0.91 for
WWR. The PND was 100% for both CLS and WWR.
Social Validity
A formal social validity survey was not completed; however, informal comments and
observations indicated that the social validity of the intervention was high. The social validity of
this intervention was determined to be high based on the positive comments during the
intervention. The teachers and principal provided positive feedback throughout the intervention
about how effective the intervention was on increasing the student’s skill. The principal
commented “their progress is amazing” and “I’ve never seen an at-home intervention be so
effective.” Additionally, the intervention was implemented with other students in first grade and
Smits, A., 84
in other grade levels. This indicated that the teachers viewed the intervention as very beneficial.
The social validity of the intervention was also demonstrated when the parents requested the
flashcards to continue to be sent home even though their children had reached the goal. The
parents said that the intervention was easy and fun to implement and that their students enjoyed
getting the new cards every week. The student’s enjoyed the intervention which was
demonstrated by their enthusiasm to get the new set of cards each week. The students often
made comments to the school psychologist intern about the flashcard intervention. Their
comments included things like: “When do I get my new set of cards?”, “I learned these new
word families quickly”, “I love getting my new cards”, “Do you want to see my folder and all the
word families I know?” The enthusiasm expressed by the students about the intervention further
supported high social validity.
Discussion
The results of the word family flashcard intervention yielded high effect sizes for all of
the students indicating that the intervention had an effect on their early literacy skills.
Additionally, all of the students were successful in achieving the set goal of reaching the winter
benchmark for nonsense word fluency. The students continued to increase their ability to read
the words as whole words which positively influenced their oral reading fluency. All 4 of the
students achieved the oral reading fluency benchmark for the end of the year. The high social
validity indicates that the teachers viewed the intervention as very beneficial and that the
student’s enjoyed the intervention.
A limit to this intervention was that adherence checks could not be completed at home.
The school psychologist intern and intervention psychologist tried to check adherence through
Smits, A., 85
the frequent phone calls to the parents and the home-school communication folder. This method
was successful for some of the students, but it was difficult to determine if the intervention was
being implemented when those methods did not work. Adherence to the core components of the
intervention could also not be monitored because the school staff was unable to actually observe
the intervention being implemented. The conversations with the parents suggested that they
were adhering to the core components; however, it is not certain. Implementation of the
intervention at-home appeared to be very effective for 3 out of the 4 students because their scores
increased immediately. When Hannah’s intervention was modified to be implemented at school,
she also demonstrated success. The intervention should have been modified earlier because of
the many progress monitoring scores that were below the aim-line for whole words read. In the
future, it will be important to adhere to the set decision rules.
Another limit to this intervention was the small amount of baseline data. The end of year
kindergarten and beginning of first grade progress monitoring points were used; however, it
would have been better to collect more baseline points using first grade probes. Using the
kindergarten end of year benchmark as a baseline point effects the reliability of the effect size
because the level difficulty of the measures might be different.
This Tier 2 Academic case was very beneficial in improving my skills to be a more
effective practitioner. This case provided me the opportunity to further develop my skills to be a
better scientist-practitioner, problem-solver, and child/family advocate. The intervention was
research-based and aligned with the core curriculum which was also research based. Data was
used to determine the students who needed targeted support to increase their early literacy skills.
Additionally, progress monitoring data was collected and frequently uploaded into a database so
it could be reviewed. This case allowed me to have the opportunity to work with the teachers
Smits, A., 86
and train them on using the Dibels database to upload their own data and review the students
progress. Providing the teachers with this knowledge made for very meaningful and
collaborative discussions during the monthly team meetings. This training was also beneficial
because they used the database to monitor the progress of all of their students. My problem-
solving skills were further refined by using the data and information provided from the teachers
to work with the intervention specialist to develop an intervention that would target the specific
skill. This intervention also increased my competency with implementing at-home interventions
and collaborating and frequently communicating with parents. The at-home intervention allowed
me to learn the limits of at-home interventions and try to develop ways to minimize them as
much as possible.
This Tier 2 case allowed me to apply the skills I learned through my graduate training
and utilize them to implement a low-intensity academic intervention to increase nonsense word
fluency of first grade students. This intervention further demonstrated the importance of the
early literacy skills in becoming fluent readers. All of the students included in this case, were in
the lowest 20% of all first grade students in the school after the fall benchmark assessment.
These students were able to increase their nonsense word fluency correct letter sounds and whole
words read to achieve the benchmark goal. Additionally, they all demonstrated success with
transferring the skill to be able to read first grade passages. All of the students achieved the end
of year benchmark for oral reading fluency. This intervention increased their skills to the
expected level where they can be dismissed from Tier 2 support for reading. This case
demonstrated the positive effects of following a Response to Intervention Model and using data
to determine students in need of additional support and reduce their chances of falling behind.
By being preventative and implementing interventions based on universal screening data, the
Smits, A., 87
students included in this case were able to remediate their skills to the expected end of year
benchmark level. I will utilize the many things I learned from this case and the core components
of the intervention for future implementations to improve the early literacy skills of students.
Smits, A., 88
References
Daly, E., & Martens, B. K. (1994). A comparison of three interventions for increasing oral
reading performance application of the instructional hierarchy. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 27, 459–469.
Fien, H., Kame’enui, E. J., & Good, R. H. (2009). School engaged in school-wide reading
reform: An examination of the school and individual student predictors of early reading
outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20, 1–25.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH
Pub. No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development
Snow, C., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing Reading difficulties in young children.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Smits, A., 89
Appendix A. Word family flashcard script.
Word Family Flash Card Intervention
• Run through one word family deck at a time without mixing families together
• Limit sessions to 10-15 minutes
o If you have not made it through all of the word families, it is okay to take a break or to
stop for the evening
o When you have another session, continue with the next word family
• Use a positive and upbeat tone. Provide praise for correct word reading
• Avoid scolding or showing disapproval for incorrect responses.
• Once you feel your child has mastered all of the word families for the week, you can mix them
together
Steps for Each Session
1. For new word family decks, demonstrate how to read the 1st
wod by separating the beginning
sound from the ending word-family (example: /cr/-/ab/, “/crab/”).
2. Explain that the next several cards will all end the same way
3. Show the next card. Wait 3 seconds. If no response, or any part of the answer is wrong, tell the
child the word and have them repeat it one time. Move on to the next card.
4. Vocabulary development:
o If your child asks about the meaning of a word, or if you suspect they don’t know the
meaning of a word, please explain it using kid-friendly terms
o Using the word in a sentence is also helpful
Smits, A., 90
Appendix B. At-home adherence sheet.
Student:
5.
Month Week M T W T F Comments
Sept.
1 1 1 2 3
Sept.
2 7 7 8 9 10
Sept.
3 13 14 15 16 17
Sept.
4 20 21 22 23 26
Sept.
5 27 28 29 30 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Oct.
1 1
Oct.
2 4 5 6 7 8
Oct.
3 11 12 13 14 15
Oct.
4 18 19 20 21 22
Oct.
5 25 26 27 28 29 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Nov.
1 1 2 3 4 5
Nov.
2 8 9 10 11 12
Nov.
3 15 16 17 18 19
Nov.
4 22 23 24 25 26
Nov.
5 29 30 1 2 3 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Dec.
1 6 7 8 9 10
Dec.
2 13 14 15 16 17
Dec.
3 20 21 22 23 24
Dec.
4 27 28 29 30 31
Intervention? Word Family Flash Card Homework
Intervention.
How will it be progress monitored? Dibels Next nonsense
word fluency each week by homeroom teacher.
KEY:
CA = child absent
CU = child unavailable
TA = Teacher absent
TU = Teacher unavailable
I = Intervention
Smits, A., 91
Appendix C. Communication log for intervention folder.
Home-School Communication Log
Parents,
Please use this folder as a way to communicate with us about the
word family flash-card intervention. We still plan to communicate with
you with through a weekly phone call, but you can also use the folder
to write any questions, concerns, or to make note of your child’s
progress. Also, if you plan to keep any cards from a set, please also
indicate that in this folder. Thanks!
Date Notes/Comments
Smits, A., 92
Tier 3 Support to Increase the Early Literacy Skills of a First-Grade Student
Research has demonstrated that early literacy skills are important in later academic
success (Adams, 1990). Key skills of language, phonological awareness, and print knowledge
have been identified as foundational skills necessary for learning how to read (Landry, 2005).
The English language is alphabetic, therefore, decoding is an essential and primary means of
recognizing words. There are simply too many words in the English language to rely on
memorization as a primary word identification strategy (Bay Area Reading Task Force, 1997).
The National Reading Panel completed research and determined the best approach to reading
instruction is one that incorporates explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, systematic
phonics (alphabetic principle) instruction, methods to improve fluency, and ways to enhance
comprehension (Armbruster, et. al, 2001). The five big areas of reading are defined as: phonemic
awareness, alphabetic principle, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Mastering each of the
big areas is essential in becoming a successful reader.
Research supports many intervention strategies to develop the core skills in reading. The
most effective interventions include early and systematic effort in improving the skills and
adherence to the general principles of good literacy instruction (Daly, Chafouleas, Skinner,
2005). Good literacy instruction includes developing alphabetic principle and phonological
awareness, provide a thorough grounding in the letters, activities should be stimulating,
sufficient practice in reading words, lead to reading whole words (Smith et al., 1998).
Alphabetic principle is made up of fluent letter naming and phonological awareness
(Daly, Chafouleas, Skinner, 2005). When selecting an intervention it is important to determine
the student’s skill level. A student who demonstrates low accuracy indicates they have not
acquired the skill and need to develop it though interventions involving modeling and prompting.
Smits, A., 93
If the student demonstrates low fluency an appropriate intervention would include drill and
practice.
Students need the basic understanding that words are made up of different sounds prior to
being able to decode unfamiliar words. Once the student has acquired phonological awareness
the child can begin increasing their fluency and automaticity with phonemic skills and reading
the words as whole words which are crucial skills to eventually being able to read text accurately
and fluently. Developing reading fluency is important because research demonstrates that fluent
readers are more likely to comprehend, are more likely to choose to read, and fluent reading
requires less effort (Daly, Chafouleas, Skinner, 2005).
Universal screening was completed at the beginning of the year for all students at an
elementary school. The universal screening data revealed students who did not meet benchmark.
A 1st grade student, Sara, was identified by the school psychologist intern as possibly needing
additional support for her early literacy skills because the benchmark assessments indicated she
was performing in the lowest 5% of all the first grade students. Her homeroom teacher
confirmed this need Tier 3 support. Sara was receiving Tier 2 intervention through a reading
skills group which met every day for 30 minutes. The school psychologist intern met with the
classroom teacher, intervention specialist, and Sara’s mother, to discuss the concerns and
develop an intervention to increase Sara’s early literacy skills. The first phase of the intervention
targeted phoneme segmentation fluency. The school psychologist intern met frequently with the
team to review data. As Sara continued to meet the set goals, additional goals were set. The
intervention activities were also modified throughout this case as the goals and progress
monitoring measures changed. The team collaboratively worked together to design, implement,
monitor, and modify an intervention to increase the early literacy skills of the first grade student.
Smits, A., 94
Method
Participants
Target Student. Sara was a 1st grade Caucasian female student. Sara was performing in
the lowest 5% of all the first grade students in her early literacy skills. School staff collaborated
and determined she would benefit from individualized and intensive Tier 3 intervention support.
Sara’s strengths included that she was very social and always gave her best effort in class. In
kindergarten, Sara had 37 absences. The team felt that Sara missed significant instructional time,
which could have resulted in her performing significantly below many of her peers. Sara was
also diagnosed with ADHD at the beginning of her first grade year and began taking Concerta.
Sara participated in a Tier 2 skills group for reading. The skills group focused on early literacy
skills including sounding out and blending words, sight word practice, and consonant-vowel-
consonant patterns.
Problem Solving Team. The problem solving team consisted of Mrs. Rose, the first
grade teacher, the intervention specialist, a Title 1 reading teacher, Sara’s mother, and the school
psychologist intern. The intern was responsible for leading team meetings, helping in designing
and developing the intervention, reviewing the data, conducting adherence checks, and
frequently communicating with the members of the team. The teachers were responsible for
implementing and adhering to the main components of the intervention, progress monitoring the
student weekly, entering the progress monitoring data into the database, providing information
about Sara’s generalization of the skills, and attending and collaborating at Tier 3 meetings.
Mrs. Brown was responsible for providing information about Sara outside of school and
attending and collaborating at team meetings.
Smits, A., 95
Setting
The intervention occurred at a public elementary school in the Greater Cincinnati Area.
Within the school, the intervention was implemented in a small room off of the first grade
classroom. The small room had a table and the intervention materials in it.
Target Variables
Through a teacher referral and consultation, review of classroom performance and
benchmark assessment data, review of research, and collaboration among the team, the target
variables were selected. Sara’s benchmark assessment data revealed that she was not at the
benchmark level for the early literacy skills of phoneme segmentation fluency (PSF) and
nonsense word fluency (NWF). Sara’s records further indicated that she did not meet the
benchmark in kindergarten for these measures. The team decided to implement an intervention
to target phoneme segmentation fluency. The skills of PSF and NWF were progress monitored.
When Sara reached the benchmark level for PSF, the intervention was modified to more
specifically target NWF and being able to read the words as whole words. When Sara mastered
this goal, the goal and intervention were modified again to increase Sara’s oral reading fluency
(ORF).
Goal Setting
The teacher’s desired goal was to have Sara be able to meet the end of year benchmark
for oral reading fluency. The end of year benchmark was 47 words correct per minute (WCPM).
At the beginning of the year, Sara was unable to read any words correct per minute.
Additionally, she was not at the benchmark level for the early literacy skills of phoneme
Smits, A., 96
segmentation fluency and nonsense word fluency. Research demonstrates that a student must
master these phonemic awareness skills in order to become fluent readers.
Throughout the intervention as goals were met, additional goals were set. The team
decided to target the phonemic awareness skills as the first part of the intervention. The first
goal set was for Sara to be able to obtain the first grade benchmark score for PSF, which was 40.
When this goal was met the team changed the goal to master NWF and reach the benchmark
level of 58 correct letter sounds and 13 whole words read. When Sara met this goal, the goal
was modified to target her oral reading fluency. Sara demonstrated success with mastering the
goals set, so the team decided to set the final goal for end of year benchmark on oral reading
fluency which was 47 WCPM.
Decision Rules
Sara’s baseline level for each of the literacy skills were used to develop aim lines. The
median baseline score and the goal were used to create an aim-line to monitor the effectiveness
of the intervention. If Sara’s weekly progress monitoring scores remained above the aim-line, it
indicated the intervention was being effective on increasing her progress at an expected rate to
achieve the set goal. The team decided that if 3 consecutive scores fell below the aim-line then
the intervention would be modified or intensified.
Progress Monitoring
The problem solving team decided to use the Dibels Next progress monitoring materials
to monitor Sara’s literacy skills. Examples of the probes are provided in Appendix A. The
school had access to all of the materials and all of the teachers were trained in administering
these materials. Dibels Next was also the school-wide universal screening assessment that was
Smits, A., 97
administered to all students, so using the progress monitoring materials would be the best
predictor of Sara’s progress towards meeting the end of year goal. The teachers and school
psychologist intern were also trained in using the Dibels database system. Sara’s progress
monitoring scores could be entered into the database so her progress could easily be monitored.
Phoneme segmentation fluency. The student is given a word and asked to provide the
phonemes (i.e “cat” would be “k-a-t”). The student’s score is the number of phoneme segments
provided in one minute.
Nonsense word fluency. The student is given a sheet with 3 letter consonant-vowel-
consonant make-believe words. The student is asked to read as many of the make believe words
as they can in one minute. If they are unable to read the word as a whole word then they sound
at as many sounds as they can. The student is given two scores: the number of correct letter
sounds (CLS) and the number of whole words read (WWR) in one minute.
Oral Reading Fluency. The student is given a passage and asked to read it out-loud. An
error is marked if a word is mispronounced or if the student is unable to accurately produce the
correct word in 3 seconds. If the student self-corrects within three seconds then the word is not
counted as an error. The student’s score for oral reading fluency is the total of words correct
they read in one minute.
Inter-scorer agreement
Inter-scorer agreement was not collected specifically for this student during the baseline
phase; however, all of the teachers participated in a training for Dibels Next in September. In
addition, the teachers reliability on scoring was checked on three different occasions at the
beginning of the year. The teachers were considered reliable scorers on all of the first grade
Smits, A., 98
measures. Throughout the intervention, inter-scorer agreement was completed 3 different times.
The school psychologist intern observed the intervention being implemented and also scored the
measures along with the title 1 teacher during the weekly progress monitoring. In addition, the
school psychologist intern reviewed the nonsense word fluency measure and the scoring
guidelines with the Title 1 teacher prior to the implementation of the first phase of the
intervention. The results of inter-scorer agreement are summarized in Chart 1.
Chart 1. Inter-scorer agreement.
Date Dibels
Measure
Scorer
1
Scorer
2 Agreement
10/29/2010 PSF 31 29 94%
11/19/2010 PSF 32 32 100%
11/19/2010 NWF-CLS 35 35 100%
11/19/2010 NWF-WWR 0 0 100%
2/25/2010 NWF-CLS 63 61 97%
2/25/2010 NWF-WWR 12 12 100%
2/25/2010 ORF-WCPM 24 24 100%
2/25/2010 ORF-errors 6 6 100%
Hypothesis
Two primary reasons students struggle to obtain early literacy skills are because of a lack
of appropriate instruction or individual characteristics that may impact the child’s educational
performance. Sara missed 37 days in kindergarten. The team hypothesized that her difficulties
in early literacy skill was a result of missing some core instruction and opportunities to practice
the early literacy skills taught in kindergarten. The team decided to develop interventions to
target each of the early literacy skills by using research based interventions and providing her
with direct instruction and repeated practice.
Smits, A., 99
Intervention Procedures
The intervention package that was implemented throughout the school-year included
various research-based strategies to target the early literacy skills. The activities were modified
as Sara achieved the set goals, to align with the new target skill. The intervention was
implemented 5 days per week for 15 minutes by a Title 1 Reading Teacher. Sara’s mother, Ms.
Brown was also given flashcards and various activities to work on at home; however, this was
for additional practice. Practicing the activities at home was not considered an essential
component to the intervention so adherence to the at-home implementation was not monitored.
Phase 1. The first phase of the intervention to increase Sara’s early literacy skills was
developed to increase her phoneme segmentation fluency. The intervention package used to
increase this skill included repeated practice of phonemic sounds using flashcards and the “Say
It, Move It” intervention (Appendix B). For children who demonstrate difficulty in sounding out
the different sounds in words, the use of activities such as “Say It, Move it” scaffolds their
learning to increase their phonological awareness. The “Say It, Move It” intervention teachers
the student how to hear the phonemes in words by moving a manipulative into a box for each
sound they say. Overtime, students learn to associate the phonemes they can hear with the
number of boxes they can see and tokens they can manipulate in an ordered sequence.
At the beginning of each session, Sara reviewed the phonemic sounds through drill
practice using flashcards. Sara was given a worksheet (Appendix C) with different pictures and
boxes for the number of phonemes in the word. Sara was also given plastic markers that she slid
into a box for each phoneme in the word. The intervention was implemented on 10/22/2010.
Smits, A., 100
Phase 2. When Sara met the goal for PSF, the goal was modified to monitor nonsense
word fluency (NWF). The intervention was also modified to more specifically target this skill.
The intervention was changed and included repeated practice of sound segmenting and blending
using a variety of activities specifically aligned to this skill. The activities included a C-V-C
book, word-family flashcards, and activities from the Florida Center for Reading Research
(www.fcrr.com). The repeated practice with C-V-C blends utilized a C-V-C flip book that was
developed by the school psychologist intern. The flip book had 3 separate sections: all of the
consonants, all of the vowels, and all of the consonants. In addition to the C-V-C book, a word
family flashcard intervention (Appendix D) was implemented to help Sara master her phonemic
awareness through nonsense word fluency. The activities from the Florida Center for Reading
Research (Appendix E) were used to provide variety to the intervention sessions to keep Sara
engaged and to help her generalize the skills. These interventions were predicted to increase
Sara’s nonsense word fluency and ability to read them as whole words.
Phase 3. Sara achieved the nonsense word fluency goal for correct letter sequences and
whole words read. The goal was changed to target her oral reading fluency and the intervention
activities were also modified. Repeated readings with a phrase drill technique (Appendix F)
were implemented to increase Sara’s oral reading fluency. Essential components of repeated
readings include reading aloud, reading to an adult who corrects word errors, and reading until a
performance criterion is reached (Therrian, 2004). Repeated Readings, is an intervention with
well documented effectiveness with native English speakers (Daly, Chafouleas, & Skinner,
2005). Error correction procedures are important so that students practice correct reading rather
than errors. Nelson, Alber, and Gordy (2004) compared Repeated Reading with error correction
Smits, A., 101
to error correction alone, and found that while both interventions decreased errors, only repeated
readings with error correction increased fluency.
Intervention Adherence
The school psychologist intern included intervention scripts for each phase of the
intervention. The scripts were modified into checklists and were used to check adherence to the
intervention. Monitoring adherence is important to ensure the intervention is implemented as
intended. Adherence checks were completed by the school psychologist intern on 10/29/2010,
11/19/2010, and 2/25/2010. The adherence checks demonstrated that the interventions were
being implemented as intended. The results of the adherence checks are included in Table 1.
Adherence was also checked by having the Title 1 teacher fill out the daily adherence sheet
(Appendix F). The intervention was implemented 97% of the total days.
Table 1. Adherence to the essential components of the intervention.
Date
percent of
components
observed
10/29/2010 100%
11/19/2010 88%
2/25/2010 100%
Results
Social Validity
The social validity of this intervention was high based on teacher and parent feedback.
At the beginning of the intervention, the teacher indicated suspicion that she thought Sara might
have a learning disability. She asked about an evaluation for special education but after
reviewing Sara’s record the team knew a lack of instruction had to be ruled out. Sara’s progress
immediately increased and towards the end of the year the first grade teacher commented that
Smits, A., 102
she was so happy that the team had followed the RtI model and that interventions resulted in
some of the best growth of a student she had seen. Additionally, Ms. Brown provided positive
feedback by indicating how much the school had helped Sara. She said she was amazed at how
her skills had improved over the year. The Title 1 teacher also utilized the intervention activities
with other students to increase their literacy skills.
Literacy Skills
Figure 1. Sara’s early literacy skill progress during first grade.
The baseline data collected at the beginning of the school year, prior to the
implementation of the Tier 3 intervention revealed that Sara was performing in the lowest 5% of
all the first grade students and was below the benchmark level for all first grade early literacy
skills. The data in figure 1 shows all measures monitored throughout the year and the various
intervention phases. The data demonstrates that when the intervention was modified to target the
Smits, A., 103
specific skill, then Sara’s performance improved to achieve the set benchmark goal. Sara
mastered the phonemic awareness skills of phoneme segmenting fluency and nonsense word
fluency. Her mastery of these skills had a positive effect on her oral reading fluency, which is
evident from the slight increase in her words correct per minute prior to the repeated reading
phase of the intervention. This suggested that Sara had developed the academic skills for
phonemic awareness and needed repeated practice to increase her fluency. The team
implemented the repeated reading intervention and Sara’s fluency improved rapidly. She
achieved the end of year benchmark for oral reading fluency on 4/1/2011. The effect size was
determined using R². The effect size for each of the variables is included in Table 2.
Table 2. Effect size.
Dibels Measure
Effect Size
R²
PSF 0.68
NWF-CLS 0.81
NWF-WWR 0.8
ORF-WCPM 0.79
Discussion
Sara began first grade will early literacy skill deficits that resulted in her being in the
lowest 5% of all first graders in the building. A Tier 3 intervention was implemented and
continued through her first grade year. The additional instruction and practice provided through
the intervention activities, resulted in Sara achieving the end of year benchmark for all first grade
measures. The problem-solving team provided a lot of positive feedback for the intervention
support that allowed Sara to achieve the expected first grade level.
This case demonstrated the importance of implementing interventions to increase skills
and as a preventative approach to a student falling further behind. By implementing
Smits, A., 104
interventions based on universal screening data, Sara’s skills were able to be remediated and she
was able to reach the level of her peers by the end of her first grade year. Additionally, this case
demonstrated the importance of making data-based decisions. The progress monitoring data was
frequently reviewed and used to set new goals and modify the intervention activities to align
with Sara’s skill level.
A limit to this case was that the universal screening data was the only baseline score.
Other classroom assessments and records were utilized to confirm the need for Tier 3 support;
however, additional baseline points would have been beneficial. Sara began taking medication
for her ADHD at the beginning of September. The intervention was implemented in the middle
of October. Sara’s skills were significantly behind most of her peers so the team assumed that
even with medicine she would need Tier 3 support; however, additional baseline data should
have been collected to demonstrate the effect of the medicine on her performance. Having this
information would have provided stronger evidence for the level of effect of the intervention on
increasing her skills.
This case allowed me to demonstrate the core principles of my model of practice and
further refine them. The experiences I had prior to this case allowed me to acquire the skills of
implementing good interventions and utilizing a Response to Intervention model. This case
allowed me to further practice and build fluency with automatically demonstrating the core
principles in a school-setting. I was a child-advocate for Sara by gathering many sources of
information to develop an appropriate intervention. Additionally, I consulted with the teacher
and advocated the importance of implementing interventions prior to an evaluation to rule out
lack of instruction. My problem-solving skills were further refined because I collaborated with
the team frequently to modify the intervention activities to align with Sara’s skill level. I
Smits, A., 105
demonstrated being a scientist practitioner by utilizing data, research based methods, and setting
measurable and explicitly defined goals. I demonstrated a leadership and initiative role by
immediately reviewing the universal screening data at the beginning of the year to identify
students performing below benchmark. I utilized this data and demonstrate initiative by
attending the first grade team meeting and implementing interventions immediately. I also
communicated frequently with the first grade teachers and led problem-solving team meetings.
Being the case manager for Sara’s Tier 3 intervention improved my confidence and skills to be a
more effective practitioner.
Smits, A., 106
References
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
Armbruster, et al (2001). The research building blocks for teaching children to learn to read: Put
Reading First. National Institute for Literacy.
Bay Area Reading Task Force (1997). A reading-writing-language source book for the primary
grades. San Francisco, CA: University School Support for Educational Reform.
Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading.
Remedial and Special Education, 25, 252–261.
Nelson, J.S., Alber, S.R., & Grody, A. (2004). Effects of systematic error correction and
repeated readings on reading accuracy and proficiency of second graders with disabilities.
Education and Treatment of Children, 27, 186-198.
Smits, A., 107
Appendix A. Examples of Dibels Next progress monitoring materials.
Smits, A., 108
Appendix B. Say It, Move It intervention materials.
Reading Intervention: Say It, Move It Script
Materials Needed: Sheet with boxes, sliders, list of words to be practiced
Time: 10-15 minutes/ day
-Use the list with the C-V-C words or the current words that you are practicing
-place the sheet with the boxes in front of Sara, and give her sliders
-instruct Sara that you will be practicing the sounds in words
-Give her a word and tell her to tell you all of the sounds in the word and to move one of her
sliders into the box for each sound in the word
-Give her praise for correctly segmenting the word. If she does not produce all the correct
sounds, model for her how to do it and have her say it with you, and then try it again on her own
-If she correctly segments the word, repeat the procedure with the rest of the words
-If Sara is having difficulty with the task, review the sound flash cards with her
Smits, A., 109
Appendix C. Word family flash card script.
Word Family Flash Card Intervention
• Run through one word family deck at a time without mixing families together
• Limit sessions to 10-15 minutes
o If you have not made it through all of the word families, it is okay to take a break
or to stop for the evening
o When you have another session, continue with the next word family
• Use a positive and upbeat tone. Provide praise for correct word reading
• Avoid scolding or showing disapproval for incorrect responses.
• Once you feel your child has mastered all of the word families for the week, you can mix
them together
Steps for Each Session
6. For new word family decks, demonstrate how to read the 1st wod by separating the
beginning sound from the ending word-family (example: /cr/-/ab/, “/crab/”).
7. Explain that the next several cards will all end the same way
8. Show the next card. Wait 3 seconds. If no response, or any part of the answer is wrong,
tell the child the word and have them repeat it one time. Move on to the next card.
9. Vocabulary development:
o If your child asks about the meaning of a word, or if you suspect they don’t know
the meaning of a word, please explain it using kid-friendly terms
o Using the word in a sentence is also helpful
Smits, A., 110
Appendix D. Example of Florida Center for Reading Research activity.
www.fcrr.org
Smits, A., 111
Appendix E. Repeated Reading Script.
Repeated Reading for Comprehension with
Missed Word Phrase Drill
Materials Needed: 2 copies of the Fluency passages, stopwatch/kitchen timer, different
colored highlighters, clipboard or something to write on.
1. Tell Sara: “Use the title, key words, and picture, make a prediction about what this passage will be about”.
2. Have her read the entire passage. Follow along on your copy.
3. Highlight on your copy any of the following:
• Any word that she struggles with for 3 seconds (give her these words).
• Any word she misreads and does not self-correct
• Any word or phrase that she skips as she reads
• Remember to mark a bracket to show the word she read at the 1-minute mark
4. When she’s finished the passage, give her feedback:
• Show her up to 5 words that she misread.
• For each, have her repeat the correct pronunciation.
• Have her re-read the phrase in which the word occurred 3 times.
5. If she struggled with more than 5 words in the passage, read the passage to her and have
her follow along.
6. If she made 5 or fewer mistakes, have her re-read the entire passage again.
7. Discuss whether her prediction turned out to be correct (if not, that’s OK---predictions are just a guess).
8. Remind Sara that everyone has to read more than once if they want to understand a
passage very, very well. Have her re-read the passage, and again mark errors on your
copy as she reads (use a new color highlighter/pen, if desired). Tell Sara how long it took
her to read the passage, praise any improvements, and talk about the passage for a few
minutes.
Smits, A., 112
Appendix F. Daily adherence sheet.
Student:
10.
Month Week M T W T F Comments
Sept.
1 1 1 2 3
Sept.
2 7 7 8 9 10
Sept.
3 13 14 15 16 17
Sept.
4 20 21 22 23 26
Sept.
5 27 28 29 30 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Oct.
1 1
Oct.
2 4 5 6 7 8
Oct.
3 11 12 13 14 15
Oct.
4 18 19 20 21 22
Oct.
5 25 26 27 28 29 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Nov.
1 1 2 3 4 5
Nov.
2 8 9 10 11 12
Nov.
3 15 16 17 18 19
Nov.
4 22 23 24 25 26
Nov.
5 29 30 1 2 3 Monthly comments/suggestions:
Dec.
1 6 7 8 9 10
Dec.
2 13 14 15 16 17
Dec.
3 20 21 22 23 24
Dec.
4 27 28 29 30 31
Intervention?
How will it be progress monitored? Dibels Next nonsense
word fluency each week by homeroom teacher.
KEY:
CA = child absent
CU = child unavailable
TA = Teacher absent
TU = Teacher unavailable
I = Intervention
Smits, A., 113
A Tier 1 Class-Wide Intervention Utilizing a Token Economy and Response Cost to Reduce
Off-Task Behaviors of Second-Grade Students
This report describes a class-wide behavior intervention to decrease off-task behaviors
during independent work time in a second-grade classroom. A request from the 2nd grade teacher
was made to address the challenge of managing the student’s behavior during independent work
time. Through observations and consultation, the target variables were identified and a class-
wide intervention was developed and implemented.
In a Response to Intervention model, universal positive behavioral supports are designed
for all students, in all settings and are preventative and proactive. The school-wide system is a
set of universal strategies that are intended to create an environment to which most students
respond (Horner and Gresham, 2007). The school-wide rules and expectations serve as the
foundation for classroom behavioral management. The classroom environment, teaching
behaviors and curriculum are all important components to successful student outcomes
(Gettinger & Stoiber, 2007).
Instructional and curricular adaptations, and behaviorally based interventions are among
the most effective interventions for reducing problem behaviors and educating students with
behavior problems (Gottfredson, 1997). Research supports systems and strategies that prevent
behavior problems rather than relying on consequences after the problem behavior has occurred
(Furlong et al., 1997). Effective behavior interventions have clearly defined rules and
expectations and are implemented with fidelity. Proactive classroom management involves
teaching the expectations, providing positive and negative examples of behavior, modeling
appropriate behaviors, and providing corrective feedback for inappropriate behaviors and
Smits, A., 114
positive reinforcement for expected behaviors (Horner and Gresham, 2007). Landrum and
Kauffman (2006) noted five basic classroom management techniques used widely in schools and
are supported by research. These techniques are: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement,
extinction, response cost punishment, or punishment involving presentation of an aversive
consequence.
McGoey and DuPaul (2000) demonstrated the use of token economies, response cost and
positive reinforcement is effective in reducing the amount of inappropriate behavior exhibited by
disruptive children in the elementary classroom setting.
Response Cost
Response cost is defined as the removal of a tangible reinforcer in response to an
undesired behavior, which results in the decrease of that behavior (Malott, 2008). A child who
exhibits the target behavior loses a specified amount of a reinforcer. The reinforcer can be
anything that the child perceives as rewarding. Some examples include money, candy, and
television time. Response cost is desirable because it results in a moderate to rapid decrease in
behavior, it is convenient, and can be combined with other approaches (Cooper, 2007).
Response cost is often combined with a behavior management technique that utilizes the
principles of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is the receiving of reinforcement is
contingent on the presence of a desired behavior. For example, if a student is sitting
appropriately at their desk then they receive a sticker. Positive reinforcement does not have to be
a tangible item; a student can also be positively reinforced by the teacher providing praise for
sitting appropriately at their desk.
Smits, A., 115
Token Economy
A token economy is a highly developed and researched behavior change system that
incorporates the idea of positive reinforcement (Cooper, 2007). Token economies facilitate
positive outcomes by increasing appropriate behaviors (Boreggo & Pemberton, 2007). Token
economies have been useful in changing behaviors that were resistant to instruction and therapy
(Cooper, 2007). The three major components of token economies are having a specified list of
target behaviors, tokens or points the child receives for emitting the target behavior, and a menu
of reinforcers that the child can earn with a certain amount of earned tokens (Cooper, 2007). The
token economy system rewards children for behaving appropriately with tokens or some type of
tangible reinforcer. Once the child has earned a specified amount of reinforcers they trade it in
for a larger reinforcement, such as a new toy, staying up late, extra television time, etc. The
menu of reinforcers should be decided on with the child to ensure the reinforcement is actually
rewarding (Cooper, 2007). The child has to want to work hard for the reward for the token
economy to be effective.
Combined Intervention-Response Cost and Token Economy
Utilizing and combining the principles of response cost and a token economy is effective
in reducing unwanted behavior. A child is rewarded for exhibiting appropriate behaviors but can
also lose tokens for inappropriate behaviors. The treatment acceptability of response cost and
token economies among parents ranks higher than other behavior management tactics such as
planned ignoring and overcorrection (Boreggo, et al., 2007). This intervention is most effective
when punishment or reward is given immediately following the behavior, the parent or teacher is
Smits, A., 116
consistent, the child has been taught the target behaviors and how the whole system works, and
the reward is reinforcing.
The principles of a token economy was utilized in developing a class-wide behavior
intervention to reduce the off-task behaviors of 2nd grade students.
Method
Participants
The classroom had one lead teacher and 23 students (13 boys, 11 girls). The problem-
solving team included the teacher, school psychologist intern, intervention psychologist, and the
principal. The intern was responsible for serving as the primary consultant for the classroom.
This included conducting observations, researching and designing an intervention plan, creating
materials and scripts, and communicating frequently with the teacher. The teacher was
responsible for implementing the intervention with fidelity, monitoring progress, and
communicating with the team. The intervention psychologist and principal were responsible for
overseeing the intervention implementation and supervising the intern.
Setting
The intervention occurred in a second-grade classroom at an elementary school in the
Greater-Cincinnati area. The students attended school Monday through Friday from 9:00-3:30.
The class daily activities included whole group instruction, small group instruction, partner
work, and independent work. The class included 23 students. 16 students’ desks were grouped
to form 3 tables throughout the room and 7 students sat at independent desks throughout the
room. There was a school-wide positive behavior support system in place and the class-wide
Smits, A., 117
system was developed to align with the main components of the school-wide system. A
summary of the school-wide PBS is included in Appendix A.
Target Variables
The school psychologist intern completed observations, consulted with the classroom
teacher, and collaboratively target variables were identified. The consultation with the teacher
revealed concern about the student’s off-task behaviors. She further identified independent work
time as more difficult than whole group instruction. The school psychologist intern developed
an observation code (Appendix D) that was used to observe in the classroom during math
independent work. The observation confirmed the teacher’s concerns for off-task behaviors.
The school-wide consequence for displaying undesired behavior was filling out a “refocus sheet”
(Appendix B).
Teacher Variable. The observation completed by the intern revealed that the teacher
gave many prompts and re-directions for off-task behaviors. The teacher’s frequency of verbal
prompts/re-directions was monitored using the behavior code (Appendix D) developed by the
intern. A prompt/redirection was defined as: The teacher provides a verbal request to a student,
who is engaging in an off-task behavior, to do what they are supposed to be working on at the
time.
Student Variables. The observation confirmed the teacher’s concern for off-task
behaviors during independent work. Off-task behaviors were monitored using the developed
behavior code. Off-task behaviors were defined as: the student is not completing or
participating in the activity that is expected at that time. The number of re-focuses earned per
month by the class was also used to monitor progress.
Smits, A., 118
Baseline Conditions
Baseline data was collected from reviewing the number of refocuses and from the
observation data. In November, 10 refocuses were given for off-task behavior and 14 were given
in December. The school psychologist intern completed two 30-minute observations as baseline
data for off-task behaviors and teacher prompts. The baseline data is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Baseline data.
Date
% students off-
task
teacher
prompts/re-
directions
1/18 22% 14
1/21 17% 11
Goal Setting
The goal was set to reduce to 5 or less by the end of the year. This goal was based on
data the school had from previous years about the average number of refocuses given in third
grade. The teacher wanted to prepare the students for third grade expectations. The teacher and
intern set an end-of-year goal for students off-task during independent-work to be less than 10%.
The goal for teacher prompts/re-directions for off-task behaviors was set to be less than 5.
Decision Rules
The effectiveness of the intervention was going to be determined by the number of
refocuses, teacher prompts/redirections, and student’s off-task behaviors. The teacher and intern
collaboratively decided that if the number of re-focuses for off-task behavior did not decrease
after a month of implementation, then the intervention would be modified.
Smits, A., 119
Hypothesis
The classroom observation revealed that the students responded well when one student
was rewarded a “pom-pom” for displaying a desired behavior and when prompted by the teacher
to begin working. The student’s also displayed more on-task behaviors during whole-group
instruction. It was hypothesized that the school-wide PBS did not provide immediate
reinforcement for every individual and the class-wide reward was not frequent enough. The
teacher and intern thought that implementing a token-economy would provide a visual stimulus
(student’s individual cup and tokens) for the students to be reminded to stay on-task which
would result in a decrease of teacher prompts/redirections. It was further hypothesized that the
token economy would allow for more immediate reinforcement for the student and would
provide more opportunities for a student’s appropriate behavior to be reinforced. Additionally,
response cost was utilized in combination with the token economy. If the student had to be
redirected, a token was taken away. If a student lost 3 tokens then a refocus was earned. The
class “pom-pom” jar was still used and the rewards for the class-wide jar were larger.
Progress Monitoring
Teacher prompts/redirections and student off-task behaviors were monitored using the
observation-code developed by the intern (Appendix D). The observation-code was an interval
recording form that used 15-second intervals. The intern divided the classroom into 4 sections
with 5-6 students seated in each section. At the beginning of each interval the intern scanned one
section of the room and recorded the number of students displaying off-task behaviors.
Throughout the interval the intern recorded any teacher prompts and if any tokens were given or
taken away. Off-task student behavior was calculated by multiplying the number of students
Smits, A., 120
present by the number of intervals observed. This determined the total number of student on-
task behaviors that could have been observed. The total number of students who were recorded
to be off-task was divided by the total number of on-task opportunities. The equation is below.
% students off-task= number of students off-task throughout observation/ (number of students
present x number of intervals)
The number of refocuses was monitored by using the school-wide refocus checklist.
Accountability Plan
An A-B design was utilized for this Tier 1 class-wide intervention. This design allows
for assessment of intervention effectiveness by comparing intervention levels to baseline levels.
Intervention Procedures
A class-wide intervention was developed to target off-task behaviors during independent
work time. The components of the intervention were research based and the intervention was
developed collaboratively with the problem-solving team. The intervention was designed using
the principles of a token economy and response cost. The intervention also aligned with the
school-wide positive behavior support system which was a dependent group token economy.
The intervention was implemented on January 24, 2011.
Token Economy. A token-economy was implemented in the second-grade classroom.
Each student was given a red cup with their name on it that sat in the corner of their desk. The
teacher had a large jar of plastic links in the back of the classroom. During independent work
time the teacher walked around and dropped links in the cups of students who were
demonstrating on-task behaviors. Additionally, the students earned a token for completing their
Smits, A., 121
work accurately (accuracy was determined by the teacher based on the number of problems they
were expected to complete). If a student was engaging in an off-task behavior then a link was
removed from their cup. The teacher created a classroom treasure box with a variety of items
worth different amounts of links. On Fridays, the students had the opportunity to cash their links
in for something in the class treasure box. The scripts and materials utilized for the class-wide
token economy are included in Appendix E.
Adherence
Adherence to the intervention was monitored using the intervention script as a checklist.
Adherence to each procedure was documented. Additionally, adherence was monitored by
teacher report and from her records. The teacher kept a record of the number of links each
student cashed in each week. This recorded provided an approximation of the number of links
given out each week and also documentation that the reward was given on Fridays. Adherence is
summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Adherence to intervention.
% of components
observed 100%
% of weeks reward given 92% (11/12)
Adherence to essential components of the intervention was monitored during two
observations. The teacher utilized the token economy throughout the whole day; however,
adherence was only monitored during independent work time. The adherence to the Friday
reward component occurred during 11 out of 12 possible weeks.
Smits, A., 122
Results
The token economy was effective in reducing the number of teacher prompts, students
displaying off-task behaviors, and number of “refocus sheets” earned by the students in the 2nd
grade classroom. The results are summarized in Figures 1-3.
Figure 1. Teacher prompts/redirections towards off-task student behavior.
A visual analysis of the data for teacher prompts demonstrates that the intervention was
effective in decreasing the frequency of prompts and re-directions towards off-task behaviors.
The baseline average was 12.5. After the intervention, the average decreased to 4.5. The level
change was a decrease in 8 prompts/re-directions.
Smits, A., 123
Figure 2. Student off-task behavior.
A visual analysis of the data for student off-task behavior demonstrates that the token-
economy was effective in reducing the percentage of students who were off-task during
independent work. The baseline average was 19.5 and after the intervention implementation the
average was 8. This is a level change of 11.5%.
Figure 3. Number of refocus sheets earned per month.
Smits, A., 124
A visual analysis of the bar graph demonstrates a decrease in the number of refocus
sheets earned per month. After the intervention implementation the number earned decreased to
a level below the goal line. This was maintained for the duration of the year. The average
number of refocuses earned prior to the intervention was 12/month. The decreased to 3.5 per
month after the implementation of the intervention. This is a level change of 8.5.
Social Validity
A formal social-validity survey was not completed; however, this intervention was
determined to have high social validity based on teacher and student responses. The students
responded well to the intervention and were observed to be very excited when they earned a
plastic link in their cup. The teacher also commented that the intervention was easy to
implement and that the students really enjoyed it. The teacher also utilized the intervention
during different times of the day which indicates she perceived it as an effective behavioral
intervention. This intervention was also determined to have high social validity because it
aligned with the school-wide positive behavior support. The materials and scripts were easy to
develop and the intervention was easy to implement because the teacher and students were
familiar with the school-wide intervention.
Discussion
A research-based Tier 1 intervention was implemented in a second grade classroom as a
way to increase the students’ on-task behaviors during independent work time. Through
collaboration an intervention was developed and planned. The teacher implemented the token
economy with fidelity and the results demonstrate that the intervention was effective in
Smits, A., 125
increasing on-task behaviors and decreasing teacher prompts and the number of refocuses earned
by the students.
This case demonstrated the effectiveness on classroom behavior by implementing a
universal strategy to target all the students. This intervention also aligned with the school-wide
PBS which is important because the school-wide PBS serves as the foundation for classroom
class-room management.
A limit to this case included that literature-based or local norms were not used to
determine the appropriate goal for on-task behaviors. This would have been appropriate to
determine the on-task behaviors of a typical 2nd grade classroom. One literature-based norm
indicates the on-task behavior during independent seat work for a second grader is 68% (Haile-
Griffey et al., 1993). This norm could not be used because it isn’t recent and it also is the
percent of intervals on-task behaviors occurred. The data collected for this report indicates the
percent of students demonstrating off-task behaviors.
Another limit to this case was that observations were only completed during math
independent work time. This was due to the intern’s schedule. It would have been appropriate
to complete observations during other independent work times for other subjects.
This case was beneficial for my professional development and becoming a more effective
practitioner. I gained experience with analyzing school-wide PBS, reviewing school-wide and
classroom behavior data, and developing a class-wide intervention to target the specific needs of
a classroom. I refined my collaboration skills by consulting frequently with the teacher. This
case also allowed me additional opportunity to develop behavior codes and to progress monitor
off-task behaviors of an entire class.
Smits, A., 126
The token economy seemed to be enjoyable for the students and easy for the teacher to
implement. I will utilize this intervention in future class rooms as a strategy to reduce undesired
behaviors.
Smits, A., 127
References
Borrego, J., & Pemberton, J. (2007). Increasing Acceptance of Behavioral Child Management
Techniques: What Do Parents Say?. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 29(2), 27-45.
Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database
Cooper, J.O., Heron, T.E., Heward, W.L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis, second edition.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Furlong, M.J., Morrison, G.M., Chung, A., Bates, M., Morrison, R. (1997). School Violence: A
multicomponent reduction strategy. Children’s needs II: Development, problems and
alternatives. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Gettinger, M., & Stoiber, K. (2007). Applying a Response-to-Intervention Model for Early
Literacy Development in Low-Income Children. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 27(4), 198-213. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Gottfredson, D.C. (1997). School-based crime prevention. Preventing crime: What works, what
doesn’t, what’s promising. College Park, MD: Department of Criminology and Criminal
Justice, University of Maryland.
Mallot, R.W. (2008). Principles of behavior, sixth edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education Inc.
McGoey, K.E., & DuPaul, G.J. (2000). Token reinforcement and response cost procedures:
Reducing the disruptive behavior of preschool children with Attention-
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 330–343.
Smits, A., 128
Appendix A. School-wide PBS strategy.
School-Wide Positive Behavior Support
Pom-Pom Jars -Best “Bobcat” Behaviors will be encouraged by earning a “pom-pom” for the
class
-The teacher will announce for student to get a “pom-pom” for the class and tells
the specific behavior (i.e. “Sara go choose a pom-pom and place it in the jar for
starting your work immediately.”)
-The student will place the “pom-pom” in the class jar (the size of the jar is
determined by each grade level)
-The class jar should be visible to all students
-Each classroom will develop a list of possible rewards
-when the jar is filled the classroom earns one of the class-wide rewards
Smits, A., 129
Appendix B. School-wide consequence for undesired behavior.
Smits, A., 130
Appendix C. School-wide refocus record form.
Smits, A., 131
Appendix D. Observation code.
Smits, A., 132
Appendix E. Script for class-wide token economy.
2nd Grade Class-Wide Token Economy
Goal: To increase on-task behaviors and work-completion during independent work time.
First time introducing the Token Economy
1. Introduce the Token Economy right before independent work time
2. Explain to the students that the class will be implementing a new behavior game
3. Explain that it is similar to the “pom-pom” jar but they will now have their own cups that they
will be responsible for
4. Hand out the plastic cups
5. Explicitly identify and define the behaviors they are expected to display
6. Explain and provide examples of how they will earn a plastic link for their cup
7. Model how the links will be given out by walking around the room and dropping links in a couple
of students cups who are displaying appropriate behavior
8. Tell them that they can also lose links by not doing what they are expected to be doing
9. Provide examples of how they can lose a link and demonstrate how they will lose it, by taking a
link out of a student’s cup
10. Explain what they will earn with the links
11. Show them the class treasure box and discuss that on Fridays they will have the opportunity to
use their links to “buy” something out of the box
12. Review the procedures and ask if the students have any questions and begin implementing it
Daily Script for Token Economy
1. Remind students to have their plastic cups on the corner of their desks
2. Praise them for good behavior they have been demonstrating or if they demonstrated
difficulty the day before review how to earn a link and what they can earn
3. Remind them about the class treasure box and being able to use their links to get something
out of it on Friday
4. During independent work, walk around and drop links in the cups of students who are
displaying on-task behaviors
5. If a student is off-task, remove a link from their cup
6. The plastic link dropping in the cup will provide a cue for other students so verbal praise does
not need to be given each time
Smits, A., 133
Tier 2: Utilizing the Principles of Effective Classrooms and a Dependent Group
Contingency to Reduce Disruptive Behaviors in a Targeted Group of Kindergarten
Students
A kindergarten teacher requested the support of the school psychologist intern to help in
reducing the disruptive behaviors of a targeted group of students. Through direct observations
and assessment, the target variables were identified. A response to intervention model was
utilized to provide positive behavioral support to the classroom. The school psychologist intern
provided positive behavioral support to reduce the behaviors of a targeted group of students, by
making modifications to the current Tier 1 strategies and by developing and implementing a Tier
2 intervention within the classroom.
The classroom environment, teaching behaviors and curriculum are all important
components to successful student outcomes (Gettinger & Stoiber, 2007). A classroom
environment with unknown or unclear expectations (Mayer, 1995) and frequent negative teacher
interactions (Gunter & Coutinho, 1997; Shores, Gunter, & Jack, 1993) becomes a setting for
problem behaviors. Classroom rules should be explicitly defined and posted so each student can
clearly state and explain them (Trussel, 2008).
A student’s inappropriate and disruptive behaviors are sometimes maintained by a
naturally occurring social contingency, attention from one’s teacher (McKerchar and Thompson,
2004). Students, who have a history of being reinforced by obtaining attention from displaying
undesired behaviors, are likely to continue to demonstrate these behaviors. The use of praise to
increase positive behavior has been shown to simultaneously decrease disruptive behavior
(Thomas, Nielsen, Kuypers, & Becker, 1968). Teacher praise as contingent on, or as a
Smits, A., 134
consequence of appropriate student behaviors is a behavior management strategy with a thorough
base of empirical support.
In addition to classroom environment and teacher behavior management strategies,
interventions employing group contingencies have demonstrated that they are effective in
reducing noncompliant and inappropriate behaviors (Swiezy et al., 1992), increasing on-task
behavior (Bushell et al., 1968), and promoting social interactions (Kohler et al., 1990). Group
contingencies can be used to acknowledge students performing a desired behavior and to
facilitate positive social interactions. Dependent group contingencies reinforce an entire group
based on one or a couple target students meeting the specified criteria (Litow & Pumroy, 1975).
The principles of a classroom environment with clearly defined expectations, teacher praise for
desired behaviors, and a dependent group contingency was utilized to develop a Tier 2
intervention in a kindergarten classroom. The goal of the intervention was to reduce the
disruptive behaviors of a targeted group of students.
Method
Participants
The intervention occurred in a kindergarten classroom with 10 girls and 14 boys. Out of
the students, 2 girls and 4 boys were identified as needing additional behavior support in addition
to the Tier 1 behavioral strategy already being implemented. The problem solving team
consisted of the classroom teacher, a classroom instructional assistant, the school psychologist,
and the school psychologist intern. The school psychologist intern was responsible for assessing
classroom and instructional variables, assessing student behavior, analyzing the data, researching
and designing an intervention plan, creating materials and scripts, progress monitoring, leading
Smits, A., 135
team meetings, and frequently communicating with the classroom teacher. The teachers in the
classroom were responsible for adhering to the components of the intervention, keeping track of
daily behaviors, attending meetings, and communicating with the intern and other team
members. The school psychologist was responsible for providing supervision to the intern.
Setting
The behavioral support occurred in a kindergarten classroom in a public school in the
Greater Cincinnati Area. The students attended school all-day, Monday through Friday. The
class daily activities included structured and unstructured times. The structured parts of the day
included whole group instruction, circle time, and independent work time. The unstructured
times included center time and recess.
Target Variables
Through collaboration with the lead teacher, Mrs. White, and observations in the
classroom, the target variables were selected. The initial teacher request and meeting with the
teacher, revealed her concerns about the high frequency of off-task behavior within the
classroom. The interview with the teacher further identified a group of students who seemed to
display these behaviors the most frequently. These students were also reported to display the
behaviors despite the Tier 1 intervention being implemented in the classroom. Mrs. White
identified the off-task behaviors as verbal disruptions, following class rules, and completing
work. The teacher prioritized verbal disruptions as a main concern.
After the initial request for behavioral support in the classroom, the school psychologist
intern conducted a narrative real time observation. The class-wide strategy being implemented
within the classroom, prior to the referral, utilized the principles of response cost. Each student
Smits, A., 136
had a pocket with 3 cards (green, yellow, red) and if they were observed to display undesired
behaviors their card was flipped to the next card. If a student remained on green they earned a
sticker at the end of the day, if a student earned a yellow card it was considered a warning, and
earning a red card resulted in a note being sent home. The narrative real time observation
revealed concerns about the lack of explicitly defined rules and criteria and for the frequency of
the negative interactions as an attempt to manage student behavior. The teacher was observed to
frequently give attention to students displaying inappropriate behaviors through a negative
redirection (i.e. “You will not do that”, “that is not what you are supposed to be doing”, “you are
not following directions”, etc.). To confirm the frequency of negative interactions the intern
completed another observation using an observation code to document the positive and negative
interactions during 30-second intervals. The results of this observation further confirmed the
high frequency of negative attention towards undesired behaviors.
On 10/20/2010, the school psychologist intern met with the classroom teacher, Mrs.
White, the instructional assistant, and the school psychologist to review the observations, define
the target variables, and to develop an intervention plan. Through collaboration, the identified
students, student variables and teacher variables were identified and explicitly defined. The
identified variables and the definitions are included in the chart 1.
Student Variables. The identified student variables were verbal disruptions and off-task
behavior. The student’s progress was monitored periodically by classroom observations using
the developed behavior code. The teacher also monitored progress by documenting when one of
the identified target students earned a yellow or red card and what they earned it for.
Smits, A., 137
Teacher Variables. The identified teacher variables were positive and negative
interactions to address behavior. The teacher variables were monitored through observations and
the developed behavior code.
Chart 1. Definitions of identified teacher and student variables.
Teacher Variables Definitions
Positive Interaction
(behavior)
The teacher provides attention to a student who is displaying
the expected behavior through verbal or non-verbal praise; or
the teacher provides a positive prompt, model, or explanation
of the expected behavior.
Negative Interaction
(behavior)
The teacher provides attention to a student who is displaying
unexpected behaviors through reprimands or stating the
behavior they should not be exhibiting.
Student Variables
verbal disruptions
The student exhibits an off-task comment or noise when they
are expected to be quiet; or the student speaks when they are
expected to wait to be called on.
off-task behavior
The student is engaging in a behavior that is not expected at
that time.
Goal Setting
After identifying the target student and teacher variables, the team collaborated and
developed an intervention plan. On 10/21/2010 and 10/22/2010, Mrs. White documented when a
student’s card was flipped and the reason. The teacher’s records also had documents of the
students who had received red cards and this information was also used as baseline data. The
information collected from the school psychologist intern’s observations was used as baseline
data for the teacher variables and the student variables of verbal disruptions and off-task
behaviors. The baseline data was reviewed and goals were set.
Smits, A., 138
The goal for the teacher variable of positive interactions towards desired behaviors was
decided to be 30% of the intervals. This was based on the baseline data which demonstrated the
teacher was displaying positive attention towards desired behaviors at a rate of around 10%. The
teacher felt it was an obtainable goal to demonstrate positive interactions three times more the
amount of positive interactions she had been giving. The goal for negative interactions was set
to decrease to less than 10% of observed intervals.
For the student variables, the team also collaborated to determine the goals. The teacher
wanted the number of times the student earned a red card to decrease to 1 time per week by
January. This goal was based on what Mrs. White felt the typical student might earn in a week.
The baseline data from the school psychologist intern’s observation using the behavior code, was
used to set the goals for verbal disruptions and off-task behavior. The goal of occurring in 20%
or less of the observed intervals was set for both verbal disruptions and off-task behavior.
Decision Rules
The effectiveness of the intervention on student behavior was determined to be monitored
by the total number of red cards the student earned in a week. An aim-line was set to track the
progress of the goal. The behaviors were expected to decrease, so the team decided if three
consecutive data points fell above the aim line for a particular student then the intervention
would be modified or intensified.
The school psychologist intern utilized the behavior code to monitor the teacher variables
and the student variables of verbal disruptions and off-task behavior. Since these observations
only occurred about once per month for a brief amount of time, the data from the observations,
were used as a secondary source of data to demonstrate the relationship between increased
Smits, A., 139
desired student behaviors and teacher positive interactions. Furthermore, if the number of red
cards a student was earning each week was not decreasing, but the observation data indicated an
increase in teacher interactions, then the intervention would be changed.
Hypothesis
Through collaboration and observations the hypothesis for the level of undesired
behaviors for the group of students was due to lack of explicitly defined rules and criteria for the
class-wide behavior strategy, and insufficient positive praise, prompts and modeling of expected
behaviors. An intervention package was developed using the principles of positive behavior
support. The intervention package included collaborating with the teacher and discussing
positive interactions to increase desired behaviors, explicitly defining and posting the classroom
rules, creating cards with expected behaviors to be used as non-verbal prompts, and
implementing a mystery motivator intervention. The intervention package was implemented
class-wide but it was predicted to decrease off-task behaviors and verbal disruptions of the
identified students displaying the undesired behaviors most frequently. Decreasing these
variables would consequently result in a decrease of the number of red cards the student earned
in a week.
Progress Monitoring
The school psychologist intern progress monitored the teacher and student variables
about once a month using the developed behavior code. The teacher was responsible for
recording when a note was sent home for earning a red card. This data was used to assess the
effectiveness of the intervention.
Smits, A., 140
Accountability Plan
An A-B design was determined to be appropriate for supporting the class-wide behavior
through implementing a Tier 2 intervention. This design allows for assessment of intervention
effectiveness by comparing intervention levels to baseline levels.
Baseline Conditions
The teacher’s records were used as baseline data and additional baseline data was also
collected prior to the implementation of the intervention. The baseline data for the number of
red cards a student earned in a week was used, but during the intervention phase the student had
the opportunity to earn 2 red cards per day. The teacher reported that she felt the baseline data
was an accurate representation because she felt the student’s were more likely to earn the red
card more towards the end of the day. The school psychologist intern also conducted
observations in the classroom to collect baseline data for the target teacher and student variables.
Intervention Procedures
Teacher Consultation. The school psychologist intern met with the teacher to discuss
ways to increase positive behavioral management in the classroom. Collaboratively the teacher
and school psychologist intern discussed how frequent to praise students and the best times to
implement it. The school psychologist intern modeled and provided examples of what it would
look like in a classroom. They also discussed hypothetical situations and how to handle it using
positive behavior support. In addition to collaborating about positive praise, the team also
worked together to develop and post the classroom rules (Appendix 1) and identified explicit
criteria (Appendix A) for behavior that would result in a student flipping their card. A tier 1
Smits, A., 141
classroom behavior management strategy was already implemented, so this component of the
intervention was a modification of the Tier 1 intervention.
Mystery Motivator. A mystery motivator intervention is a group contingency that has
been demonstrated to reduce disruptive behaviors. The mystery motivator implemented in the
kindergarten classroom was a dependent group contingency, where a student’s behavior
impacted if the entire class earned the reinforcement. The classroom rules and criteria for
earning a yellow or red card were explicitly reviewed with the students. The rules were also
posted around the classroom. Pictures were accompanied with the rules, and the teacher also had
these pictures on small cards (Appendix 1) which she wore around her neck to use to prompt the
students to follow the rules. The day was split up into 2 different times that a mystery motivator
would be chosen. At the end of the designated time period the student’s name in the envelope
was revealed. If the student who was the mystery motivator still had a green card then the entire
class earned a point. Each student’s cards were returned to green after the mystery motivator had
been revealed. When the class earned 10 points they got a larger reward (extra recess time, class
game, something from the class treasure box, etc.). The teacher occasionally selected the student
as a way to ensure the target students were the mystery motivators.
Fading Intervention. When the intern and teacher met in February, the data revealed
that 5 out of the 6 students had met the goal and were maintaining their behaviors. The teacher
decided to implement a Tier 3 intervention for student who continued to display frequent
disruptive behaviors. The team decided to fade the mystery motivator intervention by decreasing
the number of times the mystery motivator was revealed. The teacher began choosing one
mystery motivator for the day.
Smits, A., 142
Intervention Adherence
An intervention can only be determined to be effective for the specified target variable if
there is adherence to all of the essential components of the intervention. Adherence to the
intervention was monitored by the use of a checklist which included the main components of the
intervention (Appendix 1). Adherence was checked when the school psychologist intern
completed classroom observations. Intervention adherence was 80% or higher for 5 out of the 6
observed times.
Results
Social Validity
A formal written social validity was not provided to the teacher; however, the teacher
provided verbal praise to the practicum student on many occasions. In addition, the teacher
provided feedback to the intern’s supervisor expressing how much help the intern had provided
the classroom. The kindergarten teacher further commented that she had shared the mystery
motivator intervention with the other kindergarten teachers for them to use in their classroom.
Teacher Variables
The data in Figure 1 represents the teacher variables of positive and negative interactions,
before and after the implementation of the intervention. The goal for positive interactions was
set to occur in at least 30% of the observed intervals.
Smits, A., 143
Figure 1. Teacher positive and negative interactions to manage classroom behavior.
As a result of the intervention, the number of positive interactions to manage behavior,
increased immediately to above the set goal. The number of positive interactions continued to
exceed the goal for the following observations, with the exception of the observation in
December. The baseline average for positive interactions was 11.5% of the observed intervals.
This increased to positive interaction being displayed in an average of 33.4% of the observed
intervals. The effect size was 0.84 and the percent of non-overlapping data (PND) was 100%.
0.84 indicates a large effect size for the intervention increasing the teacher variable of positive
interactions. After the intervention was faded, Mrs. White continued to display positive
interactions to meet the set goal of more than 30% of the observed intervals.
Smits, A., 144
Student Variables
Figure 2. Student verbal disruptions and off-task behavior.
The goal for off-task behaviors and verbal disruptions was set to decrease to less than
20% of the observed intervals. This goal was exceeded immediately after the implementation of
the intervention. The percentage remained below the goal for verbal disruptions for the
following observations. Student off-task behaviors increased for the following observation, but
decreased again and the goal was maintained for the duration of the observations. The baseline
average for verbal disruptions was 50.5%. After the intervention the average decreased to
10.5%. The effect size for verbal disruptions was 0.91. The baseline average for off-task
behaviors was 0.82.
Smits, A., 145
Figure 3. Steve’s earned red cards per week.
A visual analysis of the data indicates that the intervention was effective in decreasing the
number of red cards Steve earned in a week. Before the intervention Steve earned an average of
2.75 red cards. This decreased to an average of 0.47. The effect size was 0.82 and the PND was
96%. Steve continued to meet the goal of less than one red card per week after the intervention
was faded.
Figure 4. Scott’s earned red cards per week.
A visual analysis of the data indicates that the intervention was effective in decreasing the
number of red cards Scott earned in a week. Before the intervention Scott earned an average of
3.75 red cards. This decreased to an average of 0.42. The effect size was 0.89 and the PND was
Smits, A., 146
96% Scott maintained his behaviors after the intervention was faded and he continued to meet
the set goal of less than one red card per week.
Figure 5. Jeff’s earned red cards per week.
A visual analysis of the data indicates that the intervention was effective in decreasing the
number of red cards Jeff earned in a week. Before the intervention Jeff earned an average of
3.25 red cards. This decreased to an average of 0.16. The effect size was 0.9 and the PND was
96%. Jeff maintained 0 red cards being sent home per week after the intervention was faded.
Figure 6. Joe’s earned red cards per week.
A visual analysis of the data indicates that the intervention was effective in decreasing the
number of red cards Joe earned in a week. Before the intervention Joe earned an average of 2.5
red cards. This decreased to an average of 0.42. The effect size was 0.86 and the PND was
Smits, A., 147
96%. When the intervention was faded, Joe continued to maintain his behaviors and continued
to meet the set goal.
Figure 7. Emily’s earned red cards per week.
A visual analysis of the data indicates that the intervention was effective in decreasing the
number of red cards Emily earned in a week. Before the intervention Emily earned an average of
2.25 red cards. This decreased to an average of 0.16. The effect size was 0.92 and the PND was
100%. When the intervention was faded Emily continued to maintain her behaviors and meet the
goal for less than one red card per week.
Figure 8. Abby’s earned red cards per week.
Smits, A., 148
A visual analysis of the data in Figure 8 indicates the intervention was not successful in
reducing the number of red cards Abby earned in a week. The average number of cards Abby
earned during the baseline phase was 3.25. After the mystery motivator intervention was
implemented Abby’s average decreased to 1.5. The effect size was 0.55. Although the average
decreased, Abby was unsuccessful in maintaining the set goal of 1 red card or less per week.
Another intervention phase was added. A Tier 3 intervention was implemented by the teacher.
Abby had an individualized points chart. The true effects of this intervention could not be
determined because Abby moved out of the school district shortly after the intervention was
implemented.
Discussion
The high effect sizes yielded by the data for the teacher variables, student variables, and
individual student data, indicate that the Tier 2 intervention was successful in decreasing the
undesired behaviors of the identified students. The intervention package was consisted of
teacher consultation, modification of the Tier 1 strategy, and the implementation of the mystery
motivator intervention was successful in increasing the teacher’s positive interactions to manage
behavior and in decreasing the student’s verbal disruptions and off-task behaviors. In addition,
the number of red cards the targeted students earned per week also decreased. The effect of the
intervention on one student’s behaviors was not as significant as the other students. As a result,
a Tier 3 intervention was implemented; however, the effect of this intervention could not truly be
determined because the student moved out of the district.
Although the intervention resulted in a decrease of the undesired behaviors and an
increase in the teacher’s positive interactions, there are some things that could be changed for
Smits, A., 149
future implementations of this intervention. A decision rule should have been determined by the
team for when the students met the goal for less than 1 red card per week for a specified number
of weeks, then a goal for the number of yellow cards earned should have been set and progress
monitored. It would have also been beneficial to conduct observations during different times of
the day. The intervention was implemented throughout structured and unstructured times.
Doing inter-session sampling would have provided more information about specific times the
behaviors were more frequent. The school psychologist intern predicted based on her
observations that verbal disruptions and off-task behaviors occurred more frequently during
unstructured times and whole group instruction. Collecting baseline data during the different
times of the day would have helped to determine this and observations after the implementation
of the intervention could have occurred during specific times to demonstrate the difference.
In addition to targeting one specific time or activity, this intervention might have had
stronger support if data was collected for each of the specific behaviors that the classroom rules
targeted. During observations, verbal disruptions were not also counted as off-task behavior;
however, any other off-task behavior was included under this category. More specifically
defining behaviors to align with the classroom rules might have been beneficial. It would also be
important for future implications to make note of other variables that could influence the
frequency of the student’s undesired behaviors. This would provide stronger evidence that the
intervention was the primary reason for the change in behavior.
My model of practice emphasizes positive behavior support, so another component that
might be changed in the future is sending a positive note home for the students not earning a red
card for the entire week, instead of sending a note home to bring attention to the undesired
behavior.
Smits, A., 150
Working with the kindergarten classroom and the teacher to implement a Tier 2
intervention to reduce undesired behaviors was beneficial in further developing and refining my
skills to be an effective practitioner. This case allowed me to see theory transferred into practice.
I learned the importance of clearly defining the components of the intervention prior to
implementing the intervention. Although the teacher wanted the intervention implemented
immediately, it is important to collect baseline data, define criteria, and review the essential
components of the intervention. These crucial parts were completed as part of this intervention
and this helped to demonstrate the true effectiveness of the intervention on the student’s
behavior.
This case also provided me skills in implementing class-wide strategies as Tier 2
interventions. Interventions can be used in the classroom to target the behaviors of specific
students. I also further refined my problem-solving and collaborating skills. By adhering to my
model of practice I demonstrated skills that supported my principles of being a good scientist-
practitioner, a child-advocate, demonstrated leadership and initiative, and focused on ecological
and behavioral interventions. As a scientist practitioner, I utilized research based strategies and
progress monitored data. By adhering to my model of practice and emphasizing the importance
of making data-based decisions, the classroom teacher also learned the importance of collecting
and reviewing data. She applied these skills to monitor other variables in her classroom, such as
progress monitoring academic skills. This further supports the high social validity of the intern’s
support in the classroom. As a child advocate, I monitored the student’s progress and used the
data to make decisions. I also worked with the teacher to increase her positive behavioral
strategies to manage behavior. The intervention was ecological and behavioral based because
observations led to a concern in the learning environment about the frequency of negative
Smits, A., 151
interactions and about the concern of the students undesired behaviors. The intervention was
developed to target and change the frequency of the behaviors and increase the frequency of
positive behaviors.
This case allowed me to apply the skills I learned through my training and utilize them to
implement a Tier 2 intervention. My decisions were based on my model of practice and the
experiences I had helped in further refining my skills to be a more successful practitioner. I also
further refined my skills in successfully implementing interventions and the components of
strong interventions while balancing other cases and work responsibilities. I will utilize this
experience for further implementations of this Tier 2 behavioral intervention to increase positive
behaviors of students.
Smits, A., 152
References
Mayer, G. R. (1995). Preventing antisocial behavior in the schools. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 28, 467– 478.
Davis, P.K., & Blankenship, C.J. (1996). Group-oriented contingencies: Applications for
community rehabilitation programs. Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment
Bulletin, 29, 114–118.
Gettinger, M., & Stoiber, K. (2007). Applying a Response-to-Intervention Model for Early
Literacy Development in Low-Income Children. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 27(4), 198-213. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Gunter, P. L., & Coutinho, M. J. (1997). Negative reinforcement in classrooms: What we’re
beginning to learn. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20, 249–264.
Kohler, F.W., Strain, P.S., Maretsky, S., & DeCesare, L. (1990). Promoting positive and
supportive interactions between preschoolers: An analysis of group-oriented
contingencies. Journal of Early Intervention, 14, 327–341.
Litow, L., & Pumroy, D.K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies.
Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 8, 341–347.
McKerchar, P. M., & Thompson, R. H. (2004). A descriptive analysis of potential reinforcement
contingencies in the preschool classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37,
431–444.
Smits, A., 153
Shores, R. E., Gunter, P. L., & Jack, S. L. (1993). Classroom management strategies: Are they
setting events for coercion? Behavioral Disorders, 18, 92–102.
Swiezy, N.B., Matson, J.L., & Box, P. (1992). The good behavior game: A token reinforcement
system for preschoolers. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 14, 21–32.
Thomas, D. A., Nielsen, L. J., Kuypers, D. S., & Becker, W. C. (1968). Social reinforcement and
remedial instruction in the elimination of a classroom behavior problem. Journal of
Special Education, 2, 291–302.
Trussel, R.P. (2008). Classroom universals to prevent problem behaviors. Intervention in School
and Clinic, 43, 179-185.
Smits, A., 154
Appendix A. Observation code.
MRS. WHITE'S CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR OBSERVATION CODE
Date:__________ Time/Activity: _________________ Number of Students Present:_______
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
Teacher Variables
Positive Interaction (behavior)
Negative Interaction(behavior)
Target student Variables
# of students off-task
verbal disruption
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Total
Teacher Variables
Positive Interaction (behavior)
Negative Interaction(behavior)
Target Student Variables
# of students off-task
verbal disruption
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total
Teacher Variables
Positive Interaction (behavior)
Negative Interaction(behavior)
Target Student Variables
# of students off-task
verbal disruption
Smits, A., 155
Appendix B. Classroom rules.
Our Kindergarten Classroom Rules
1. I will follow directions a. I will stand appropriately in line.
b. I will raise my hand and wait to be called on.
c. I will sit appropriately in my seat or on the carpet.
d. I will keep my hands to myself.
2. I will always give my best effort a. I will complete my work.
b. I will try hard.
c. I will ask for help if I do not understand something
d. I will participate during all class activities.
3. I will be respectful a. I will listen to the teacher.
b. I will share with others.
c. I will listen to my friends when they are speaking.
d. I will be nice to all my classroom friends.
Smits, A., 156
Appendix C. Mystery Motivator Materials.
Introducing Mystery Motivator the first time:
• Say, “We are going to start a new class wide game, called MYSTERY MOTIVATOR!”
• Ask them if they know what a motivator is, and then explain what it is
-everyone’s name is in this jar/envelope
-explain that you will draw one name out and that person will be the mystery
motivator, but no one will know who it is
-tell them when the mystery motivator is revealed and that person still has a green
card, then the entire class earns a point. Once the class has earned 10 points, then we
get a classwide reward.
• Go over the rules to keeping a green card.
-demonstrate how it will be done and explain that they will do it 3 times
throughout the day
-explain that once you have been the mystery motivator your name still goes back
in with all of the other names so you could be chosen again
Smits, A., 157
Mystery Motivator Script
-Pick a student’s name out of the jar to be the mystery motivator and place the name in the
mystery motivator envelope
-Remind the students that if they are the mystery motivator and they have a green card when it is
revealed then they will earn a point towards the class reward
-Go over the rules of keeping a green card
-Show the class how many points they currently have
-Use the mystery motivator envelope as a visual cue to remind students to have good behavior
throughout the day
-Have rules posted for how to behave and keep a green card
-At the specified time of the day, reveal the mystery motivator. If the student still has a green
card, praise them and have them mark a point on the class chart. If the student did not display
good behavior, then go over ways to earn a green card next time.
-Return all students cards to green, but make note of any students who earned a yellow or red
card.
-Pick another student’s name and place it in the envelope and repeat
*When the class has earned 10 points they get the reward, this can be modified
when you feel the class has achieved this easily
Smits, A., 158
Mystery Motivator Points
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!REWARD!
Smits, A., 159
Appendix D. Essential components of intervention.
Essential Components of the Intevention
1. Classroom rules should be reviewed with the students, model, and posted
2. For the classwide intervention, explain the specific criteria for having a card flipped
3. If a student does not follow one of the classroom rules, they are required to flip their
card
4. The teacher should quietly and individually tell the student why they have to flip
their card
5. The teacher will document when a student receives a red card
6. Mystery Motivator will be used daily. There will be 2 mystery motivators per day.
7. When the students earn 10 points, the class will earn a reward.
Smits, A., 160
Appendix F. Adherence to the essential components of the intervention.
Essential Components 10/28/2010 11/15/2010 12/15/2010 1/15/2011 2/20/2010 3/5/2010
Classroom Rules are posted X X X X X X
Mystery Motivator Envelope is
visible to students X X X X X X
A student's name is in the
envelope X X X X X X
The teacher reviews class
rules/how to stay on a green card X
not
observed
not
observed X X
Teacher uses positive praise X X X X X X
Teacher refers to the mystery
motivator envelope as a reminder
for appropriate behavior
X X
Mystery Motivator is praised or
provided feedback on how to stay
on green card for next time
X X X X not
observed
not
observed
class earns point if the mystery
motivator remained on green X X X X
not
observed
not
observed
Teacher follows criteria for a
student having to flip their card X X X X X
Teacher records any students who
earn a red card X X X X X X
percent of components completed 100% 89% 70% 100% 88%% 88%
Smits, A., 161
Tier 3: Utilizing a Response to Intervention Model to Determine Eligibility for Special
Education Services for a Kindergartener with Aggressive Behaviors
A referral for a kindergarten student, David, was made by his mother, Ms. Martin, to
complete an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education services due to his
aggressive and unsafe behaviors. The team met with Ms. Martin and discussed the school’s
Response to Intervention (RtI) model, and collaboratively agreed to implement interventions to
target David’s undesired behaviors. The general education teacher implemented Tier 2
interventions within the classroom before making a referral to the school psychologist intern to
complete a functional behavioral assessment and implement Tier 3 interventions. Through a
teacher interview, parent interview, and observations the problem behaviors were defined and
prioritized. The target behaviors were aggressive behaviors, off-task movement throughout the
classroom (safe), and off-task movement throughout the classroom (unsafe and disruptive).
David’s unsafe and aggressive behaviors resulted from him being removed from the classroom
on multiple occasions due to the safety concerns for him and the other students. His removal
from the classroom resulted in him missing a significant amount of instructional time. The team
decided to conduct a functional behavioral assessment to identify a hypothesized function of the
behaviors. The results of the FBA were used to develop and implement interventions to try and
reduce the frequency of the undesired behaviors. The school psychologist intern worked
collaboratively with the problem-solving team to conduct an FBA, design, implement, and
progress monitor the interventions, modify the interventions, and eventually used the results of
the intervention process to make a referral and complete a multi-factored evaluation to determine
eligibility for special education services.
Every behavior a person exhibits, serves a function (Cooper, 2007). Four functions of
behavior are to obtain attention, to escape an aversive situation, to obtain tangibles, and to obtain
Smits, A., 162
sensory stimulation (Cooper, 2007). Determining the function of the problem behavior is the
first step in designing an effective intervention. Piazza et al. (1997) found that a combination of
positive (attention or tangible items) and negative reinforcement (break) for compliance reduced
problem behavior for behavior that was maintained by escape and attention or tangibles.
Utilizing a Response to Intervention (RtI) model, interventions were implemented and
intensified as an attempt to maintain David’s behaviors. The intervention components were
developed to target the hypothesized functions of the behavior. The components included a:
picture schedule with differential reinforcement, time-out, designated rest-time, more engaging
activities to maintain David’s interest, and a resource room for emotional and behavioral support.
These were all implemented throughout the intervention process.
Method
Participants
Target Student. David, a kindergarten Caucasian male student, was referred for his
unsafe and aggressive behaviors. His mother made a referral for an evaluation for special
education, upon enrollment. David had been removed from previous daycares and schools as a
result of his behaviors. Upon enrollment, at the public elementary school, the team decided to
implement interventions and follow the school’s Response to Intervention Model to address the
undesired behaviors. A request from David’s teacher was made for the assistance of the school
team to complete a functional behavior assessment and to implement Tier 3 interventions.
David’s strengths included that he was extremely intelligent and articulate.
Problem Solving Team. The school problem solving team consisted of David’s mother,
the general education teacher, intervention specialist, behavior specialist, intervention
Smits, A., 163
psychologist, school psychologist intern, and the building principal. The school psychologist
intern was responsible for assessing the student’s behavior through observations, working
collaboratively with the behavior specialist to complete the functional behavior assessment,
develop and implement interventions, adherence checks, making modifications and changes to
the interventions, communicating frequently with the school team members and the parents,
analyzing data, leading problem solving meetings, and completing the multi-factored evaluation.
The teachers were responsible for implementing the intervention, providing feedback, progress
monitoring the frequency of the behaviors and amount of missed instructional time, providing
information regarding the student’s progress, and attending and collaborating at team meetings.
The other team members were responsible for providing ideas for interventions, helping in data
analysis, and providing information to complete the functional behavioral assessment.
Setting
The intervention process occurred at a public elementary school in the Greater Cincinnati
Area. Within the school, the intervention occurred in the kindergarten classroom, an office
designated as a time-out space, and the final phase of the intervention process occurred in a
resource classroom for emotional and behavior support. David’s school day was a half-day
kindergarten program, which he attended Monday through Friday, from 1-3:30.
Functional Behavior Assessment
Teacher Interview. Joe Smith, the primary kindergarten teacher of David was
interviewed on 10/8 using the Functional Assessment Checklist for Staff (FACTS) as a guide
(Appendix A). Mr. Smith summarized David’s behaviors in the classroom. He reported that
David was average or slightly above average in academics but his aggressive and disruptive
Smits, A., 164
behaviors were frequent and unmanageable. The school-day began with table work, followed by
circle time, small group, and then math. David’s behaviors were described as unsafe and
harmful to other students. Mr. Smith made several phone calls to other student’s parents to
inform them that David had hit or kicked them. Mr. Smith recorded the episodes and his data
revealed that the end of the day is typically worse. He reported that David typically moves
throughout the classroom during circle time but the aggressive behaviors typically occurred later
in the afternoon, during or after small group time (2-2:30). The teachers could not identify any
specific task the behaviors occurred. The teachers had observed David displaying inappropriate
behavior such as moving throughout the classroom but then coming back to the expected activity
and paying attention when not prompted to do so. A time of the day the behavior typically did
not occur was morning circle time which includes a lot of movement, is very fast-paced and a
story is read. David has displayed appropriate behaviors in all settings and has displayed
appropriate behaviors with peers during activities in which he is engaged. When David is asked
to stop the undesired behavior his behavior escalates into aggression towards adults and peers
and non-compliance (laying on the floor, refusing to stand up, running away from the
supervising adult). Mr. Smith reported that he tried to ignore behaviors that aren’t harmful and
this typically results in more disruptive behaviors.
Mr. Smith reported that David enjoys the smart board, computers, cops, playing games
and having stories read to him. Some of the things Mr. Smith attempted were providing praise
for good behaviors, giving him a seat at the back of the carpet where he has more room to move,
re-directing him, providing a reinforcement for not displaying inappropriate behaviors, and
ignoring behaviors that aren’t harmful.
Smits, A., 165
Parent Interview. A parent interview with David’s mom, Mrs. Martin, was also
completed. She described David as a very intelligent boy that loves to read and loves police
officers. She said he was an only child that didn’t interact with many other kids. She also
revealed that David had been asked to leave his previous school, which was a private school.
She also said that David had exhibited behavior problems since he was 2 and was removed from
several day cares. She commented that if David doesn’t get what he wants he is likely to show
aggressive behaviors. The parent interview did not provide any indications of developmental
delays or medical concerns. The interview revealed that David was diagnosed with disruptive
behavior disorder but was not taking any medication. Through the parent interview, no
environmental factors could be identified as a factor for David’s behaviors.
Records Review. David’s records indicated that he had attended a private school prior to
enrollment at the current school. The records included notes which said David had been enrolled
in the previous school from August 18-September 20 and had been suspended 6 days and
removed from the classroom every day. His records also indicated he had been removed from
several day cares. David had previously been evaluated by a comprehensive care center and the
results of the evaluation recommended that David be put in a behavioral support unit. The
enrollment papers provided information that David was an only child and lived with his mom
and dad.
Target Variables
Through a parent and teacher interview, assessment of David’s behaviors through
observations, and collaboration among the team, the target variables were identified and defined.
The teacher and parent referrals revealed concern regarding the frequency of David’s unsafe
Smits, A., 166
behaviors. The unsafe behaviors were prioritized as the most concerning due to the safety risk
for David and other students. The school psychologist intern’s observations in the classroom
revealed that safe but off-task movement throughout the classroom, typically preceded the more
unsafe behaviors. Therefore the team identified three target variables to complete the functional
behavioral assessment. The target behaviors were identified as off-task movement (safe), off-
task movement (unsafe and disruptive), and aggressive behaviors.
-off-task movement (safe) was defined as: the student moves throughout the classroom by
walking around or crawling under the tables when he is expected to be stationary on the carpet,
in a chair, or at a table participating in the group or independent activity.
-Off-task movement (unsafe) was defined as: the student moves throughout the classroom in an
unsafe manner by climbing and standing on objects (table, chairs), running across tables,
jumping off of tables, walking while peers are sitting where he could step or fall on them, or
throwing objects when it is not expected, that could hit or harm someone.
-Aggressive behaviors were defined as: the student is harmful and unsafe towards other peers
and adults by making intentional, undesirable physical contact with them (hitting, kicking,
spitting, or scratching). The behaviors are considered intentional if the behavior occurs during a
time where he is expected to have his hands and his feet stationary or if he does not provide an
apology after he makes undesirable physical contact.
Reward preference survey. The school psychologist intern utilized the Dunn-Rankin
Reward Preference Inventory (Appendix B) to help determine David’s preferences and things
that are reinforcing to him. The results of the survey indicated that David preferred adult
attention and tangibles, specifically certain types of food.
Smits, A., 167
Observations. Multiple informal observations and observations using narrative real time were
conducted by members of the problem solving team over many weeks. Direct observations were also
completed by several members of the problem solving team. The functional assessment observation
form (Appendix C) was used to determine the frequency of behaviors and antecedents and
consequences. Through collaboration the following patterns of behavior were identified based on the
data collected through the observations.
Patterns of Behavior
1. David’s behaviors begin with moving throughout the classroom and being off-task (not
listening to adult requests, saying off-topic comments). These behaviors are typically ignored
and the behaviors escalate into more disruptive aggressive behaviors.
2. The aggressive behaviors tend to occur later in the day, around 2-2:30
3. David displays appropriate behaviors when he is very engaged in the activity he is expected to
be doing. He displays appropriate behaviors with peers on the playground or when
participating in an activity with them he enjoys.
4. David is more likely to remain engaged in a one-on-one activity
5. If David becomes frustrated or is unable to complete a task to meet his set expectations, then he
exhibits unsafe behaviors.
6. The behaviors escalate and result in David being removed from the classroom where he is
taken to a time-out room with adult support which consequently gives him individual adult
attention.
Setting Events: At times, David demonstrates a much lower tolerance for classroom activities than at
other times. During these times, even when presented with activities previously enjoyed (and with
Smits, A., 168
activities that have not been found to be overly frustrating), David still exhibits problem behaviors.
The team has hypothesized that at these times, unsafe and aggressive behaviors occur as a result of a
setting event that occurs prior to coming to school (he hasn’t eaten enough lunch, he did not sleep
well, etc.).
Hypothesized Function of the Behaviors
Based on the data collected from the FBA, David’s behaviors were hypothesized to serve
different functions, which are summarized below.
1. Function One: Sensory: Off-task movement (safe)- When David loses interest or is not
engaged in an activity he begins to display safe but off-task movement throughout the
classroom. If the safe movement is ignored or he is told no, his behaviors escalate into more
unsafe and aggressive behaviors.
2. Function Two: Communication of Frustration: David exhibits aggressive behaviors when
he is unable to complete a task to meet his expectation or makes a mistake. (i.e. unable
to draw a letter perfectly, cuts outside of the line) He also exhibits these behaviors when
he is frustrated that he is not getting his way or what he wants.
3. Function Three: Unsafe Movement- to obtain adult attention: When David’s disruptive
(safe) behaviors are ignored they escalate into more severe behaviors requiring him to be
removed from the room and he obtains individual adult attention.
The competing behavior pathway form (Appendix B) was used to help with generating
strategies to reduce David’s problem behaviors. The purpose of using the competing behavior
pathway is to focus on the hypothesis of the function of the behavior, identify alternative desired
behaviors, and to determine strategies for making the problem behavior ineffective, inefficient,
or irrelevant (Crone, Horner, 2003).
Smits, A., 169
Goal Setting
Phase 1-3 (General Education Setting): The unsafe and aggressive behaviors were prioritized
due to the safety concern for David, the other students, and the adults interacting with him. The
desired goal was to have the frequency of unsafe behaviors decrease to zero as soon as possible
and be maintained for 10 or more days. In addition, the teacher wanted David to remain in the
classroom and have the frequency of removal from the classroom decrease to zero and increase
his academic engaged time as soon as possible. In October, David was removed from the
classroom 55% of the days. In October, a goal was set to decrease this to 20% of the days for a
month, with the anticipation that this would quickly be reached and a new goal could be set. The
team decided to meet every 4 weeks to analyze the progress. Members of the team collaborated
frequently to discuss observations, patterns of the behavior, and progress. David demonstrated
some success with achieving his goal on various days; however, he was inconsistent and the
frequency of zero could not be maintained. Furthermore, despite classroom based interventions,
David continued to have to be removed from the classroom which resulted in a significant
amount of instructional time being missed. Another intervention was implemented at the
beginning of January 2011 where David spent his school day in a resource room for emotional,
behavioral, and academic support. When the intervention changed, the goal was also modified.
Phase 4 (Resource Room): The desired goal was for David to earn time back into the general
education classroom. He earned time back into the classroom when he achieved his goal of
earning 65% or higher on his daily points sheet for 8 consecutive days. This goal was based on
the set procedures for students who receive behavioral support from the resource room.
Smits, A., 170
Decision Rules
Decision rules were set by the problem solving team to monitor the effectiveness of the
interventions. The team decided the intervention would be modified or intensified if the
following occurred:
Phase 1-3:
1. There are 5 consecutive points above the aim-line for missed academic time
2. The monthly percentage of days removed from the classroom did not decrease to 25% or
less.
Phase 4:
1. Due to the intensity, individualized instruction and support from the resource room with 2
teachers, the team decided a referral for a multi-factored evaluation would be completed
if after a month of implementation, David had not successfully earned time back into the
general education room. This would be based on if he met his goal of earning 65 points
or more for 8 consecutive days.
Accountability Plan
The results of the FBA yielded 3 functional hypotheses for the different behaviors which
resulted in David being removed from the classroom and missing out on instructional time. A
multi-element design was used to determine the effectiveness of each of the intervention phases.
This design allows for the different phases of the intervention to be compared. This design
would allow the team to determine the level of support needed to maintain David’s behaviors.
Smits, A., 171
Intervention Procedures
Based on the developed functional hypotheses from the results of the functional behavior
assessment and the strategies identified through the competing behavior pathway chart an
intervention was developed to target David’s unsafe and aggressive behaviors. The components
of the intervention were research based and the intervention was developed collaboratively with
the problem-solving team. The first phase of the intervention was implemented on 10/14/2010.
A-B-C picture schedule. A picture schedule with a reward contingent on appropriate
behavior was developed. A picture schedule provides visual prompts and makes expectations
clear about what is to be completed (Schopler et al., 1995).. David did not have a history of
being in a structured academic setting and might have been unclear about classroom
expectations. Also his undesired behaviors resulted in him having control to access activities he
found more reinforcing. Differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO) is a procedure in
which reinforcement is delivered contingent on the absence of a target behavior. In whole-
interval DRO (wDRO), a reinforcer is given if the target behavior has been absent throughout the
entire interval (e.g., Repp, Barton, & Brulle, 1983).
The picture schedule was made using a file folder with pictures of the classroom
activities and possible rewards which were determined from the results of the Dunn-Rankin
reward preference survey. The front of the file had 3 spaces with Velcro. David followed the
classroom schedule and put 2 activities under A and B, and then chose a reward and put it under
C. Utilizing the principles of differential reinforcement for other behaviors (DRO), David was
expected to remain safe during 2 class activities (A and B) before earning a reward (C). This
intervention utilized a fixed-time schedule of reinforcement. David earned reinforcement after
Smits, A., 172
he successfully demonstrated safe behaviors for 2 classroom activities. The rewards included a
snack, read a book of choice, or 15 minutes of recess or library.
Time-Out with specific procedures. The time-out procedure has been defined in
several ways in the literature. Cooper,Heron, and Heward (2007) defined time-outas “the
withdrawal of the opportunity to earn positive reinforcement or the loss of access to positive
reinforcement for a specified time, contingent on the occurrence of a behavior” In addition, if
implemented correctly, time-out has the potential of rapidly suppressing disruptive behavior and
generalization across settings (Jenson & Reavis). A meta-analysis study determined that time-out
procedures are most often used with verbal, aggressive, and off-task behaviors. Additionally the
study indicated that individual characteristics of the child such as being male and below the age
of 7 years old may result in the largest reductions of disruptive behavior using time-out
procedures (Vegas, Jenson, & Kircher, 2007). A common treatment for escape-maintained
behavior is escape extinction, in which the contingency between problem behavior and the
negatively reinforcing consequence is removed by not providing or preventing escape from
demands when problem behavior occurs (Iwata, Pace, Cowdery, & Miltenberger, 1994; Iwata,
Pace, Kalsher, Cowdery, & Cataldo, 1990). Procedurally, escape extinction often entails the
continued presentation of prompting (e.g., instructions, modeling, physical guidance; Iwata et al.,
1990).
When David engaged in disruptive behaviors he was removed from the classroom and
placed in a designated time-out space with set procedures (Appendix D). This space had all
materials removed that could be rewarding to David in any way. While in the time-out room he
was expected to calm down, complete a worksheet, and read the social story (Appendix E). In
class, David had a Picture Schedule Folder included all daily activities.
Smits, A., 173
Designated Rest Time. David was given time when he first arrived at school to rest and
transition because of the hypothesized function of his behavior being a setting event prior to
coming to school (being tired). Hoch, McComas, Thompson, and Paone (2002) found that
providing breaks and access to preferred activities was effective in promoting compliance and
reducing problem behavior. David was given the opportunity to take a break in the nurse’s
office from 12:50-1:10. The picture schedule and rewards continued in the classroom because
David demonstrated 9 consecutive days of success with this in place. If David had to be
removed from the classroom he was taken to the school psychologist’s office where there were
less dangerous objects. Specific procedures were developed by the team and posted in the time-
out room and were followed by all staff who worked with David.
Additional Adult Support in Classroom. David was observed to start moving
throughout the classroom when he lost interest or was off-task during classroom activity. This
behavior was observed to precede his more aggressive behaviors. As a preventative approach,
the team decided to add additional adult support to Mr. Smith’s room to assist David with
transitioning from the bus to the classroom. The adult was also available to work one-on-one
and do higher level activities with David if he started displaying the off-task behaviors.
Resource room for behavioral and emotional support. The team collaboratively
decided to use the support of the resource room for students with emotional disturbance. David
would spend his afternoons with the two ED unit teachers in the resource room for behavioral
and emotional support. Mr. Smith provided the daily lesson plans for the teachers to use and
they often modified these to a higher level to meet David’s needs. David earned points each day
for his target behaviors. A goal was set for him to achieve 65% of points for 8 consecutive days
Smits, A., 174
before earning time in Mr. Smith’s classroom. In addition to the academic component, the
teachers also implemented strategies to teach David appropriate behaviors and responses.
Intervention Adherence
Adherence to the components of the intervention was documented with the use of
checklists modified from the scripts and essential components of the interventions. Adherence to
the interventions was essential in the case because the team had to make frequent decisions about
intensifying the intervention. If the intervention hadn’t been implemented as intended, the team
couldn’t be certain the intervention wasn’t effective.
Picture Schedule: Adherence to implementing the intervention was documented daily by Mr.
Smith. The picture schedule was used 100% of the days. The school psychologist intern
monitored adherence to the essential components by utilizing a checklist modified from the
intervention script. Adherence to the essential components was 100% on all observations.
Time-Out: Adherence to the time-out procedures was documented by the team checking off the
procedures when they were in the room with David. Two adults were always in the time-out
room with David, so adherence was also able to be monitored informally. Adherence to the
time-out procedures is summarized in Appendix B. The components were implemented as
intended with the exception of a couple days when school ended and Mrs. Martin was called to
pick him up before he could complete all of the procedures.
Rest-Time: Adherence was monitored by the nurse documenting the times David was in the
nurse’s office.
Smits, A., 175
Additional adult support: Adherence was monitored by documenting the days additional adult
support was in the room. The adult was present 100% of the days. The school psychologist
intern utilized a checklist (Appendix A) for adherence on one day. Adherence was 100% to the
essential components.
Behavioral/Emotional Resource Room: Adherence was determined through the teacher’s daily
reports and the points sheets. Donny remained in the resource room and did not earn time back
in the general education classroom because he was unsuccessful in achieving his goal.
Results
Social Validity
A formal social validity assessment was not completed; however, the social validity was
determined to be high. This intervention process followed and adhered to the core components
of RtI and the team demonstrated exceptional collaboration to problem-solve. The district
special education supervisor commented on the amount of support and determination being
provided to this student. Mrs. Martin frequently expressed that the school was going way above
and beyond any other school David had attended. She further commented that she, “really
appreciated everything the school was doing and that she felt everyone treated David like a little
boy, not as a behavior problem.” The positive feedback received from many key stakeholders
indicates that the interventions and frequent problem-solving to try and reduce David’s
behaviors, had high social validity.
Smits, A., 176
Daily Academic Missed Time
The data in Figure 1 demonstrates the amount of academic time missed each day
throughout each intervention phase.
Figure 1. David’s Daily Missed Academic Time.
The data for David’s missed academic time indicates that although he has a decreasing
trend, he was unable to reach the goal consistently. The data demonstrates a pattern that when a
new intervention was implemented he demonstrated some success, but was unable to sustain this
success. Student has been most successful with support in the resource room, where he has
individual support from 2 adults.
The data in table 1 includes the intervention phases and the average academic time
missed and the percentage of days removed from class for each of the phases. This data was
Smits, A., 177
used to determine the effectiveness of each phase of the intervention to see the level of support
David needs to be successful in maintaining his behaviors.
Table 2. Data to determine effectiveness of each intervention phase.
Intervention
phase
Date
Started
Average
Academic
Time Missed
per day
(minutes)
Percent of days
removed from
class
1 10/14/2010 32 45%
2 11/1/2010 46 67%
3 11/15/2010 29.5 45%
4 1/3/2010 27 (approx.)
completely
removed 100%
due to being in
resource room
The academic missed time average was the lowest during the phase with the additional
adult support and also when David was receiving individualized instruction in the resource room.
The percentage of days David was removed from class was the same for intervention phases 1
and 3. It was the highest when the rest time was added.
Intervention 1, Phase 1. With the picture schedule and time-out, David had 9 consecutive safe
days; however, difficulty emerged on 10/26 and escalated through the week. The average
amount of missed academic time prior to the intervention was 57.5 (SD=44.8) minutes. The
average amount of academic time missed each day after this intervention was implemented
decreased to 31.8 (SD=39.8) minutes. The effect size was 0.29 and the PND was 92%. During
baseline, David was removed 86% of the days. After the intervention, David was removed from
Smits, A., 178
the classroom to the time-out room 45% of the days. Although the intervention demonstrated
some success, David was unable to maintain the behavior for 10 consecutive days, so the
intervention was intensified.
Phase 2: The team collaborated and intensified the intervention by adding a designated rest time.
During this intervention phase David only had 2 successful days with zero missed academic
time. The average amount of academic time missed each day during this period increased to 46
(SD=52.8) minutes/day. The effect size was 0.14 and the PND was 45%. David had to be
removed from the class 67% of the days during this phase. The added rest time resulted in an
increase in the number of days David was removed, so the team determined it was ineffective
and removed the rest time.
Phase 3: The intervention was further intensified to add additional adult support into his
classroom. David had 8 successful days of zero missed academic time during the first 10 days
with additional adult support. On the two days when he was unsuccessful, he had to be removed
from the classroom. After 10 days of implementation, his behavior began to escalate and he was
removed from the classroom for 45% of the total days during this intervention period. The
additional adult support was available and in the classroom 100% of the days. The average
amount of academic time missed during this period was 29.5 (SD=32.2) minutes, which was a
decrease. The effect size was 0.18. David’s aggressive and unsafe behaviors, still required him
to be removed from the classroom. Because aggressive and unsafe behaviors were not
decreasing enough to help him obtain the goal, the team collaborated and the intervention was
changed to a very intense and individualized intervention.
Smits, A., 179
Intervention 2: David began receiving instruction in the resource room for students identified
with emotional disturbance. There was some inconsistency with the data collection regarding
David’s missed academic time due to the nature of the resource room but the approximate
average amount of missed academic time per day in the resource room was approximately 27
minutes. The team began monitoring his daily points earned and time earned back in the
classroom. During this period, David achieved the goal, of 65% or more, on 27% of the days.
He did not achieve his goal to earn time back in the general education classroom. The effect size
could not be determined because of the inconsistency with documenting missed academic time
and because baseline data was not collected for daily points earned. The data for his average
points earned is summarized in Figure 1.
A visual analysis of the graph indicates a flat trend line. This indicates
David’s behaviors were not increasing to allow him to consistently achieve his goal.
The average amount of points earned for the specific behaviors is summarized in
Table 1.
Table 1. Average points earned for behaviors.
Smits, A., 180
Table 1. Resource Room Average Points for Jan. 3-Feb. 7, 2010
Behavior Average Points Earned
follow directions 62%
stay safe in space 61%
stay on task 68%
follow picture schedule 56%
use words to express frustration 59%
finish a task appropriately 53%
interact appropriately with peers 69%
interact appropriately with staff 66%
The percentages indicate that David demonstrated the most difficulty with finishing a
task appropriately, following his picture schedule, and using words to express frustration.
Discussion
The results indicate that David was most successful in the resource room, but that the
interventions were not effective in reducing and maintaining his aggressive behaviors to zero.
David demonstrated some success with the interventions when they were first implemented;
however, he was unable to sustain this success to achieve a rate of behavior that is similar to his
peers. His behaviors were preventing him from receiving instruction in the general education
classroom. After a month of the very intense, individualized and specialized support David
continued to demonstrate behaviors that prevented him from earning time back in the general
education classroom. The level of supports being provided to David were more intensive then
Smits, A., 181
children identified with a disability. The resource room was able to increase David’s academic
time; however, he was unable to earn time back in the classroom.
The team utilized a Response to Intervention model to implement interventions, progress
monitor, analyze data, and continued intensifying supports based on the data. Despite the intense
intervention support David’s behaviors were still unable to be maintained. The team decided to
complete a multi-factored evaluation to determine if David met the criteria for a disability that
was greatly impacting his academics. The disabilities the team considered were Other Health
Impairment and Emotional Disturbance. The referral for the evaluation was completed on 2/2
and parent consent was received on 2/7.
The school psychologist intern completed the multi-factored evaluation (Appendix D)
and the team met on 3/23 to determine eligibility. The results of the evaluation were discussed
by the team and the team determined that David met the criteria for Emotional Disturbance.
Additionally the team determined that his identified disability was significantly impacting his
ability to learn in the general education setting. David would need the support of special
education services in order to progress in the curriculum.
After the evaluation was complete, the team continued to collaborate to determine
David’s least restrictive environment. The team wanted to keep David at the school; however, it
was important to try and integrate him back into the classroom. The team developed an
intervention plan for re-implementing him into the classroom. This plan included David
spending some time in a first grade classroom, kindergarten classroom, and resource room with
adult support. The plan was to begin fading the adult support if he was successful. David
demonstrated some successful days in the general education classroom, but has recently been
Smits, A., 182
struggling. The team will meet again to determine David’s least restrictive environment and how
to best meet his needs.
This case was comprehensive in utilizing my repertoire of knowledge and skills. I gained
a tremendous amount of experience and competence in adhering to the core components of RtI.
This case demonstrated following a Response to Intervention model, problem-solving and
making data-based decisions to lead to a special education eligibility determination.
Furthermore, I served as the case-manager upon enrollment through the intervention process and
eventually completed the multi-factored evaluation.
The limitations to this case were that data should have been collected on the specific
target behaviors to determine if the intervention was effective in reducing any of them. The
amount of missed instructional time provided important information; however, it would have
been beneficial to see how the frequency of each behavior changed with each intervention phase.
Additionally, when David began in the resource room there was a lack of consistency with
collecting data. The team was able to determine the effectiveness based on the reduction of the
times he had to be removed to the time out room and by using the daily points; however, an exact
comparison of the intervention phases could not be done because the missed academic time was
an approximation based on the days the data was collected. The team should have utilized the
points charts that was utilized in the resource room, before the intervention began to collect
baseline data. Then the two phases could have had a more reliable comparison.
The experiences and knowledge I gained from this case will be utilized in many aspects
of my professional career. I refined and further developed my skills with completing functional
behavior assessments and competing behavior pathways to determine interventions to implement
Smits, A., 183
to match the hypothesis. I also further developed my collaboration skills by communicating very
frequently with the parents and problem-solving team. This case allowed me to utilize and
further refine all principles of my model of practice. I was a child-advocate by being persistent
and working diligently with the problem-solving team to try and meet the needs of David.
Additionally, I demonstrated child-advocacy be continuing to collaborate with the team and
develop intervention to determine the least restrictive environment. I utilized my scientist-
practitioner skills by implementing research based interventions matched to the hypothesized
function of the behavior and collecting and analyzing data. I used the data in collaboration with
the team to make many data-based decisions. Decision rules were also utilized to determine with
the intervention should be intensified or changed. I demonstrated and further refined taking a
leadership and initiative role by communicating with the large problem-solving team and
facilitating all of the team meetings.
Smits, A., 184
References
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., &. Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied Behavior Analysis (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Crone, D. A., & Horner, R. H. (2003). Building Positive Behavior Supports Systems in Schools:
Functional Behavioral Assessments. New York: The Guilford Press.
Mallot, R.W. (2008). Principles of behavior, sixth edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education Inc.
Shinn, M.R, Walker, H.M., Stonger, G (Eds.) (2002). Interventions for Academic and Behavior
Problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches. Washington DC: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Vegas, Jenson, & Kircher, (2007). A Single-Subject Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Time-
Out in Reducing Disruptive Classroom Behavior.
Smits, A., 185
Appendix A. Functional assessment checklist for staff (FACTS).
Smits, A., 186
Smits, A., 187
Appendix B. Reward preference survey.
DUNN-RANKIN REWARD PREFERENCE INVENTORY (MODIFIED FROM ORIGINAL)
CHECK WHICH ONE OF EACH PAIR YOU LIKE BETTER
________ The teacher writes “100” on your paper
________ You are the first to finish your work.
________ A piece of candy.
________ Other students ask you to be on their team.
________ Extra time playing a game of choice.
________ Teacher writes “100” on your paper.
________ Other students ask you to be on their team.
________ Be the first to finish your work.
________ Extra time playing a game of choice.
________ A piece of candy.
________ Teacher writes “100” on your paper.
________ Other students ask you to be on their team.
________ Be the first to finish your work.
________ Extra time doing an activity of choice.
________ A piece of candy.
________ Teacher writes “100” on your paper.
________ Other students ask you to be on their team.
________ Extra time doing an activity of choice.
________ A piece of candy.
________ Be the first to finish your work.
________ Teacher writes “A” on your paper.
________ Be the only one who can answer a question.
________ A candy bar
________ Friends ask you to sit with them
________ Be free to play on the computer.
________ Teacher writes “A” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to sit with them.
________ Be the only one who can answer a question.
________ Be free to play on the computer.
________ A candy bar.
________ Teacher writes “A” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to sit with them.
________ Be the only one who can answer a question.
________ Be free to play on the computer.
________ A candy bar.
________ Teacher writes “A” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to sit with them.
________ Be free to play a game of choice.
________ Be the only one who can answer a question.
________ A candy bar.
________ Teacher writes “Perfect” on your paper
Smits, A., 188
________ Have only your paper shown to the class.
________ A soft drink.
________ Classmates ask you to be the class leader.
________ Be free to play a game of choice.
________ Teacher writes “Perfect” on your paper.
________ Classmates ask you to be the class leader.
________ Have only your paper shown to the class.
________ Be free to play a game of choice.
________ A soft drink.
________ Teacher writes “Perfect” on your paper.
________ Classmates ask you to be the class leader.
________ Have only your paper shown to the class.
________ Be free to play a game of choice.
________ A soft drink.
________ Teacher writes “Perfect” on your paper.
________ Classmates ask you to be the class leader.
________ Be free to play a game of choice.
________ Have only your paper shown to the class.
________ A candy bar.
________ Teacher writes “Excellent” on your paper.
________ Have your paper put on the bulletin board.
________ A soft drink.
________ Friends ask you to work with them.
________ Be free to work on something you like.
________ Teacher writes “Excellent” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to work with them.
________ Have your paper put on the bulletin board.
________ Be free to work on something you like.
________ A soft drink.
________ Teacher writes “Excellent” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to work with them.
________ Have your paper put on the bulletin board.
________ Be free to work on something you like.
________ A soft drink.
________ Teacher writes “Excellent” on your paper.
________ Friends ask you to work with them.
________ Be free to work on something you like.
________ Have your paper put on the bulletin board.
________ A soft drink.
FINISHED!
Smits, A., 189
Appendix C. Competing behavior pathway forms.
Behavior: Off-task (safe) movement
Setting Event
-David is above his
peers in academics
-David gets bored
with repetitive
questions during
circle time that he was
able to answer on the
first try
-David is a
kindergartner and
does not have a
history of how to
behave in structured
academic settings
Intervention
strategies:
-Mr. Jones calls on
David to answer
higher level questions
on a variable schedule
-A classroom assistant
works individually
with David on Higher
level activities at his
instructional level to
maintain his interest
-A-B-C picture
schedule
Situation in which
problems occur
Circle time, whole
group instruction
Expected (desired)
behavior:
David will remain in
his seat where he is
expected to be
Consequences if
happens:
Praise, positive adult
attention
Access to desired
reinforcement
Antecedent
David loses interest in
an activity because
the activity is
repetitive and he
already knows what is
being taught
Problem behavior
Off-task movement Consequences of
problem:
-escapes less
stimulating
activity/access to
reinforcement
-Behavior ignored
-Adult attention
through reprimands or
redirection
Alternative behavior
David participates in
higher level academic
activities and remains
engaged and on-task
Consequences if
alternative occurred
Praise, positive adult
attention, access to
desired reinforcement
Smits, A., 190
Behavior: Unsafe Movement
Motivating
Operation
-David is not
receiving adult
attention
-David is tired or
hungry
-David has a
history of being
reinforced through
adult attention for
undesired
behaviors
-David has not
been taught
appropriate
behaviors for
structured
academic settings
Interventions:
-DRA
-picture schedule
-taught
expectations
-rest time/snacks
provided
-reinforce desired
activities with
highly preferred
activities (library,
reading books,
food)
Situation in
which problems
occur
Circle time,
independent work
time, small group
Expected
(desired)
behavior:
David will remain
in his seat where
he is expected to
be
Consequences if
happens:
Praise, positive adult
attention
Access to desired
reinforcement
Antecedent
David’s off-task
movement is
ignored
David is told no
Problem behavior
Unsafe movement Consequences of
problem:
Adult attention
through
reprimand/redirection
Removed/escape
from the classroom
Alternative
behavior
David remains in
his seat or in the
classroom where
he is expected to
be.
Consequences if
alternative occurred
Praise, positive adult
attention, access to
desired
reinforcement
Smits, A., 191
Behavior: Aggressive Behaviors
Motivating
Operation
-David becomes
frustrated when he is
unable to complete a
task to meet his
expectations or when
he is told no/his
request is denied
-David is unable to
communicate his
frustration, wants and
needs
-David is tired/hungry
Interventions:
-Social
Skills/Communication
traning
-rest time/snacks
provided
Situation in which
problems occur
Independent work-
time, during an
activity requiring him
to use his fine-motor
skills, time-out room
Expected (desired)
behavior:
David will use words
to ask for help and to
communicate his
frustration
Consequences if
happens:
Praise, positive adult
attention
Access to desired
reinforcement
-receive help and will
finish the activity
Antecedent
David makes a
mistake or does not
complete a task as he
perceives he should;
or he is told
no/doesn’t get what
he requested
Problem behavior
Aggressive behavior
Alternative behavior
David does not
become upset or uses
words to express his
frustration, to ask for
help, or to ask for a
break
Consequences of
problem:
Removed from
classroom /escape
from activity
Consequences if
alternative occurred
Praise, positive adult
attention, access to
desired reinforcement
Antecedent
intervention:
-modified activities
that are less likely to
result in him
becoming frustrated
(larger lines to cut on,
white board, etc.)
-allow choices of
activities
Behavior
intervention:
-teach problem
solving skills
-teach communication
skills
Consequence
Interventions:
-time-out room with
set procedures so he
does not escape the
task
-behavior can be
ignored in the time-
out room
Smits, A., 192
Appendix D. Time out procedures.
Procedures for Time Out in Mr. D’s Office
All items are removed from the area except for a chair for the adult and the table (turned upside
down and against the door).
• Shoes off if he’s kicking
• He may tear paper if available
• When he’s agitated, he’s told “When you’re ready you can start to follow your 3
directions”
• The directions are:
1. Sit under the mirror or the corkboard
2. Sing the Read Well Alphabet Song
3. Count to 40 (he starts, adult can join in to avoid frustration as he transitions from
decade to decade)
• Once he has completed the 3 directions, process why he ended up there:
o What were you doing that caused you to have to leave?
o Discuss safety related what he says.
o Review what will happen in class if he kicks, throws objects, hits a friend, etc.
(He says “I will have to come back here”)
• Have him put his shoes back on if they were taken off (he needs to do it).
• Hold David’s hand as you walk him back to class (if he refuses, consider if he’s ready to
go back).
• As he enters the room, he should join the activity without any announcements
• Adult checks in with Mr. Smith (either discretely at time of return to class or via email).
Smits, A., 193
Appendix E. David’s social story.
Smits, A., 194
Appendix F. Multi-factored evaluation team report to determine eligibility for special education.
CHILD’S INFORMATION: TYPE OF EVALUATION: CHILD’S NAME: Student ID NUMBER: 202734 INITIAL
EVALUATION
REEVALUATION STREET: GENDER:
male GRADE: Kindergarten
DATES CITY: Cincinnati STATE:
OH ZIP: 45245 DATE OF MEETING: 3/22
DATE OF BIRTH: 09/07/2005 DATE OF LAST ETR: DISTRICT OF RESIDENCE: West Clermont
REFERRAL DATE: 02/07
DISTRICT OF SERVICE: West Clermont Local School District
DATE PARENTS CONSENT RECEIVED: 02/09
PARENTS’/GUARDIAN INFORMATION ETR FORM STATUS NAME PART 1: INDIVIDUAL EVALUATOR’S
ASSESSMENT (Separate Assessment from each Evaluator)
STREET:
CITY: Cincinnati STATE: OH ZIP: HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: PART 2: TEAM SUMMARY CELL PHONE: EMAIL: PART 3: DOCUMENTATION FOR DETERMINING
THE EXISTENCE OF A SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY
PART 4: ELIGIBILITY PART 5: SIGNATURES
INSTRUCTIONS There are five parts to this form,i.e., Part 1,2,3,4 and 5. Parts 1,2 and 4,5 must be completed for all initial evaluations and reevaluations. Part 3 must be completed for initial evaluations if the suspected area of disability is Specific Learning Disability. Part 3 must be completed for reevaluations if the child is currently a child identified as having a specific learning disability or the team is considering a change in the child’s disability category to Specific Learning Disability. In Part 1 each member of the evaluation team will list in the “Areas of Assessment” box the area or areas that they will be assessing, i.e., vision, hearing, fine motor, gross motor, emotional behavioral or intellectual ability. The evaluator will also provide, in Part 1, the evaluation method and strategies used to conduct the assessment by checking the appropriate boxes. A detailed summary of the results of the assessment or assessments will be provided in the “Summary of Assessment Results” section. The evaluator will sign their assessment page and include his or her position title. The date on this section will be the date the evaluator completed his or her assessment. Part 2 will be completed by the team chair or district representative by gathering all team members’ assessments (Part 1) and summarizing them in the boxes provided in Part 2. The interventions summary is completed for both initial evaluations and reevaluations per the instructions found on the form and in Procedures and Guidance for Ohio Educational Agencies serving Children with Disabilities. The reason(s) for the evaluation is also completed for both initial and reevaluations. The summary of information provided by the parents of the child will include information from the referral form as well as any information provided by the parent through behavioral checklists, interviews or meetings, outside evaluations. Once all assessment information is gathered and summarized, the team will meet and review all information. The team will then describe the child’s educational needs based on the information gathered, and state the implications for instruction and progress monitoring in the appropriate text box. The team will then consider whether or not the child may have a specific learning disability based on the elements found in Part 3. If no one suspects a disability under this category, the team may skip Part 3 and move into Part 4.
Smits, A., 195
In Part 4 the team determines whether or not the child is eligible for special education and related services by addressing each of the statements found in this section. The final text box in this section is completed with the information that supports the team’s eligibility determination. In Part 5 all members of the team sign the report at the conclusion of this section. If any team member disagrees with the team’s determination, the team member must attach a written statement of disagreement to the report.
Child’s Name: Student ID NUMBER: DATE OF BIRTH:
� INDIVIDUAL EVALUATOR’S ASSESSMENT Section to be completed by each individual evaluator.
Evaluator Name:
Position: Intern School Psychologist
AREAS OF ASSESSMENT: Background Information, Academic Skills, Fine Motor Skills,
Vocational/Occupational Interests and Aptitudes Indicate the area(s) that were assessed by the evaluator in accordance with the evaluation plan.
OBSERVATIONS SCIENTIFIC, RESEARCH-BASED
INTERVENTIONS
NORM-REFERENCED ASSESSMENTS
x INTERVIEWS X CURRICULUM BASED
ASSESSMENTS
x CLASSROOM BASED ASSESSMENTS
x REVIEW OF RECORDS AND
RELEVANT TREND DATA (SCHOOL
RECORDS, WORK SAMPLES,
EDUCATIONAL HISTORY)
OTHER (Specify)
ASSESSMENT INFORMATION Provide a summary of the information obtained from the assessment results per the evaluation plan including the child’s strengths, areas of
needed baseline data.
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Background History
Student is a 5 year old boy who is described as intelligent and articulate. Student has struggled
with displaying aggressive behaviors towards adults and other students since he was in day care.
He currently lives with his mom (Mrs. M) and his dad (Mr. ). He is an only child. An interview
with Mrs. M provided information regarding Student’s background history and development.
She describes her pregnancy as normal but during labor she was not taking contractions well and
had a C-section. She said Student hit all milestones at a typical age and was always very quick
to learn. Mrs. M expressed concerns about his aggressive behaviors and obsession with being
perfect. She commented when he is frustrated he throws things.
Previous Evaluations
Smits, A., 196
Student was evaluated at North Key in Kentucky on _____. North Key is a comprehensive care
center that provides services for people needing services for mental health or intellectual
disabilities. The evaluation at North Key recommended that Student be in a specialized program
for behavior. Student was also evaluated by Child Focus in November of 2010. The results of
this evaluation provided a diagnosis of Disruptive Behavior Disorder (not otherwise specified).
Educational History
Student is currently a kindergartner enrolled in a public Elementary in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Prior to attending this school, Student attended day care, preschool, and private kindergarten.
Student attended day care from the time he was 8 weeks old until he was 2 ½ years old. He was
removed from this day care because of aggressive behaviors towards younger kids and began
attending another day care in _______ at a private school. He remained at this school and began
kindergarten there in the fall of 2010. He was in kindergarten with this school from August 17th
to September 22nd, 2010. The teacher’s reports indicate that Student was removed from his class
for aggressive behaviors towards adults and students (including hitting, scratching, and kicking).
During this time, he had 6 unexcused absences which were all due to being removed from the
classroom. On 9/22/10, Student was removed from this school due to his aggressive behaviors.
Student’s parents decided to enroll him in the public school system and he began school at ABC
Elementary on September 28th, 2010. Student has remained at this school since enrollment, but
throughout this time he has attended various daycares and had a couple of different baby-sitters.
He has consistently had the same baby-sitter since the beginning of November of 2010.
When Mrs. M enrolled Student in kindergarten she requested an evaluation for special
education services. The team at ABC Elementary met with Mrs. M, on 10/11/10, and explained
the response to intervention (RtI) model. The team collaboratively decided to not initiate the
evaluation at that time but to begin implementing interventions to determine effective strategies
to meet his needs.
Functional Behavior Assessment
The intervention team worked together to complete a functional behavior assessment (FBA) in
order to determine a hypothesis for the function of Student’s unsafe and aggressive behaviors.
The FBA was initiated on 10/8/10, but the hypothesis was revised as the team gathered more
information and conducted more observations. The results of the FBA are summarized below.
Data Sources
Classroom Observations, Student Records, Anecdotal Records, Structured Teacher Interview, Parent
Interview, Dunn-Rankin Reward Preference Inventory
Description of Behaviors
1. Aggressive behaviors- the student is harmful and unsafe towards other peers and adults by
hitting, kicking, or scratching them.
2. Movement (safe)- the student moves throughout the classroom by walking around or crawling
under the tables when he is expected to be stationary on the carpet, in a chair, or at a table
Smits, A., 197
participating in the group or independent activity.
3. Movement (unsafe and disruptive)- the student moves throughout the classroom in an unsafe
manner by climbing and standing on objects (table, chairs), running across tables, jumping off
of tables, walking while peers are sitting where he could step or fall on them, or throwing
objects that could hit or harm another student.
Reinforcement Preferences
The results of the Dunn-Rankin reward preference survey indicated that Student preferred adult
attention and tangibles (specifically certain types of food).
Patterns of Behavior
7. Student’s behaviors begin with moving throughout the classroom and being off-task (not
listening to adult requests, saying off-topic comments). These behaviors are typically ignored
and the behaviors escalate into more disruptive aggressive behaviors.
8. The aggressive behaviors tend to occur later in the day, around 2-2:30 9. Student enjoys playing games and reading stories.
10. Student displays appropriate behaviors when he is very engaged in the activity he is expected to be doing. He displays appropriate behaviors with peers on the playground or when
participating in an activity with them he enjoys.
11. Student is more likely to remain engaged in a one-on-one activity
Hypothesized Function of the Behaviors
Based on the data collected from the FBA, Student’s behaviors are hypothesized to serve different
functions, which are summarized below.
1. Function One: Sensory: When Student loses interest or is not engaged in an activity he begins
to display safe but off-task movement throughout the classroom. If the safe movement is ignored
or he is told no, his behaviors escalate into more unsafe and aggressive behaviors.
4. Function Two: Communication of Frustration: Student also exhibits unsafe and aggressive
behaviors when he is unable to complete a task to meet his expectation or makes a mistake.
(i.e. unable to draw a letter perfectly, cuts outside of the line)
Setting Events: At times, Student demonstrates a much lower tolerance for classroom activities than at
other times. During these times, even when presented with activities previously enjoyed (and with
activities that have not been found to be overly frustrating), Student still exhibits problem behaviors.
The team has hypothesized that at these times, unsafe and aggressive behaviors occur as a result of a
setting event that occurs prior to coming to school (he hasn’t eaten enough lunch, he did not sleep
well, etc.).
Educational Impact
Although Student is currently average or slightly above average in his academics, his behaviors are
leading him to miss out on core instructional time because he is not participating in the activities and
often has to be removed from the classroom. If the behaviors continue to occur he will not have full
exposure to the kindergarten curriculum and could risk falling behind in his academics.
Smits, A., 198
Intervention History
Student immediately began displaying inappropriate behaviors on his first day of school,
at ABC Elementary, on 9/28/10. His teacher’s notes indicate that he “hit a child, ran around the
room, and was on top of furniture.” The teacher implemented several behavior management
strategies within his room before requesting support from the intervention team. These strategies
included basic praise, positive reinforcement of others to redirect him, choice statements (this or
this), and if/then statements. Due to the frequency, intensity, and safety risk of Student’s
behaviors, the team decided to implement a Tier 3 intervention. The team met on 10/11/10 to
develop a Tier 3 intervention plan. The primary behaviors of concerned were identified as
aggressive behaviors towards peers and adults, unsafe movement throughout the classroom, and
verbal disruptions. The intervention summaries are included below.
Intervention 1: 10/14/10 (Tier 3)
Strategy: Time-out with social story and A-B-C picture schedule
Description: When Student engaged in disruptive behaviors he will be removed from the
classroom and placed in a designated time-out space. This space had all materials removed that
could be rewarding to Student in any way. While in the time-out room he was expected to calm
down, complete a worksheet, and read the social story. In class, Student had a Picture Schedule
Folder included all daily activities. Student was expected to remain safe during 2 class activities
(A and B) before earning a reward (C). The rewards included a snack, read a book of choice, or
15 minutes of recess or library.
Goal: For Student to remain in the classroom and reduce unsafe and aggressive behaviors to zero
as quickly as possible.
Evaluation/Results: 10/29/10- Student had 9 consecutive safe days with the strategies of this
intervention; however, difficulty emerged on 10/26/10 and escalated through the week. The
average amount of academic time missed each day after this intervention was implemented was
32 minutes. During this period, Student was removed from the classroom to the time-out room
45% of the days. The team collaborated and revised the intervention plan.
Intervention 2: 10/29/10 (Tier 3)
Strategy: Rest Time Added, Modifications to Time-Out Procedure, and A-B-C picture schedule
Description: Student was given time when he first arrived at school to rest and transition
because of the hypothesized function of his behavior being a setting event prior to coming to
school (being tired). This was in the nurse’s office from 12:50-1:10. The picture schedule and
rewards continued in the classroom because Student demonstrated 9 consecutive days of success
with this in place. If Student had to be removed from the classroom he was taken to the school
psychologist’s office where there were less dangerous objects. Specific procedures were
developed by the team and posted in the time-out room and were followed by all staff who
worked with Student.
Goal: For Student to remain in the classroom and consistently reduce his unsafe and aggressive
Smits, A., 199
behaviors to zero.
Evaluation/Results: During this intervention period Student only had 2 successful days
with no missed academic time. The average amount of academic time missed each day during
this period increased to 56 minutes/day. Student had to be removed from the class 67% of the
days.
Child Focus Services Added: 11/5/10
Strategy: Student started meeting with the child focus school-based consultant, Marisa Nyerges,
to discuss social skills, anger management strategies, etc. On 12/14/10, Student started coming
to school early on Tuesdays of each week to meet with Marisa.
Intervention 3: 11/12/10 (Tier 3)
Strategy: Additional Adult Support in Classroom, ABC picture schedule, time-out
Description: Student was observed to start moving throughout the classroom when he lost
interest or was off-task during classroom activity. This behavior was observed to precede his
more aggressive behaviors. As a preventative approach, the team decided to add additional adult
support to Teacher’s room to assist Student with transitioning from the bus to the classroom.
The adult was also available to work one-on-one and do higher level activities with Student if he
started displaying the off-task behaviors. The ABC picture schedule and time-out room
continued as part of the intervention.
Goal: For Student to remain in the classroom and consistently reduce his unsafe and aggressive
behaviors to zero.
Evaluation/Results: Student had 8 successful days with no academic time missed during the
first 10 days with additional Adult Support. On the two days on which he was unsuccessful, he
had to be removed from the classroom. After this, his behavior began to escalate again and he
again had to be removed from the classroom for 45% of the total days during this intervention
period. The additional adult support was available and in the classroom 100% of the days. The
average amount of academic time missed during this period was 29.5 minutes, which was a
decrease. This decrease supports additional adult support and higher level activities as a
successful intervention for increasing his academic time in the classroom. However, Student’s
aggressive and unsafe behaviors, still required him to be removed from the classroom. Because
aggressive and unsafe behaviors were not decreasing enough to help him obtain the goal, the
team collaborated and added more intensive support.
Intervention 4: 1/3/11 (Tier 3)
Strategy: Resource room for behavioral and emotional support
Description: The team collaboratively decided to use the support of the resource room for
students with emotional disturbance. Student would spend his afternoons with the two ED unit
teachers in the resource room for behavioral and emotional support. Teacher provided the daily
lesson plans for the teachers to use and they often modified these to a higher level to meet
Student’s needs. Student earned points each day for his target behaviors. A goal was set for him
Smits, A., 200
to achieve 65% of points for 8 consecutive days before earning time in Teacher’s classroom.
Goal: For Student’s aggressive and unsafe behaviors to consistently decrease to 0 and for him to
begin earn time in Teacher’s classroom.
Evaluation/Results: There was some inconsistency with the data collection regarding Student’s
missed academic time due to the nature of the resource room but the approximate average
amount of missed academic time per day in the resource room was 27 minutes. The team began
monitoring his daily points earned and time earned back in the classroom. During this period,
Student was able to achieve his goal, of 65% or more, on 27% (4/15) of the days.
Resource Room Average Points for Jan. 3-Feb.
7, 2010
Behavior
Average
Points
Earned
follow directions 62%
stay safe in space 61%
stay on task 68%
follow picture schedule 56%
use words to express
frustration 59%
finish a task appropriately 53%
interact appropriately with
peers 69%
interact appropriately with
staff 66%
Data Analysis
Intervention
Date
Started
Average
Academic
Time Missed
(minutes)
Percent of days
removed from
class
1 10/14/2010 32 45%
2 11/1/2010 46 67%
Smits, A., 201
3 11/15/2010 29.5 45%
4 1/3/2010 27 (approx.)
completely
removed 100%
due to being in
resource room
The data for Student’s missed academic time indicates that although he has a decreasing trend,
he has been unable to reach the goal consistently. The data demonstrates a pattern that when a
new intervention was implemented he demonstrated some success, but was unable to sustain this
success. Student has been most successful with support in the resource room, where he has
individual support from 2 adults.
Behavior Evaluation
The Behavior Evaluation Scale (BES-3) was used to assess Student’s learning problems and
behavior difficulties. The BES-3 is designed to provide educationally relevant information about
the behavior of school-age children and to assess behavioral characteristics in comparison to that
of other students the same age. Standard scores are reported for each behavioral characteristic.
Each of the items on the BES-3 is associated with one of the five characteristics of behavior
disorders/emotional disturbance included in the state and federal regulations. The Quotient
represents Student’s global measure of overall behavior problems and provides a general
Smits, A., 202
indication of his ability to be successful in the educational and residential environment as
compared to the standardization population. BES-3 results, in conjunction with other
information, may be used to assist educators in reaching and/or substantiating a diagnosis of
behavior/emotional disturbance when appropriate. Student’s teacher completed the rating scale.
This information is summarized in the table below. Standard Score
Teacher Rating Scale
(School Version)
Learning Problems* 5
Interpersonal
Difficulties* 1
Inappropriate Behavior* 2
Unhappiness/Depression* 8
Physical
Symptoms/Fears* 8
Quotient** 76 (5th percentile)
*Standard scores (SS) between 7 and 13 are considered average; SS below 7 or above 13 are
considered statistically atypical; SS of 4 or below indicates a serious level of concern.
**Standard scores between 85 and 115 are considered average.
According to the results of the BES-3 (school version) completed by Student’s teacher, he
received “atypical” ratings across in the behavioral categories of learning problems, interpersonal
difficulties, and inappropriate behavior. He was considered average for unhappiness/depression
and physical symptoms/fears. Furthermore, his total quotient of 76 is below average and a
percentile rank of 5.
Learning Problems: this area represents the students who do not respond to traditional learning
experiences and are not successful in learning without special attention or assistance in the home
from parents or guardians. Student’s teacher indicated that on a daily basis at various time or
continuously throughout the day he:
• Has difficulty attending to academic tasks
• Fails classroom tests or quizzes (he doesn’t do them)
• Does not follow directions, written or verbal, related to academic tasks
• Refuses or fails to complete class assignments or homework
• Demonstrates difficulty or reluctance in beginning tasks
Interpersonal Difficulties: this area encompasses the inclusion of behaviors ranging from the
inability to make or keep friends to the acting out/aggressive behavior which interferes with
general functioning. Student’s teacher indicated that on a daily basis he:
• Does not recognize or respond appropriately to nonverbal cues in social situations
Smits, A., 203
• Seems unable or unwilling to communicate feelings or emotions to others
• Physically hurts other students or teachers
• Seeks excessive physical attention from others
• Responds inappropriately to constructive criticism or comments from others
Inappropriate Behavior: this area is an all encompassing one which represents behavior atypical
in the context of the educational or home environment. The teacher’s ratings indicate that on a
daily basis Student:
• Demonstrates behaviors not related to immediate situations (i.e. laughs or cries without
reason)
• Blames other persons or materials for own failure or difficulty
• Does not obey teachers’ directives or classroom rules
• Deliberately makes false statements
• Makes inappropriate noises
• Fails to consider or disregards consequences of own behavior
• Acts impulsively without apparent self-control
• Continues to engage in a behavior when it is no longer appropriate
• Talks at inappropriate times or makes irrelevant comments
Unhappiness/Depression: Student’s teacher indicated that on a daily basis he:
• Indicates that he is not happy through physical expression (i.e. temper tantrums)
Physical Symptoms/Fears: this area identifies behaviors representing a negative reaction to
school problems. Student’s teacher indicated that he:
• Performs obsessive or compulsive behaviors
Social Skills Rating Scale
The Social Skills Rating Scale Questionnaire was given to Mrs. M and Student’s kindergarten
teacher, Teacher, to provide normative information on Student’s social skills and problem
behaviors at home and within the classroom. Each rater indicates how often the behavior occurs
and how important the skills are to the child’s development. These ratings are totaled to
determine a scaled score and percentile. Scaled scores and percentile scores are used by
standardized measures to communicate how similar or different Student’s results are to ratings
made by the parents and teachers of other children of the same age across the country.
Parent Rating Teacher Rating
Standard
Percentile Rate of
Behavior Standard Percentile Rate of
Behavior
Smits, A., 204
Score compared
to typical
peer
Score compared to
typical peer
SOCIAL SKILLS 84 14
fewer than
average 80 9
fewer than
average
PROBLEM
BEHAVIORS 112 79 average 125 95
more than
average
ACADEMIC
COMPETENCE n/a n/a n/a 112 79 average
Rate Student Displays Behaviors Compared to a Typical Peer
Parent Teacher
SOCIAL SKILLS fewer fewer
cooperation average fewer
assertion average average
responsibility fewer n/a
self-control average fewer
PROBLEM BEHAVIORS average more
internalizing average average
externalizing average more
hyperactivity more more
ACADEMIC COMPETENCE n/a average*
*Student was rated as the highest 10% in all areas with the exception of overall classroom
behavior, where he was rated in the lowest 10%.
Within the classroom, Student was rated as never:
• displaying compromises in conflict situations,
• responding appropriately to peer pressure and teasing,
• accepting peers ideas,
• volunteering to help peers,
• responding appropriately to being hit or pushed,
• and ignoring peer distractions.
Mrs. M indicated that the problem behaviors Student exhibits very often are:
• disturbs ongoing activities,
Smits, A., 205
• disobeys rules or requests,
• talks backs to adults when being corrected,
• and doesn’t listen to others.
Academics
Student was rated as being able to exhibit all basic reading and math skills expected of a
kindergartner. In fact, Student was rated as in the highest 10% of the class for both math and
reading. His teachers indicated that his biggest difficulty is that he often becomes easily
frustrated and is unable to complete a task. Although, there are no concerns with Student’s fine
motor skills, he becomes frustrated most often during activities that require him to use these
skills, including writing and cutting.
Student was assessed during a school-wide benchmark assessment using Dibels Next.
Dibels Next is a research-based, general outcome measures for assessing early literacy skills
for students in grades K-6. The Dibels measures were specifically designed to assess the Big
Ideas of early literacy: Phonological Awareness, Alphabetic Principle, Fluency with
Connected Text, Vocabulary, and Comprehension. Student scored above the benchmark level
on all kindergarten measures and his scores are indicated in the chart below.
FALL WINTER
Dibels Measure Student Benchmark Student Benchmark
First Sound Fluency 20 10 38 30
Letter Naming
Fluency 51 50
Phoneme Segment
Fluency n/a n/a 65 20
NWF- Correct Letter
Sequence n/a n/a 35 17
NWF-Whole Words
Read n/a n/a 3 n/a
Composite 71 26 188 122
General Intelligence
Student’s level of intelligence and ability to learn quickly is described as one of his greatest
strengths by his parents and teachers. Through a parent interview, Mrs. M indicated that he has
always learned very quickly. During classroom observations, Student often picked up on
concepts before many of the other students. Additional adult support was added as an
intervention to provide Student with higher level activities to try and maintain his interest. Ms. Z
and Ms. K have stated that they modify the lesson plans for the general education kindergarten to
target higher level skills.
Smits, A., 206
DESCRIPTION OF EDUCATIONAL NEEDS:
Student is a very intelligent and articulate kindergartner. In fact, Teacher rated him as in the
highest 10% of his class in academics. Although Student performs above his average peers in
academics, he exhibits severe behaviors that inhibit his ability to learn in the general classroom.
Student displays aggressive and unsafe behaviors that have required him to be removed from the
classroom and resulting in a significant amount of missed instructional time. In order for Student
to continue to progress in the general curriculum, Student needs intense emotional and
behavioral support to improve and maintain his behaviors. Student has difficulty appropriately
expressing himself when he becomes frustrated and often becomes frustrated when he is told
“no” or when he is unable to complete a task to meet his expectations. Student also has deficits
in his social skills. He specifically has difficulty with cooperation and self-control in the school
setting. He was rated as more than average in hyperactivity, so he benefits from highly engaging
activities to maintain his interest.
IMPLICATIONS FOR INSTRUCTION AND PROGRESS MONITORING:
Student should continue to be instructed at his grade level with possible modifications
for higher level activities since he is performing above his average peers. He will benefit from a
highly structured setting. He has made progress in increasing his academic time in the
behavioral and emotional resource room but has been unable to sustain a level of expected
behaviors to earn time back into the general education classroom. Student should continue to be
instructed on appropriate responses when he becomes frustrated and different strategies to
express his emotions. He will benefit from instruction in behaving appropriately in the school
setting. Student enjoys working with older students and loves to read. He might benefit from
watching older kids model appropriate behaviors in the school setting. Student needs intense,
individualized support for his behaviors, but will benefit from interacting with peers to increase
his social skills. When Student is integrated back into the general classroom, it should be during
highly engaging activities that allow him to interact with his peers. Student becomes easily
frustrated when he is unable to complete a task to his expectations. It might be beneficial for
him to have modified activities (larger lines to cut on, a white board to write on). Student also
responds to a picture schedule and rewards. He benefitted from the A-B-C picture schedule
where he picked two activities and earned a reward for displaying appropriate behaviors for the
duration of the activities. To address Student’s hyperactivity he needs very engaging activities to
maintain his interest. He might benefit from lessons that incorporate some movement throughout
the classroom; however, these type of activities should be used periodically because they may
result in him becoming over-stimulated. When Student is hungry or tired he also is unable to
maintain his behaviors. He should continue to eat lunch at school and may require breaks or
snacks during specified times of the day. On-going home/school collaboration will be essential
in the progress of increasing appropriate behaviors. Parents and teachers should communicate
about patterns of behaviors observed and successful strategies utilized in the home and school
setting.
Evaluator’s Signature Date
Smits, A., 207
Child’s Name: Student ID NUMBER: DATE OF BIRTH:
� TEAM SUMMARY Combine all Part 1’s Individual Evaluator’s Assessment from all evaluators into team summary.
INTERVENTIONS SUMMARY
Provide a summary of all interventions done prior to the child’s referral for an evaluation or done
as part of the initial evaluation. For all reevaluations provide a summary of interventions
routinely provided to this child.
Student has been receiving interventions since enrollment at ABC Elementary in September,
2010. ABC Elementary follows a Response to Intervention model, which is a tiered service
delivery model. Student has received intensive, individualized interventions to target his
inappropriate behaviors. A functional behavioral assessment was completed by the school team
to try and identify the function of Student’s behaviors. Interventions were developed to match
the hypothesized functions. The team met regularly with Mrs. M to review data and modify the
interventions. The Tier 3 interventions that have been in place since Student began at WT
include: an A-B-C picture schedule, a time-out room, specified rest time during the day,
additional adult support to help with transitions and to provide higher level activities, and
receiving instruction in a resource room, which also provided emotional and behavioral support.
REASON(S) FOR EVALUATION:
Upon enrollment at ABC Elementary, Mrs. M made a referral for an evaluation for special
education. The team met with Mrs. M and explained the Response to Intervention model and
agreed to implement interventions to address Student's behavioral concerns. With interventions
and supports in place, Student continues to display behaviors that are aggressive in nature and
are at a rate that is significantly higher than his peers. These behaviors require him to be
removed from the general education classroom and miss instructional time. There was concern
regarding the possibility of a disability that may be impacting his behavior and educational
performance.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY PARENTS OF THE CHILD:
Mrs. M has met frequently with the school team to provide information and collaborate on ways
to meet Student’s needs. Mrs. M describes Student as extremely smart, says that he has a great
memory, and is a quick learner. She is concerned about his obsession with being perfect and his
tantrums. Mrs. M indicated that Student displayed all developmental milestones at a typical age.
Mrs. M provided information about Student’s educational history and indicated that he had
attended preschool and was enrolled in a private kindergarten before attending WT. She
expressed that he had difficulty with his behaviors in his previous schools and was removed from
the schools as a result of his behaviors. Mrs. M said that Student enjoys TV and reading stories.
SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS: (only required for preschool and SLD)
Observations were conducted by several team members (teachers, behavior specialists, school
psychologist interns, additional support staff, and the school principal) periodically from
Student’s enrollment at ABC Elementary until the evaluation was initiated in February, 2011.
Smits, A., 208
The purpose of the observations was to provide information regarding Student’s behaviors and
the functions of his behaviors. Student’s records provided many teacher reports about incidents
within the classroom and multiple observations were completed as part of the functional
behavior assessment. The team felt that the observations conducted prior to the evaluation and
the information provided through teacher reports and team discussions, was sufficient. Through
the observations the functions of his behaviors were hypothesized to be for sensory purposes and
to communicate frustration. The team hypothesized that sometimes his behaviors occur due to
setting events prior to coming to school (he’s tired, he hasn’t eaten lunch). Other patterns noted
through observations include that Student responds to adult attention, is more likely to remain
engaged in an activity when it is one-on-one, and off-task behaviors such as moving throughout
the classroom, saying off-topic comments, and not responding to adult requests typically
precedes his more aggressive and disruptive behaviors.
MEDICAL INFORMATION:
The school nurse provided information indicating that Student passed his vision and hearing
screenings. Student was diagnosed with disruptive behavior disorder by child focus. He is not
currently taking any medication.
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Student is an articulate and very intelligent kindergartner. He has attended ABC Elementary
since September 2010 and has received Tier 3 intensive, individualized instruction since
enrollment. Student attended schools prior to WT but was removed as a result of his aggressive
behaviors.
Academics
Student is a quick learner and is extremely intelligent. He is rated in the top 10% for both
reading and math; however, he was rated in the bottom 10% of the class for overall classroom
behavior. Although one of his strengths is his intelligence, his behaviors are unmanageable
within the classroom and this has resulted in Student missing a sufficient amount of instructional
time which impacts his progress in the general curriculum.
Behavior
A functional behavior assessment was completed to identify the hypothesized functions of his
behaviors. The hypothesized functions were for sensory purposes and to communicate
frustration. Setting events prior to coming to school were also a hypothesized function. The
patterns identified through the FBA included off-task behaviors precede the more aggressive
behaviors, Student responds to adult attention, he enjoys reading, and he is more likely to be
successful during one-on-one instruction.
Interventions were developed to match the hypothesized functions and were implemented.
Student demonstrated some success with the interventions; however, his success was minimal
and was unable to be maintained over a long period of time. Student is currently receiving
instruction in a resource room for emotional and behavioral support where he is supposed to
meet his goal (65%) on 8/10 days, to earn time back in the general classroom. Student has been
unsuccessful in reaching this goal. He demonstrates the most difficult on finishing a task
appropriately, following his picture schedule, and using words to express his frustration. Student
has missed the least amount of instructional time in the resource room (average missed time=
Smits, A., 209
27min/day). The second most effective intervention was when additional adult support was
added to the general classroom to provide Student with higher level activities (average missed
time=29.5 min/day, removed 45% of days).
The behavior evaluation scale, 3rd edition (BES-3), was given to Student’s teacher to assess his
behavior difficulties and learning problems related to the educational setting. According to the
results, he received “atypical” ratings across in the behavioral categories of learning problems,
interpersonal difficulties, and inappropriate behavior. He was considered average for
unhappiness/depression and physical symptoms/fears. Furthermore, his total quotient of 76 is
below average and a percentile rank of 5.
Social Skills
Mrs. M (parent) and Teacher (teacher), each completed a social skills rating form to assess
Student’s social skills. Mrs. M and Teacher’s ratings indicated that Student displays fewer
appropriate social skills than peers his age. More specifically, Student struggles with self-
control, responsibility, and cooperation. Teacher’s ratings indicated that Student displays more
problem behaviors than peers at school; however, these ratings were not consistent with Mrs.
M’s ratings which indicated he displays an average amount of problem behaviors. This
inconsistency could be due to the fact that at school Student is around more children close to his
age at school or that the school environment creates more opportunities for Student to display the
aggressive behaviors. The consistencies on the parent and teacher ratings were that Student’s
internalizing behaviors were average and his hyperactivity is more than average.
Communication
Student’s expressive language was evaluated using the expressive language subtests of the
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, 4th edition (CELF-4). Student was asked to use
correct grammatical structures, recall sentences word-for-word and formulate a sentence about a
given picture when given a word to use. Student scored within the normal range of all subtests
and achieved an expressive language index score of 114, which falls in the high normal range.
An average score is 100, with 85-115 indicating skills within a normal range.
Student was also given an informal assessment where he was asked to answer questions and was
also given the opportunity to ask the evaluator questions about pictures related to events in the
evaluator’s life. This informal assessment provided information that Student has difficulty
taking on other people’s perspectives and understanding that a person can manipulate another
person’s thoughts. He also demonstrates difficulty with reading a person’s body language in
pictures.
DESCRIPTION OF EDUCATIONAL NEEDS:
Student is a very intelligent and articulate kindergartner. Although Student performs above his
average peers in academics, he exhibits severe behaviors that inhibit his ability to learn in the
classroom and his behaviors present a safety concern to the other students in the classroom.
Student’s aggressive and unsafe behaviors have required him to be removed from the classroom
and resulting in a significant amount of missed instructional time. In order for Student to
continue to progress in the general curriculum, Student needs intense emotional and behavioral
support to improve and maintain his behaviors. On a communication assessment, Student’s
Smits, A., 210
expressive language fell in the normal range; however, he has difficulty appropriately expressing
himself when he becomes frustrated. He often becomes frustrated when he is told “no”, makes a
mistake, or is unable to complete a task to meet his expectations. Student needs to be able to
assess a situation to figure out how to problem solve. He also demonstrates difficulty in
understanding other people’s perspectives. Student also has deficits in his social skills. He
specifically has difficulty with cooperation and self-control in the school setting. Student also
displays a high rate of hyperactivity in the home and school setting so he will benefit from highly
engaging activities.
IMPLICATIONS FOR INSTRUCTION AND PROGRESS MONITORING:
Student should continue to be instructed at his grade level with possible modifications for
higher level activities since he is performing above his average peers. He will benefit from a
highly structured setting. Student should continue to receive explicit instructed on appropriate
responses when he becomes frustrated and different strategies to express his emotions. He will
benefit from the teaching of social skills, problem solving skills, and behaving appropriately in
the school setting. Student enjoys working with older students and loves to read. Student needs
intense, individualized support for his behaviors, but will benefit from interacting with peers to
increase his social skills. Student becomes easily frustrated when he is unable to complete a task
to his expectations. It might be beneficial for him to have modified activities (larger lines to cut
on, a white board to write on). Student also responds to a picture schedule and rewards. He
benefitted from the A-B-C picture schedule where he picked two activities and earned a reward
for displaying appropriate behaviors for the duration of the activities. When Student is hungry or
tired he also is unable to maintain his behaviors. He should continue to eat lunch at school and
may require breaks or snacks during specified times of the day. On-going home/school
collaboration will be essential in the progress of increasing appropriate behaviors. To further
increase desired behaviors, it is important to have consistency in how his behaviors are managed,
between school and home. Parents and teachers should communicate frequently about patterns
of behaviors observed and successful strategies utilized in the home and school setting.
Smits, A., 211
Child’s Name: Student ID NUMBER: DATE OF BIRTH:
� ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION It is the determination of the team that:
The determining factor for the child’s poor performance is not due to a lack of appropriate
instruction in reading or math or the child’s limited English proficiency. For the preschool-age
child the determining factor for the child’s poor performance is not due to a lack of preschool
pre-academics.
Yes No
The child meets the state criteria for having a disability (or continuing to have a disability)
based on the data provided in this document
Yes No
The child demonstrates an educational need that requires specially designed instruction Yes No
If the response is NO to any question, then the child is NOT eligible for special education.
If the response to all three questions is YES, then the child IS eligible for special education.
The child is eligible for special education and related service in the category of: Emotional
Disturbance
BASIS FOR ELIGIBILIY DETERMINATION: (or Continued Eligibility)
Provide a justification for the eligibility determination decision, describing how the student meets or does not
meet the eligibility criteria as defined in OAC 3301-51-01 (B) (10) (Definitions) and OAC 3301-51-06 (Evaluations).
Include how the disability affects the child’s progress in the general education curriculum.
Smits, A., 212
Child’s Name: Student ID NUMBER: DATE OF BIRTH:
� SIGNATURES
DATES DATE OF
MEETING:
DATE OF LAST
ETR:
REFERRAL DATE:
03/22/2011
EVALUATION TEAM The names, titles and signatures below identify the members of the evaluation team and indicate whether or not each team
member is in agreement with the conclusions of the report.
NAME TITLE SIGNATURE DATE STATUS
Mrs. M parent
Agree
Disagree
Mr. M parent
Agree
Disagree
Ms. S General education
teacher
Agree
Disagree
Ms. Z Intervention
specialist
Agree
Disagree
Ms. K Instructional
assistant
Agree
Disagree
Ms. S Building Principal
Agree
Disagree
Ms. Z Behavioral
Specialist
Agree
Disagree
Ms. H School psychologist
Agree
Disagree
Ms. S School psychologist
intern
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Disagree
STATEMENT OF DISAGREEMENT
If a team member is not in agreement with the team’s determination, the team member shall attach to this report a written
statement explaining his or her reason for disagreeing with the team’s determination.
Smits, A., 213
EVALUATION PLANNING FORM School Age Disability Determination
ASSESSMENT AREAS
RELATED TO SUSPECTED
DISABILITY(IES)
DATA AVAILABLE1
FURTHER TESTING
NEEDED2
PERSON RESPONSIBLE
FOR ASSESSMENT AND
REPORT
Information Provided by
Parent yes Intern
General Intelligence Yes Intern (summary that
there is no concern)
Academic Skills yes Intern Classroom Based Evaluations
and Progress in the General
Curriculum
yes Gen ed teacher
Data from Interventions yes Intern
Communicative Status SLP (expressive)
Vision Yes Nurse
Hearing yes Nurse
Social Emotional Status yes Intern Physical Exam/General
Health No concern
Gross Motor No concern
Fine Motor No concern
Vocational/Transition n/a
Background History yes Intern (interview)
Observations yes intern
Behavior Assessment yes intern
Adaptive Behavior No concern
Other: (circle) Braille needs as determined
by VI
teacher or appropriately
trained/licensed personnel
Audiological needs as
determined
by certified/licensed
audiologist.
Assistive Technology needs.
Other: × The Team has taken into consideration limited English proficiency to plan this assessment.
× The Team has taken into consideration possible sources of racial or cultural bias in planning this assessment
SIGNATURES
School District Representative (Name/Date)
Parents (Name/Date)
Regular Education Teacher (Name/Date) Intervention Specialist (Name/Date)