Search

The relationship between learning disabilities and behavior disorders is well documented and has led to the development of integrated interventions that target both academic and behavior deficits in elementary school-age students. This paper describes the rationale for, development of and implementation of an integrated academic-behavior intervention called "academic and behavior combined support (ABC Support)." The intervention was developed by integrating the critical intervention elements from two single-focus interventions (i.e., repeated reading and check-in/check-out) into a single comprehensive intervention designed to improve reading fluency for early elementary school-age students with reading disorders while also strengthening their engagement and compliance with behavior expectations. [For the corresponding grantee submission, see ED617652.]

In current multi-tier models, students who are not responsive to universal instruction receive supplementary support. Despite most students having co-occurring academic and behavior challenges, their needs are often addressed through separate academic or behavior interventions. This approach may not only be costly for schools, but it also fails to acknowledge the well-documented link between behavior and academic performance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate "Academic and Behavior Combined Support" ("ABC Support"), a newly developed supplemental intervention that merges a combined focus on reading fluency and engagement. Six teachers implemented the intervention for 6-8 weeks with Grade 2 students. Students' oral fluency on standard and training reading passages and occurrence of engagement and disruptive behaviors during classroom reading instruction were measured repeatedly across baseline and intervention phases in a multiple-baseline design. Visual and statistical analyses revealed significant improvement from baseline to intervention for both reading and behavior outcomes. Post-intervention surveys and interviews revealed a high level of acceptability among teachers and students. Theoretical and empirical contributions as well as practice implications are addressed.

School psychologists can engage in consultation to address inequities in educational opportunities to support multiply marginalized students. This critical work is codified in the NASP 2020 Practice Model, which outlines professional and organizational principles to facilitate school psychologists' engagement in equitable, effective supports to students, schools, and families. However, the legacy of historical beliefs about race and ability, based on white supremacy, have become intertwined in complex ways that are evident within and across multiple school ecologies, including consultation. In this paper, we apply DisCrit, a theoretical framework that incorporates a dual analysis of race and ability through an integration of critical race theory and disability studies, to provide a conceptual review of problem-solving consultation structure, roles, and purpose. Next, we highlight the potential of embedding equitable implementation, an emerging perspective from implementation science, into consultation. Equitable implementation occurs when strong equity components (e.g., trusting relationships, community-defined evidence) are integrated into the implementation process to facilitate quality delivery of programs. With this perspective and an illustrated case study, we hope to provide actionable steps for researchers and practitioners to center disrupting problematic ecologies and advancing equity as foundational in their consultation. We also reflect on opportunities, challenges, and implications for training and practice that are aligned with the NASP 2020 Practice Model.

We examined the outcomes of elementary school-based problem-solving teams (PSTs) who participated in a multi-component consultation focused on enhancing systematic problem solving. Consultation provided to each PST included training in the use of a problem-solving protocol (i.e., "Outcomes: Planning Monitoring, and Evaluating" ["Outcomes: PME"]) and subsequent performance feedback and training regarding team use of the protocol. A train-the-trainer model was used whereby researchers trained school psychologists to deliver the intervention and serve as coaches on the PSTs. At baseline, all three PSTs demonstrated low (i.e., <50%) problem-solving procedural integrity (i.e., the degree to which critical components of the problem-solving process were implemented), often scoring lowest for problem-solving components related to data collection and analysis (e.g., treatment integrity, progress monitoring, and pre-post intervention data). Each PST demonstrated increased problem-solving integrity following implementation of the first intervention component, problem-solving information and "Outcomes: PME" training. Procedural integrity also increased for the two PSTs that received the second intervention component, performance feedback. An increase in procedural integrity was not found for one PST that received the third intervention component, targeted consulting; however, data collection was incomplete. Results are discussed in terms of future research priorities to examine consultation that promotes the use of quality team problem-solving components.

We argue in this article that there are conditions in which publication of negative results can make a useful contribution. Three small-scale examinations of journal publication criteria for publishing negative results were conducted. We first reviewed 29 journals from education and school/counseling psychology to assess author submission guidelines for reporting negative results. We then reviewed the most recent issue of each of the 29 journals to determine whether articles reporting negative results were being published. Finally, we surveyed the editors of the 29 journals to examine conditions in which they perceived it appropriate to publish articles that did not demonstrate experimental effects. Results of these studies indicate that currently only one of the 29 journals provides formal guidance to authors about submitting papers with negative results. Two articles published in the 29 journals in their last issue of 2016 contained only negative results. And, of the 60% of the editors who responded to our survey, 96% indicated there were conditions in which publication of negative results was appropriate. In conclusion, we propose situations in which studies reporting negative results would make a valuable contribution.

Numerous evidence-based classroom management strategies to prevent and respond to problem behavior have been identified, but research consistently indicates teachers rarely implement them with sufficient implementation fidelity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation planning, a strategy involving logistical intervention implementation planning and identification of implementation barriers, and participant modeling, a strategy involving didactic and in vivo intervention training, on teachers' implementation of an evidence-based classroom management plan. A randomized multiple treatment embedded within a multiple baseline design across participants was used to assess (a) teachers' adherence to the classroom management plans and quality of implementation and (b) student disruptive behavior in the classroom immediately and at follow-up. Results indicated that teachers' adherence and quality increased with both implementation planning and participant modeling, but these improvements were not fully maintained at 1- and 2-month follow-up. A similar pattern in student disruptive behavior was also observed. These findings highlight the need for ongoing implementation support for behavioral interventions in schools. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to explore the efficacy and acceptability of problem-solving consultation for homeschooling families with children who exhibited externalizing behavior problems. Three families participated, with multiple siblings participating from each family. Six children were male and 1 child was female. Children's ages ranged from 5 to 9 years old. Single-case experimental multiple baseline designs were used to evaluate the functional relation between implementation of behavior support plans within problem-solving consultation and children's externalizing behaviors. Direct observation data showed decreases in externalizing behaviors after the consultation and intervention process for 2 of the 3 families. The parents of the homeschooling children reported that the behavior support plans and consultation process were acceptable. Implications for future research and practice are presented.

The central roles of science in the field of remedial and special education are to (a) identify basic laws of nature and (b) apply those laws in the design of practices that achieve socially valued outcomes. The scientific process is designed to allow demonstration of specific (typically positive) outcomes, and to assist in the attribution of those outcomes to controlled variables. Although growing recognition is being given to the importance of replication in this process, equal consideration should be given to the function of publishing studies that document negative (or null) results. In this manuscript, we outline the features of negative results in educational and psychological single-case intervention research. We also discuss the assessment, methodological, and statistical dimensions of negative results that should be considered when reporting negative results. The importance of replication studies (direct, systematic, and clinical) is also discussed within the context of negative-results research.

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the current state of research in the area of treatment integrity as it relates to behavioral consultation. To this end, four primary topics are discussed. First, a rationale for why treatment integrity is an important professional and methodological concern is presented. Second, conceptualizations of treatment integrity as a dimensional construct and methods for assessing treatment integrity are reviewed. Third, variables hypothesized to moderate treatment integrity and the empirical basis for several strategies to promote treatment integrity are summarized. Finally, the relationship between treatment integrity and outcomes is discussed. Research from related fields that may influence thinking and practice related to treatment integrity within behavioral consultation are discussed throughout. (Contains 1 figure.)

Although quality guidelines for single-case intervention research emphasize the importance of concurrent baselines in multiple-baseline and multiple-probe designs, nonconcurrent variations on these designs persist in the research literature. This study describes a systematic review of special education intervention studies (k = 406) between 1988 and 2020 that report using nonconcurrent multiple-baseline or multiple-probe designs to test interventions for individuals with disabilities ages 21 years and younger. We coded and synthesized study characteristics pertaining to participants, settings, interventions, data reporting, and contextual factors. Findings indicate the prevalence of nonconcurrent designs for intervention studies in a variety of settings addressing social and communication needs of individuals with disabilities. We discuss implications for research and practice and offer suggestions for improving the validity of nonconcurrent designs. A PRISMA-compliant abstract is available at https://osf.io/sdnj5/?view_only=f386b1fe5f14430a8d63fceed293718d. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

School psychologists are uniquely positioned to support the delivery of evidence-based mental health practices (EBMHPs) to address the overwhelming mental health needs of children and youth. Graduate training programs can promote EBMHPs in schools by ensuring school psychologists enter the workplace prepared to deliver and support high-quality, effective services. Despite the remarkable growth of effective interventions to address a range of mental health problems, more work is needed to develop and adapt existing graduate training curricula to address this pressing issue. Using a problem-solving framework, we sequentially identify and analyze current challenges in training the next generation of school psychologists in EBMHPs. These challenges include how EBMHPs are packaged and structured, researchers' limited understanding of how culture affects efficacy, and continual shifts in evidence-based practice designations. These challenges provide a basis for the adaptation and future direction of training in EBMHPs. System-level changes and adaptations to professional practice standards are also discussed.

Recent studies have suggested single case design (SCD) intervention research is subject to publication bias, wherein studies are more likely to be published if they possess large or statistically significant effects and use rigorous experimental methods. The nature of SCD and the purposes for which it might be used could suggest that large effects and rigorous methods should not always be expected. The purpose of the current paper is to propose and describe a theory-driven cycle of SCD intervention research. The proposed SCD-specific cycle serves several purposes including (a) defining the purposes for which SCD research might be adopted, (b) specifying the types of evidence to be collected in establishing an intervention for applied use, and (c) illustrating the phases of SCD-based intervention research (i.e., development, efficacy, effectiveness, contextualization, and implementation). The proposed model is intended to serve as an intermediary between theory and research, facilitating the consideration of theory-driven expectations when selecting particular SCDs (e.g., reversal, multiple baseline) and interpreting SCD data. Next steps and future directions for research are included.

The published literature often underrepresents studies that do not find evidence for a treatment effect; this is often called "publication bias." Literature reviews that fail to include such studies may overestimate the size of an effect. Only a few studies have examined publication bias in single-case design (SCD) research, but those studies suggest that publication bias may occur. This study surveyed SCD researchers about publication preferences in response to simulated SCD results that show a range of small to large effects. Results suggest that SCD researchers are more likely to submit manuscripts that show large effects for publication and are more likely to recommend acceptance of manuscripts that show large effects when they act as a reviewer. A nontrivial minority of SCD researchers (4% to 15%) would drop 1 or 2 cases from the study if the effect size is small and then submit for publication. This article ends with a discussion of implications for publication practices in SCD research.

Behavioral interventions delivered across home and school settings can promote positive outcomes for youth with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Yet, stakeholders who deliver these interventions may struggle to implement interventions as intended. Low levels of treatment integrity can undermine potentially positive intervention outcomes. One way to promote implementers' treatment integrity is Implementation Planning, a logistical planning and barrier reduction strategy that is supported by emerging school-based research. The current study extended the research on Implementation Planning and evaluated the effectiveness of the strategy with parents implementing a behavioral intervention at home within a Conjoint Behavioral Consultation model. The behavioral intervention aimed to increase compliance and decrease aggression for two children with ASD at home. Initially, parents struggled to deliver the intervention consistently; however, after Implementation Planning, parents' treatment integrity increased and, subsequently, child outcomes improved. Implications for future research and consultation are presented.

We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts.

A recent review of existing rubrics designed to help researchers evaluate the internal and external validity of single-case design (SCD) studies found that the various options yield consistent results when examining causal arguments. The authors of the review, however, noted considerable differences across the rubrics when addressing the generalization of findings. One critical finding is that the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) review process does not capture details needed for report readers to evaluate generalization. This conclusion is reasonable if considering only the WWC's SCD design standards. It is important to note that these standards are not used in isolation, and thus generalization details cannot be fully understood without also considering the review protocols and a tool called the WWC SCD review guide. Our purpose in this commentary is to clarify how the WWC review procedures gather information on generalization criteria and to describe a threshold for judging how much evidence is available. It is important to clarify how the system works so that the SCD research community understands the standards, which in turn might facilitate use of future WWC reports and possibly influence both the conduct and the reporting of SCD studies. [Some of the information contained in this article is based on the What Works Clearinghouse's Single-Case Design Technical Documentation version 1.0 (Pilot) (referred to as the Standards in this article). For "Single-Case Designs Technical Documentation," see ED510743. For the response to this commentary, "Considering Generality in the Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research: A Response to Hitchcock et al.," see EJ1082189.]

Evidence-based practices within a response-to-intervention framework must be implemented with adequate treatment integrity to promote student outcomes. However, research findings indicate educators struggle to implement interventions and logistical considerations may limit the utility of performance feedback, an evidence-based treatment integrity promotion strategy. This study evaluates the effect of implementation planning, a treatment integrity promotion strategy that includes detailed logistical planning and barrier identification adapted from an adult behavior change theory from heath psychology (i.e., the Health Action Process Approach). A multiple baseline across participants design was used to evaluate teachers' adherence to a behavior support plan as well as their quality of implementation. Results indicated that after intervention training, adherence was initially low and variable, and quality of implementation was moderate to high and variable, but both adherence and quality increased and became less variable after implementation planning. The increases in implementation were more pronounced for two teachers, whose students also had subsequent improvements in their academic engagement and disruptive behavior. These findings highlight the relationship between adequate levels of treatment integrity and student outcomes as well as provide initial support for implementation planning.

In this article, we respond to Wolery's critique of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) pilot "Standards," which were developed by the current authors. We do so to provide additional information and clarify some points previously summarized in this journal. We also respond to several concerns raised by Maggin, Briesch, and Chafouleas after they applied the "Standards" to a single-case design synthesis published in this journal. The overall purpose of this response is to clarify what the "Standards" are designed to accomplish and to offer our views about future revisions.

A majority of evidence-based interventions in schools are delivered through consultation models and are implemented by a mediator, such as a teacher. Research indicates that mediators do not always adequately implement adopted evidence-based interventions, limiting their effectiveness in transforming student outcomes. We propose that to transform student outcomes through evidence-based practice, conceptualization of mediators' intervention implementation must move beyond quantification of discrete intervention steps implemented. Intervention implementation requires behavior change and thus can be conceptualized as an adult behavior change process. The purpose of this article is to illustrate how adult behavior change theory may inform how intervention implementation is conceptualized, facilitated, and supported. An empirically supported theory of adult behavior change from health psychology, the Health Action Process Approach, and how it has informed development of PRIME (Planning Realistic Intervention Implementation and Maintenance by Educators), a system of supports to facilitate mediators' implementation of school-based interventions, are introduced. A case study demonstrating the application of PRIME with a public school teacher implementing a behavior support plan is presented. Implications for future research are discussed. (Contains 3 figures.)

In this study we examined the extent to which teachers implement and generalize a praise intervention learned during behavioral consultation. Four elementary teachers and 15 of their students (3-4 per teacher) participated in the study. In each classroom, 1 student was randomly assigned as the consultation target student, 1 as the generalization target student, and the remaining as nontarget students. Within a randomized multiple baseline across teacher-participants design, data measuring treatment integrity, the consultation process, teacher intervention behaviors, and student outcomes were collected across 4 conditions: baseline, intervention implementation, generalization prompt, and generalization training. Results indicated that teachers did not consistently implement or generalize the praise intervention as a result of the conditions of the consultation process. The major limitations of treatment integrity, student selection, and a possible mismatch in teachers' training/philosophy of behavior management and the proposed intervention are discussed. Implications of the findings for future research and practice are presented. (Contains 4 tables and 6 figures.)