First Step to Success: An Early Intervention for Elementary Children At Risk for Antisocial Behavior

15 Pages·2004·3.98 MB·English

7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 396
First Step to Success:
An Early Intervention for Elementary
Children At Risk for Antisocial Behavior
Kelli Y. Beard
California State University, Dominguez Hills
George Sugai
University of Oregon
ABSTRACT: The increased prevalence and seriousness of antisocial behavior displayed by today’s
youths have become serious concerns for parents, educators, and community members. Antisocial
behavior has a developmental course that starts with minor offenses in preschool (e.g., whining,
teasing, noncompliance) and develops into major offenses (e.g., vandalism, stealing, assault, homi-
cide) in older children and adolescents. Research results suggest that if interventions are imple-
mented in the early elementary years, the likelihood of preventing future antisocial behavior is
improved. Furthermore, interventions are said to be more successful if family members and teach-
ers are involved. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an early intervention strat-
egy, First Step to Success, involving (a) teacher-directed and (b) a combination of teacher- and
parent-directed strategies on the behaviors of elementary school children at risk for antisocial
behavior. The results suggest that interventions involving teachers and parents were associated with
decreases in problem behavior in the classroom that maintained over 1 academic school year after
intervention. Implications and recommendations are presented based on the outcomes and limita-
tions of this study.
Kazdin (1985) stated, “Antisocial behavior tiple forms are vulnerable to rejection by
refers to a variety of acts that violate social teachers and peers, alternative placement
norms and the rights of others” (p. 1). Walker, (e.g., special education), school failure, delin-
Colvin, and Ramsey (1995) defined antisocial quency, and dropping out of school. Therefore,
behavior as “recurrent violations of socially intervention early in the establishment of the
prescribed patterns of behavior” (p. 43) across child’s antisocial behavior pattern is impera-
a range of settings (e.g., home, school, com- tive (Kauffman, 1999).
munity). Antisocial behavior patterns in young In the past 2 decades, the improvement of
children include, for example, whining, non- educational and behavioral outcomes of chil-
compliance with parents and teachers (e.g., dren with antisocial behavior who are at risk
disobedience, talk-outs, touching others, for emotional or behavioral disorders has been
being out of seat), and fighting. In mid- a priority of general and special educators
elementary and early middle school children, (Kauffman, 1989; U.S. Department of Educa-
these patterns escalate to involve, for example, tion, 1991). Storey, Lawry, Ashworth, Danko,
lying, minor theft, and cheating. If left and Strain (1994) reported that nearly half of
unchecked, these behaviors in high schools, preschool and early elementary school teach-
become even more antisocial and problemat- ers requested behavior management assis-
ic, for example, stealing, assault, homicide, tance for several children with antisocial
vandalism, and other acts of delinquency. The behavior in their classrooms. According to
development of escalating antisocial behavior Feil, Walker, and Severson (1995), “Early iden-
patterns is difficult to reverse. Furthermore, tification and remediation . . . is a high priori-
children whose antisocial behavior occurs at ty for most educators and is based on the
high rates across multiple settings and in mul- assumption that academic and behavioral
396 / August 2004 Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 397
problems can be averted through early detec- general education kindergarten classrooms
tion, prevention, and intervention” (p.194). across the two schools.
Given the critical need to deter the devel-
opment and occurrence of antisocial behavior Student Selection
and associated serious negative outcomes,
efficient and effective early interventions are Five teachers, using the Early Screening Pro-
needed desperately for use within schools gram (Feil et al., 1995; Walker, Severson, &
(Mayer, 1995). These school-based interven- Feil,1995), each identified 3 students in their
tions must (a) be positive and preventative classrooms whose behaviors would not be con-
(Sprague, Sugai, & Walker, 1998; Walker et al., sidered typical child behavior and occurred at
1996), (b) involve the family along with the a higher rate than their peers. Each teacher
teacher (Ramsey & Patterson, 1989), and (c) selected 1 of the 3 students whose behavior
program for the maintenance of desired was believed to be most in need of an early
behaviors (Wolery, Bailey, & Sugai, 1988). intervention. Because the intervention could
The purpose of the study described here only be run with 1 student at a time, 1 student
was to examine the relative effectiveness of an was selected to narrow the field of potential
early intervention, First Step to Success (Walk- participants. Although a random selection
er et al., 1996), implemented by teachers and process would have been more desirable
parents to improve the classroom behavior of experimentally, teachers were given the
kindergarten students with behavioral prob- opportunity to select which students would
lems (Golly, Stiller, & Walker, 1998; Golly, participate in this study because (a) teachers
Sprague, Walker, Beard, & Gorham, 2000). were most disturbed by the behavior of these
Because the literature suggests that families students and (b) in single-subject research
with teachers, rather than teachers alone, designs each subject serves as his or her own
would have a stronger effect on antisocial control. As a result, 6 kindergarten students
behavior through early intervention (Dunson, were identified as displaying early indicators
Hughes, & Jackson, 1994; Golly et al., 1998, of antisocial behavior and being at risk for
2000; Ramsey & Patterson, 1989; Walker, Sev- developing chronic antisocial behavior pat-
erson, Feil, Stiller, & Golly, 1998; Walker, terns, and these students were asked to par-
Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995), we addressed three ticipate. However, all students originally
questions in this study: identified were given the opportunity to par-
ticipate at a later date. One teacher chose a
1. Is a teacher-directed-only early interven- student from the morning sessions and one
tion strategy (i.e., partial First Step to Suc- from the afternoon session. These students had
cess program) associated with decreases in no previous experience with the intervention,
the antisocial behavior of students in a and direct observations confirmed the prob-
classroom setting? lem behaviors reported by teachers and/or par-
2. Is a teacher- and parent-directed early ents. Table 1 provides a summary of the
intervention strategy (i.e., entire First Step problem behaviors and baseline rates dis-
to Success program) associated with played by each student.
decreases in the antisocial behavior of par- Clifford, a Caucasian 5-year, 3-month-old
ticipants in a classroom? identical twin, was selected from a morning
kindergarten session. He lived in a low-SES
3. For both intervention conditions, are treat-
neighborhood. Although his parents reported
ment effects maintained when intervention
that he had normal intelligence, his teacher
is discontinued?
reported that he was academically behind his
peers because of behavior problems in the
Method classroom (e.g., wandering, noncompliance,
talking out).
Schools and Settings Bradford, a Caucasian 5-year, 6-month-old
student from a low-SES neighborhood, was
Two elementary schools in an urban school selected from a morning kindergarten session.
district in the Pacific Northwest served as His teacher and parents reported that he had
research sites. The school district served chil- normal intelligence. His teacher reported that
dren from low to middle socioeconomic status he often was out of his seat and touched oth-
(SES) families. The study was conducted in five ers and/or their property. His parents reported
Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409 August 2004 / 397
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 398
TABLE 1
Types and Baseline Rates of Problem Behavior by Student
Student Types of Problem Behaviors Baseline Rates
Bradford Talking out, touching others, noncompliance .89–1.22
Clifford Talking out, out of seat, noncompliance .03–.93
Tommy Touching others and property, out of seat, noncompliance .03–.70
Amy Talking out, out of seat, touching others’ property,
noncompliance .08–.39
Katie Talking out, out of seat, noncompliance 0–.33
Bilbert Talking out, out of seat, touching others, noncompliance 0–.28
that he had been hyperactive since infancy ural mother was unfit to care for her. In an
and had difficulty attending to any task. To interview, her foster mother reported that Amy
increase attention and decrease impulsivity was suspected of having fetal alcohol syn-
soon after beginning the school year, he was drome. Her teacher reported that Amy exhibit-
put on Ritalin. His teacher reported that the ed behavior problems that disrupted the
use of Ritalin was associated with reduced classroom and required excessive amounts of
problem behaviors and improved attention teacher time.
(e.g., less talking with others and touching Katie was a Caucasian 5-year, 5-month-
other children or their property). His parents old student from a middle-SES neighborhood
reported that he attended better at home and attending an afternoon kindergarten session.
got into fewer fights with his older sibling Her teacher and parents reported that she
when he was on the medication. Nonetheless, seemed to have normal intelligence. However,
the teacher selected him because the problem her teacher stated that Katie often needed
behaviors had not reduced to low levels and assignments explained more than once. Katie’s
he was the only student the teacher deemed as teacher recommended her for participation in
needing intervention. the study because she was displaying problem
Tommy, a Caucasian 6-year, 3-month-old behaviors similar to those of her older brother
student from a low-SES neighborhood, was (e.g., aggression, noncompliance). Her teacher
selected from a morning kindergarten session. did not want Katie to develop the same prob-
His teacher reported that he had been demot- lems that her brother was having in the second
ed to her kindergarten classroom from the first grade (e.g., hitting, defiance).
grade in early October because he was unable Bilbert, a Caucasian 5-year. 9-month-old
to complete his work and exhibited intolerable student from a low-SES neighborhood, was
problem behaviors (e.g., talking out, crawling selected from an afternoon kindergarten ses-
under furniture, running out of the room, sion. His teacher reported that he had normal
touching others inappropriately). Due to his intelligence but seemed “obsessive compul-
inappropriate behavior, he reportedly had no sive.” His teacher and mother reported that he
friends in his first-grade classroom. The teacher displayed problem behaviors at home and in
selected this boy because she noticed these the classroom (e.g., lying, stealing, manipulat-
same problems in her classroom. No informa- ing).
tion was gathered from the mother because
she declined to meet with the researcher. The Dependent Measures
teacher reported that Tommy’s mother was a
casual drug user and frequently missed meet- A trained observer recorded problem behav-
ings to discuss his problems in school. iors in the classroom, including talking out,
Amy, a Caucasian 5-year, 7-month-old stu- being out of seat, touching others, touching
dent from a middle-SES neighborhood, was others’ property, and noncompliance. Acade-
selected from an afternoon kindergarten ses- mic engaged time (AET) also was recorded.
sion. Amy lived with foster parents and three Definitions for these dependent measures are
other children. She was placed in foster care at presented in Table 2. Frequency data were col-
the age of 2 when a court decided that her nat- lected for the problem behaviors, and duration
398 / August 2004 Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 399
TABLE 2
Dependent Measures
Behavior Definition
Talking out The student spoke without raising a hand and being acknowledged by the
teacher or interrupted the teacher or another student who was talking
(e.g., answered without permission, called out requests, yelled).
Out of seat The student moved from his or her chair without teacher permission. The
student was considered out of seat if his or her buttocks left the chair seat
(e.g., stood up from the chair, went to other places in the classroom).
Touching others The student touched others’ bodies with hands, feet, or objects. Also
included pushing, grabbing, or exhibiting any other physical contact.
Touching others’ The student touched others’ property with hands, feet, or object. Also
property included grabbing or exhibiting any other physical contact with another’s
property.
Noncompliance The student failed to initiate what he or she was told to do by the teacher
within 5 seconds.
Academic engaged The student was attending to the task at hand; in other words, was on task
time (AET) (e.g., looking at the teacher, participating in an activity, following a
direction). Students were considered off task when they were not attending
to the task at hand (e.g., talking with peers while teacher is talking,
daydreaming, wandering).
data was collected for AET. Frequency data each day during sessions divided into eight 3-
were converted into rate (number of behaviors minute intervals. Two different observation
per minute) to control for time and show rela- procedures were used within each 24-minute
tive change. Duration data were converted session. In the first observation condition (i.e.,
into percentage of time spent academically event recording), the frequency of dependent
engaged during the observation period. measures (i.e., problem behaviors) occur-
rences was tallied. The observer sat in the
Observation Procedures classroom and marked occurrences with a
pencil on a data sheet.
The observer, who was unaware of the primary In the second observation condition (i.e.,
purpose of the study, was a parent in her late duration recording), AET was collected. In this
30s whose child attended one of the schools condition, the observer used a stopwatch to
used for this study. She completed a 1-day determine the duration of on-task behavior.
training session on First Step to Success that The two observation conditions were counter-
was conducted by a First Step director, and she balanced across the eight 3-minute intervals to
practiced observing and collecting data for 2 allow for a more precise and accurate sam-
weeks prior to implementation. In addition to pling of the dependent variables. Because
her First Step training, she received 4 hours of many behavioral occurrences did not occur
training on observation procedures and opera- consistently throughout the 24-minute obser-
tional definitions of appropriate and inappro- vation session, this counterbalancing proce-
priate behaviors and AET. Practice sessions dure allowed the data collector to observe and
using role-play and videotape situations were record as many occurrences as possible. For
conducted to increase her fluency. The observ- example, the observer would enter the class-
er was required to meet a criterion of at least room, start her stopwatch, and for 3 minutes
85% agreement for 3 consecutive practice ses- tally occurrences of (a) talking out, (b) being
sions before beginning the collection of actual out of seat, (c) touching others or property, and
data. The observer met criterion within 1 hour (d) noncompliance. For the next 3 minutes,
of completing the practice sessions. she would record AET, followed by 3 minutes
During all phases of this study, direct of event recording, and so on. The observer
observations were conducted at the same time would continue to counterbalance tally and
Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409 August 2004 / 399
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 400
TABLE 3
Description of CLASS Components
Component Description
Red /green card A paper card that is green on one side and red on the other worn around
the teacher’s neck. Points are given at specific times on the green side for
appropriate behaviors.
Preintervention Prior to implementation, each student was asked whether he or she wanted
phase to participate in the study. If the student agreed to participate, he or she
received 30 minutes of role-play practice during which the student learned
about positive and negative examples of classroom behavior.
Consultant phase Days 1–5 of the program are implemented by a consultant. The program
lasts 20 minutes each day.
Teacher phase Days 6–30 of the program are implemented by the teacher. The program
lasts 30–150 minutes each day.
Giving points The teacher randomly gives a point on the green side of the card when the
student displays appropriate behavior. Each day has a certain number of
points the student must accumulate to earn a reward.
Giving praise The teacher gives positive statements to the student randomly for appropri-
ate behavior.
Meeting criterion The student must earn 80% of the available point opportunities to meet
criterion to earn a reward.
Rewards When the student meets criterion, the student chooses a reward that the
entire class can enjoy.
duration recording procedures until the end of score for AET across all students was 97.5%
the 24-minute observation period. (range, 95.5%–99.5%).
Interobserver Agreement Independent Variable
Interobserver agreement was checked at least First Step to Success is a packaged early inter-
once per phase and a minimum of once every vention program for students in kindergarten
5 days per student. The researcher served as a through third grade. A collaborative home and
second observer. Interobserver agreement for school approach is used in First Step to divert
the frequency of problem behaviors was cal- young at-risk children from a path leading to
culated by dividing the total number of tallied school failure, violence, and poor adult out-
occurrences from one observer by the total comes. The program consists of two treatment
number of tallied occurrences from the other components, CLASS and HOMEBASE, which
observer, always dividing by the larger of the are implemented simultaneously in the class-
two numbers, and multiplying by 100. To cal- room and home, respectively. Teachers and
culate agreement for AET, the total duration parents teach children a behavior pattern that
from one observer was divided by the total contributes to school and social success
duration from the other observer, always divid- through the systematic use of positive rein-
ing by the larger of the two numbers and mul- forcers. Summaries of the features of CLASS
tiplying by 100. and HOMEBASE are included in Tables 3 and
Interobserver agreement was calculated 4, respectively.
for 30% of observations sessions. On average,
interobserver agreement scores were never Experimental Design
less than 90%. The average interobserver
agreement score for problem behavior across A series of basic ABA and ABAB case studies
all students was 94.5% (range, 90.25%– across students and classrooms were conduct-
98.55%). The average interobserver agreement ed to examine the effects of (a) teacher- and
400 / August 2004 Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 401
TABLE 4
Description of HOMEBASE Components
Component Description
General description The parents give praise and reward the student when criterion is met in
the classroom and the card is brought home to show parents. Parents
sign card and write reward received at home. The card is returned to
school the next day.
Giving praise The parents give positive statements to the student when criterion was
met in the classroom
Playing the games Packaged games are provided to the family each week for 6 weeks. The
daily 5-minute games are used to increase positive interactions between
student and parent and increase appropriate social behavior.
Rewards When the student meets criterion in CLASS, the parents provide a reward
that they participate in with the student at home.
parent-directed and (b) teacher-directed early Teachers and parents were trained separately
interventions on antisocial behavior of chil- in the use of the intervention by the first author
dren at risk for emotional or behavioral disor- and a First Step to Success director. Teachers
ders. Although it would have been preferred, received CLASS training (i.e., explanations,
the development and implementation of a role plays, and practice) that lasted approxi-
multiple-baseline design across students was mately 3 hours. HOMEBASE training lasted for
not possible because of logistical constraints approximately 45 minutes with the parents of
(i.e., teacher preferences and requests; sched- the students in the HOMEBASE condition. The
uling; types of activities; different teachers, training consisted of explaining the purpose of
classrooms, and schools). In general, all stu- the intervention, their responsibilities in the
dents independently experienced baseline, intervention, and the time needed to complete
intervention, and maintenance conditions. the intervention. The training took place at the
Based on teacher request and increases in school, and the student was not present.
problem behavior, intervention phases were Teacher and parent acquisition and fluen-
reinstated for 2 students. cy with CLASS and HOMEBASE were not for-
Students were divided equally into two mally assessed. This limitation is addressed in
conditions based on which kindergarten ses- the discussion section of this article.
sion (i.e., morning or afternoon) they attended.
Therefore, the 3 students in the morning ses- Intervention
sions were assigned to the CLASS (i.e.,
After baseline, CLASS or CLASS+HOMEBASE
teacher-directed intervention) condition, and
interventions were initiated. On the day prior
the 3 students in the afternoon sessions were
to the first day of CLASS treatment, each stu-
assigned to the CLASS+HOMEBASE (i.e.,
dent was asked whether he or she wanted to
teacher- and parent-directed intervention)
participate in the study. If the answer was yes,
condition. The determination of which condi-
the student received 30 minutes of role-play
tion would be used with which group of stu-
practice during which he or she learned about
dents (i.e., morning or afternoon kindergarten
positive and negative examples of classroom
session) was determined by a flip of a coin.
behavior. During the CLASS component of the
First Step to Success program, the teacher
Baseline
wore a card with one red side and one green
During baseline, teachers were told to main- side on a key lanyard. When the student was
tain routine instruction and behavior manage- behaving appropriately, the green side of the
ment procedures (i.e., keep to their daily card was showing and the student intermit-
routine and schedule without making any tently earned points. When the student was
changes). Baseline data on AET and problem not displaying appropriate behavior, the red
behaviors were collected for at least 4 days or side of the card was shown and no points
until stable trends in behavior were noted. could be earned. If at the end of the class the
Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409 August 2004 / 401
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 402
student had earned 90% of the possible points, formance did not maintain, reinstatements of
he or she received a reward that all students in previous treatment levels were observed.
the classroom could enjoy (e.g., teacher reads
a special story, extra recess time, group game). CLASS Condition
Students in the HOMEBASE+CLASS condi-
tion took their red/green card home to be Clifford
signed by their parents. If a student met the
During the baseline phase, an upward trend
CLASS reward criteria, parents provided
(median = .71, range = .89–1.22) was ob-
another reward (e.g., playing a game together,
served in Clifford’s rate of problem behavior. A
taking a walk together, doing an activity
slight upward trend was noted in the percent-
together) at home. If a student did not meet the
age of AET (median = 48, range = 45–49). Lit-
CLASS criteria, parents simply thanked the stu-
tle variability was noted in either trend.
dent for bringing the card home and encour-
During the CLASS-only treatment phase,
aged him or her to work on meeting the
Clifford’s rate of total problem behaviors
criteria the next day. To verify whether parents
decreased and little variability was noted
did their part (i.e., giving reward at home if
(median = 0, range = 0–.14). Higher variabili-
earned, playing prescribed daily games that
ty was observed when individual problem
addressed specific skill areas), the teacher
behavior data were examined. When treat-
made a call to the home each night.
ment was initiated, the percentage of AET
increased quickly; it leveled off after Session
Maintenance/Reversal
11 (median = 98, range = 74–100). As a note,
During the maintenance phase, intervention on Session 10 the percentage of AET dropped
was discontinued, and at least once a week 80% when Clifford was sick.
observations were conducted to assess for During the maintenance phase, Clifford’s
response maintenance. When stable trends rate of problem behavior was stable and low
were noted, maintenance checks were con- (median = .04, range = 0–.13). His percentage
ducted twice a month for 5 months. Students of AET remained at a high level with little vari-
received no First Step to Success instruction or ability.
reminders during that time.
Bradford
Return to Intervention
During the baseline phase, a slight downward
At the request of their teachers, interventions trend (median = .69, range = .03–.39) was
were reinstated for 2 students because of observed in Bradford’s rate of problem behav-
undesired outcomes during the maintenance ior. A slight upward trend was noted in his per-
phase (see Figures 3 and 6). centage of AET (median = 79, range = 79–84).
Little variability was noted in either trend.
Data Analysis During the CLASS-only treatment phase,
Bradford’s rate of total problem behaviors
Visual data analysis procedures were used decreased, and moderate variability was noted
(Tawney & Gast, 1984; White & Haring, 1980; (median = 0, range = 0–.17). Low variability
Wolery et al., 1988) to assess for variations in was observed when individual problem
trend, level, and stability within and across all behavior data were examined. When treat-
phases. In addition, simple descriptive analy- ment was initiated, his percentage of AET
ses (e.g., within-phase median and range) increased quickly; it leveled off after Session
were conducted. 14 (median = 100, range = 84–100).
During the maintenance phase, Bradford’s
Results rate of problem behavior was stable and low
(median = 0, range = 0–.04). His percentage of
AET remained at a high level with little vari-
Across all students and compared to baseline
ability (median = 100, range = 96–100).
rates, decreases in rates of problem behavior
and increases in percentage of AET were
Tommy
observed when treatment conditions were ini-
tiated. Treatment effects were maintained for 4 During the baseline phase, a slight downward
of the 6 students. When treatment conditions trend (median = 1.58, range = .03–.70) was
were reinstated for the 2 students whose per- observed in Tommy’s rate of problem behavior.
402 / August 2004 Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 403
• Combined (Talk Out,
Out of Seat,
Touch Other,
Touch Properly,
Noncompliance)
Academically Engaged Time (AET)
FIGURE1. Clifford’s Combined Behaviors (CLASS)
A slight upward trend was noted in his per- CLASS+HOMEBASE Condition
centage of AET (median = 73, range = 70–76).
Little variability was noted in either trend. Amy
During the CLASS-only treatment phase,
During the baseline phase, a slight upward
his rate of total problem behaviors decreased
trend (median = 1.24, range = .08–.39) was
and moderate variability was noted (median =
observed in Amy’s rate of problem behavior.
.06, range = 0–.3). Higher variability was
An upward trend also was noted in her per-
observed when individual problem behaviors
centage of AET (median = 77, range = 33–78).
were examined. When treatment was initiated, Little to moderate variability was noted in both
his percentage of AET increased, with high trends.
variability (median = 97, range = 81–100). During the CLASS + HOMEBASE-only
During the maintenance phase, Tommy’s treatment phase, Amy’s rate of total problem
rate of problem behavior increased; his per- behaviors decreased and high variability was
centage of AET decreased; and moderate vari- noted (median = .08, range = 0–.88). Moder-
ability was noted (median = .29, range = ate variability was observed when her individ-
0–.38). As a result, a second CLASS-only treat- ual problem behaviors were examined. When
ment phase was implemented in which treatment was initiated, her percentage of AET
Tommy’s rate of total problem behavior increased, with high variability (median = 99,
decreased to levels similar to those of the first range = 68–100). On Session 30, rate of prob-
treatment phase (median = .08, range = lem behavior rose by 85% when Amy stated
0–.08), as did his percentage of AET (median = that she had a stomach ache.
95, range = 92–100). During the maintenance phase, Amy’s rate
The results of the CLASS condition for Clif- of problem behavior increased; her percentage
ford, Bradford, and Tommy are given in Figures of AET decreased; and moderate variability
1 through 3. was noted (median = .82, range = 0–.46). As a
Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409 August 2004 / 403
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 404
• Combined (Talk Out,
Out of Seat,
Touch Other,
Touch Properly,
Noncompliance)
Academically Engaged Time (AET)
FIGURE2. Bradford’s Combined Behaviors (CLASS)
• Combined (Talk Out,
Out of Seat,
Touch Other,
Touch Properly,
Noncompliance)
Academically Engaged Time (AET)
FIGURE3. Tommy’s Combined Behaviors (CLASS)
404 / August 2004 Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409
7Beard.qxp 10/7/2004 12:22 PM Page 405
• Combined (Talk Out,
Out of Seat,
Touch Other,
Touch Properly,
Noncompliance)
Academically Engaged Time (AET)
FIGURE4. Amy’s Combined Behaviors (CLASS + HOMEBASE)
result, a second CLASS-only treatment phase Bilbert
was implemented in which her rate of total
During the baseline phase, upward and then
problem behavior decreased to levels similar
to those of the first treatment phase (median = downward trends (median = .71, range =
.19, range = 0–.33), as did her percentage of 0–.28) were observed in Bilbert’s rate of prob-
AET (median = 87, range = 80–97). lem behavior. A slight upward trend was noted
in his percentage of AET (median = 85, range
Katie
= 84–98). Little variability was noted in both
During the baseline phase, a level trend (medi- trends.
an = .50, range = 0–.33) was observed in During the CLASS + HOMEBASE treat-
Katie’s rate of problem behavior. A level trend ment phase, Bilbert’s rate of total problem
also was noted in her percentage of AET
behaviors decreased and little variability was
(median = 84, range = 83–85). Little variabili-
noted (median = .02, range = 0–.08). Similar
ty was noted in both trends.
variability was observed when individual
During the CLASS + HOMEBASE treat-
problem behavior data were examined. When
ment phase, Katie’s rate of total problem
behaviors decreased with little variability treatment was initiated, his percentage of AET
(median = .02, range = 0–.17). Little variabili- increased; it leveled off after Session 14 (medi-
ty was observed when individual problem an = 100, range = 97–100).
behavior data were examined. When treat- During the maintenance phase, Bilbert’s
ment was initiated, her percentage of AET
rate of problem behavior was stable and low
increased; it leveled off after Session 6 (medi-
(median = .03, range = 0–.08). His percentage
an = 100, range = 94–100).
of AET remained at a high level with little vari-
During the maintenance phase, Katie’s rate
ability (median = 99, range = 97–100).
of problem behavior was stable and low
(median = .63, range = 0–.08). Her percentage The results of CLASS condition for Amy,
of AET remained at a high level with no vari- Katie, and Bilbert are summarized in Figures 4
ability (median = 99, range = 99–100). through 6.
Behavioral Disorders,29(4), 396–409 August 2004 / 405