Problem-Solving/RtI: Application to Students with Emotional/Behavior Disorders David Wheeler, Ph.D....
-
Upload
abigayle-phillips -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Problem-Solving/RtI: Application to Students with Emotional/Behavior Disorders David Wheeler, Ph.D....
Problem-Solving/RtI: Application to Students with Emotional/Behavior Disorders
David Wheeler, Ph.D.George Batsche, Ed.D.
José Castillo, M.A.
University of South Florida
FASP 2007
Rule 6A-6.03016, FAC
(1) Definition. Students with an emotional / behavioral disability (EBD). A student with an emotional/ behavioral disability has persistent (is not sufficiently responsive to implemented evidence-based interventions) and consistent emotional or behavioral responses that adversely affect performance in the educational environment that cannot be attributed to age, culture, gender, or ethnicity.
Assumptions
• Students with emotional/behavioral disabilities demonstrate behaviors that are intense and severe– Intensity - deviation of the behavior (frequency, duration) from general
expectations and peer/cultural/setting norms– Severity - the behaviors continued non-response to evidence-based
interventions delivered with increasing intensity and consistency
• Some students with behavior problems have an emotional/behavioral disability
• Some students with behavior problems display behaviors that are intrusive and disruptive without having an emotional/behavioral disability
Criteria for Special Education Eligibility
• Significant gap exists between student and benchmark/peer performance
• The Response to Intervention is insufficient to predict attaining benchmark
• Student is not a functionally independent learner
• Complete comprehensive evaluation
“Change is the law of life and those who only look to the past or present
are certain to miss the future.” John F. Kennedy
Paradigm Shift
• Eligibility– Diagnostic/Test &
Place Model
• Improving student outcomes – Problem Solving/
Response to Intervention Model
IDEA 2004 - 20 U.S.C. § 1400(c)(5)
30 years of research has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by . . . providing incentives for whole-school approaches, scientifically based early reading programs, positive behavioral interventions and supports, and early intervening services to reduce the need to label children as disabled in order to address the learning and behavioral needs of such children
State Board Rule 6A-6.0331
District’s responsibility to address through appropriate interventions and, to the extent possible, resolve a student’s learning or behavioral areas of concern in the general education environment.
“Every student needs something special in education BUT not every student needs special education.”
Jim Tucker
Getting “help” without labeling children as disabled
• Problem-solving approach
• Multiple tiers of intervention service delivery
• An integrated system of assessment & data collection that informs decisions at each tier
Response to Intervention
Response to Intervention is a multi-tiered, problem-solving approach to providing instruction and intervention to students, at increasing levels of intensity, based on progress monitoring and data analysis.
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Three-Tier Model of Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier III: Intensive, Individual Interventions
Tier II: Targeted Group Interventions
Tier I: Universal Interventions/Supports
80 - 90%
10-15%
1-5%
How Does it Fit Together?Standard Treatment Protocol
Addl.DiagnosticAssessment
InstructionResults
Monitoring
IndividualDiagnostic
IndividualizedIntensive
weekly
All Students at a grade level
ODRsMonthlyBx
Screening
Bench-Mark
Assessment
AnnualTesting
Behavior Academics
None ContinueWithCore
Instruction
GradesClassroomAssessments
Yearly Assessments
Step 1Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Supplemental
1-5%
5-10%
80-90%
Core
Intensive
StandardProtocol
Small GroupDifferentiatedBy Skill
2 times/month
Problem-solving Process
• Problem identification - What is the problem?• Problem analysis - Why is it occurring?• Intervention development & implementation -
What are we going to do?• Response to intervention (evaluation of
effectiveness through progress monitoring) - How effective is the intervention?
I
II
III
Problem Identification
Problem Analysis
Intervention Design
Responseto
Intervention
Tiers of Problem Solving
Categories of school-based behavior problems
• Problems that respond to interventions – Not eligible for special education
• Problems that do not respond to intensive interventions AND do not constitute a recognized emotional/behavioral disability – Not eligible for special education but require intervention
• Problems that do not respond to intensive interventions AND constitute a recognized emotional/ behavioral disability– Eligible for special education
Importance of emotional/behavioral intervention within an RtI model
• Promotes social/emotional health for all students• Improves school climate and culture • Focus on early intervention/prevention• Assessment linked to intervention• Reduces the number of students “needing” placement• Disproportionality - minorities and males• Maintains students in least restrictive environment
Adapted from E. Runkel’s presentation on Behavioral Assessment & RTI at the NASP 2007 Annual Conference
Three Tier Model of Behavioral Intervention & Positive Support
• Tier I: Universal: School-wide interventions and support
• Tier II: Targeted Group Interventions
• Tier III: Intensive Individual Interventions
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Three-Tier Model of Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier III: Intensive, Individual Interventions
Tier II: Targeted Group Interventions
Tier I: Universal Interventions/Supports
80 - 90%
10-15%
1-5%
Tier I
• Question: How effective is school-wide program?
• Assessment: – Office discipline referrals (ODR)– Disproportionality data & school climate surveys– Screening (mental health & behavior)
• Hypotheses: – Lack of instruction – Lack of positive behavior supports – Inconsistent discipline policy
• Interventions– Identify common behavioral issues & develop school-wide (or whole
class) interventions– Introduce positive behavior supports– Teach prosocial behaviors
10 - 15%
Tier I: Behavioral Intervention/Support
80 - 90%
Tier I - Assessment Discipline Data (ODR)
Benchmark AssessmentSchool Climate Surveys
Universal Screening
Tier I - Core Interventions School-wide Discipline
Positive Behavior SupportsWhole-class Interventions
TIER 1: School-Wide Discipline Programs:
Positive Behavior SupportProsocial Discipline Programs
School-wide Discipline CommitteeAttendance Programs
Identifying students at-risk
• Universal screening for social skill competencies/social behaviors/mental health
• Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorder (SSBD)• School Wide Information System (SWIS)• School Archival Records Search (SARS)• BASC Emotional Screening System (BESS)• Classroom observation/Teacher nomination• Parent reported child risk factors• Student reported risk factors/self-identification
Universal Screening - Identifying students at-risk
• Sources of screening data – Academic performance– Discipline data (ODR)– Records – Observation
• Screening Instruments/Systems– School Wide Information System (SWIS)– School Archival Records Search (SARS) – Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorder (SSBD)– BASC Emotional Screening System (BESS)– Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Performance
Screening
10
30
38
30 31
24
30
54
26
18
86
17 16 16
26
29
32
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
August
September
OctoberNovember December
January February
MarchApril May
Month
Number of ODRs
2005-2006 2006-2007
Referral Analysis
• 42% Noncompliance• 30% Off-Task/Inattention• 12% Physical/Verbal
Aggression• 6% Relational
Aggression• 10% Bullying 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1stQtr
2ndQtr
3rdQtr
4thQtr
NoncomplianceOff TaskAggressionRel AggressionBullying
Building-Level Behavior Data
Behavior Referral Analysis
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
MaleFemale White
HispanicAfrican Am
OtherLow SES
Building
Referred
% Building
% Referred
Male 50% 80%
White 72% 54%
Hispanic 12% 20%
African American 15% 24%
Other 1% 2%
Low SES 25% 50%
Tier II
• Question: How is student functioning compared to expectations? peers?
• Assessment: – Baseline data (intensity of behavior - frequency, duration)– Peer group comparison– Gap analysis
• Hypotheses: – Student has not been taught the skill– Expected behavior is not reinforced in the learning environment
• Interventions– Classroom-based behavioral interventions– Small-group, targeted interventions
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Tier II: Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier II - Targeted InterventionsTargeted Group Interventions
Social Skills TrainingSmall Groups
Tiered Discipline Programs
80 - 90%
10-15%
Tier II - AssessmentBehavioral Observations
Intervention Data (peer group comparison)
Tier I - Core InterventionsTier I Assessment
TIER 2: StrategicStrategic/Supplemental Behavior Programs:
• Small Group SST• Anger Control Training
• Peer/adult mentoring program• Tiered discipline program
(e.g., positive rehearsal, time out)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
% Wait for Turn
Benchmark75%
30 %
42%
74%
58%
Baseline
33%
37% 37%40%
42%
Class-Wide Social Skills Training
49%
65%62%
67%
70%
62%
79%75%
73%
79%82%
86% 85%
90%92%
(+3%) (+4%)
(+0%) (+3%)
(+2%)
Outcome?
• Rate of Peer Performance?– 82-58= 58/24 or 2.42
• Rate of Target Student Performance?– 42-27= 27/15 or 1.80
• Type of Response to Intervention?– Peer??– Student??
• Intervention Effectiveness Decision?
Raphael's Compliance
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% of on task behavior
78.3%
61.6%
81.6%
31.6
Jan
Baseline
Benchmark
Feb March April May
RTI -5% per wk.
RTI + 4.8% per wk
Tier One
Aimline
RTI +2.7% per wk.
89%
75%
96.%
42.5
RTI + 2.6%per wk.
Tier III
• Question: What is the student’s response to evidence-based interventions?
• Assessment: – Functional Behavior Assessment - prior to interventions– Response to Intervention data with graph
• Hypotheses: – Focus on child-specific issues in problem-solving
• Interventions– Behavior intervention plan - based on FBA– Assessing quality/intensity of interventions
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Tier III of Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier II Targeted Interventions
80 - 90%
10-15%
1-5%
Tier I Core InterventionsTier I Assessments
Tier II Assessments
Tier III: Individualized InterventionsBehavior Intervention Plan
Individual CounselingSelf-Monitoring
In-school Alternative Education
Tier III: AssessmentsFBA
Progress Monitoring Graph
TIER 3: INTENSIVE Behavior Programs
• Individual counseling/therapy• Individual Behavior Plan
• Rapid Response • In-school alternative education
• Frequent, daily mentoring
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5%
Tier 3: Comprehensive and Intensive InterventionsIndividual Students or Small Group (2-3)Reading: Scholastic Program,
Reading,Mastery, ALL, Soar to Success, Leap Track, Fundations
1-5%
Tier 3: Intensive InterventionsIndividual CounselingFBA/BIPTeach, Reinforce, and Prevent (TRP)Assessment-basedIntense, durable procedures
5-10%Tier 2: Strategic InterventionsStudents that don’t respond to the core curriculumReading: Soar to Success, Leap Frog, CRISS strategies, CCC Lab Math: Extended DayWriting: Small Group, CRISS strategies, and “Just Write Narrative” by K. Robinson
5-10% Tier 2: Targeted Group InterventionsSome students (at-risk)Small Group CounselingParent Training (Behavior & Academic)Bullying Prevention ProgramFBA/BIP Classroom Management Techniques, Professional Development Small Group Parent Training ,Data
80-90%Tier 1: Core CurriculumAll studentsReading: Houghton MifflinMath: HarcourtWriting: Six Traits Of WritingLearning Focus Strategies
80-90% Tier 1: Universal InterventionsAll settings, all studentsCommittee, Preventive, proactive strategies, School Wide Rules/ Expectations Positive Reinforcement System (Tickets & 200 Club) School Wide Consequence System School Wide Social Skills Program, Data (Discipline, Surveys, etc.) Professional Development (behavior)Classroom Management Techniques,Parent Training
Three Tiered Model of School Supports:Anclote Elementary-Pasco County
Students
Intervention Support
• Intervention plans should be developed based on student need and skills of staff
• All intervention plans should have intervention support • Principals should ensure that intervention plans have
intervention support • Teachers should not be expected to implement plans
for which there is no support
Critical Components of Intervention Support
• Support for Intervention Integrity
• Documentation of Intervention Implementation
• Intervention and Eligibility decisions and outcomes cannot be supported in an RtI model without these two critical components
Intervention Support
• Pre-meeting– Review data– Review steps to intervention– Determine logistics
• First 2 weeks– 2-3 meetings/week– Review data– Review steps to intervention– Revise, if necessary
Intervention Support
• Second Two Weeks– Meet twice each week
• Following weeks– Meet at least weekly– Review data– Review steps– Discuss Revisions
• Approaching benchmark– Review data– Schedule for intervention fading– Review data
Problem-Solving Process Applied to E/BD
Problem solving - levels of analysis
• Student
• Class
• School
• District
• State
I
II
III
Problem-solving protocol
• Identify target & replacement behavior• Identify peer group for comparison
– Collect baseline & progress monitoring data (frequency, duration)
– Gap analysis - compare student to peer group and expectation
• Determine function of the behavior (FBA)• Develop/Implement interventions based on FBA (BIP)• Monitor/Evaluate/Modify interventions based on data
– Document response to intervention – Problem solving continues based on response to
intervention
Documenting response to intervention
• Benchmark/Expectation
• Student’s level of performance
• Peer performance
• Aimline
• Trendline
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
% Compliance
35%
Benchmark75%
= Peer Group = Aim Line
BASELINE
Evaluating the response to intervention - GAP Analysis
• What is the deficit in initial level?
• What is deficit in slope or rate of progress?
• How does the student compare to peers (students of similar age, gender, culture, & ethnicity)?
Tier 1 —Universal Interventions
25 2328
3540
45
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
% Compliance
• School-Wide Positive Behavior Support
• Grade Level Social Skill Training
35%
50%
55%
60%
Benchmark75%
= Peer Group
= Target Student
= Aim Line
= Trend Line
Types of responses to intervention
• Positive response– Gap closing at acceptable rate
• Questionable response– Gap maintained or is closing at unacceptable rate
• Poor response– Gap widens
Intervention decisions based on RtI
• Positive response– Continue intervention– Modify intervention intensity or fade
• Questionable response– Increase intensity of intervention - freq/time/focus– Monitor more frequently (at least weekly)
• Poor response– Revisit problem solving– Significantly modify current or develop new intervention
Evaluating the effectiveness of the intervention
• Is the intervention evidence-based?
• How “intense” is the intervention?
• What can we “expect” the intervention to do?
• Was the intervention implemented as planned?
• How effective is this intervention with students from similar backgrounds?
Data Issues
• Data collection– What is collected? Who is responsible for collecting? – How frequently is data collected? How is the data used?
• Data display - necessary to evaluate RtI– Graph - Benchmark, Aimline, Trendline– Disaggregate - grade, gender, race, ELL, SES
• Data Management – AIMS-WEB, Wireless Generation– Local Programs– Chart Dog
Case example . . . Victor
Problem Identification - Baseline data
Benchmark Level 75%
Current Level 27%
Peer Level 42%
Assess effectiveness of universal supports
• Gap analysis– Student and benchmark: 75/27 = 2.8– Student and peers: 42/27 = 1.5
• Effectiveness of core supports– Not effective for male peers
• Intervention decision: focus on Tier I– Grade-level social skills training 2x weekly
Document effectiveness of Tier I interventions & supports before moving to Tier II
Assess effectiveness of universal behavior supports at Tier I• Gap analysis
– Gap between student and benchmark: 75/11 = 6.8– Gap between student and peers: 71/11 = 6.5
• Effectiveness of core interventions– Is the gap closing?– Response to intervention?
• Intervention decision: move to Tier II interventions– Hypothesis - Victor is not complying to teacher requests
because he lacks social skills– Intervention - small group social skills training for 30 minutes
a day
Assess effectiveness of targeted group interventions at Tier II• Gap analysis
– Student and benchmark: 75/43 = 1.7– Student and peers: 80/43 = 1.9
• Effectiveness of targeted group intervention– Is the gap closing? – Response to intervention?
• Intervention decision: move to Tier III interventions– Multiple Hypotheses – ICES by RIOT– Interventions - Tier I + II + III
Assess effectiveness of intensive individual interventions at Tier III
• Gap analysis– Student and benchmark: 75/69 = 1 – Student and peers: 85/69 = 1.2
• Effectiveness of intensive individual interventions– Is the gap closing?– Response to intervention?
• Intervention decision– Does Victor require special education services?
IDEA Eligibility Evaluation
• IDEA definition of “evaluation” (§300.15) - procedures used to determine whether a child has a disability AND the nature and extent of special education needs
• What constitutes an evaluation? CFR §300.305– Review of existing evaluation data
• Evaluations and information provided by the parent• Current classroom-based, district, or state assessments, and
classroom-based observations • Observations by teachers and related service providers
– Identify what additional data (if any) are needed to determine if the student is a student with a disability and to determine the educational needs
IDEA Evaluations - §300.304
• Evaluation Procedures – Use variety of assessment tools and strategies – Not use any single measure as the sole criteria for
determining eligibility– Use technically sound instruments
• District responsibility– Not discriminatory (selection & administration) – Used for purposes for which the assessment is valid and
reliable– Administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel– Administered in accordance with publisher’s instructions
Where is requirement for RtI?
• Rule 6A-6.0331– Interventions must include a progress monitoring plan and
pre/post measures of intervention effects.– Parent conferences must include discussion of student’s
responses to interventions.• E/DB Rule
– Persistent defined in RtI language - not sufficiently responsive to evidence-based interventions
• Draft Administrative Rules• RtI embedded in NCLB and IDEA 2004
– Student outcomes– Data-driven accountability– Use of evidence-based interventions
When should an eligibility evaluation be initiated?
• There is evidence of effective core supports– 90 - 95% of students successful in Tier I/II
• There is evidence of effective targeted and individual interventions– Interventions effective with 70% of students at Tier II/III
• The intensity of behaviors persist given evidence-based, individual interventions implemented with fidelity (Tier III)
• Purpose of evaluation is to assist in determining – whether behaviors constitute an emotional/behavioral
disability and – the educational needs of the student
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Tier III of Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier II Targeted InterventionsTargeted Group Interventions
Social Skills TrainingSmall Groups
80 - 90%
10-15%
1-5%
Tier I Core InterventionsSchool-wide Discipline
Positive Behavior SupportsWhole-class Interventions
Tier I AssessmentsDiscipline Data (ODR)
Benchmark AssessmentUniversal Screening
Tier II AssessmentsBehavioral Observations
Intervention Data Gap Analysis
Tier III: Individualized InterventionsBehavior Intervention Plan
Individual CounselingSelf-Monitoring
Tier III: AssessmentsFBA
Progress Monitoring Graph/RtI(Eligibility Assessment)
RIOT/ICEL Matrix
Review Interview Observe Test
Instruction(Intervention)
Curriculum(School-wide Program)
Environment
Learner
RIOT
• Review - looking at records & products
• Interview - talking to people who know the student
• Observe - watching what occurs in the instructional setting
• Test - having students perform skills in structured format
ICEL
• Instruction - how content is presented (teaching)
• Curriculum - what is taught (content)
• Environment - physical setting where instruction occurs
• Learner - student variables
RIOT/ICEL Matrix Applied to E/BD
Review Interview Observe Test
Instruction(Intervention)
Curriculum(School-wide Program)
Environment
Learner
80 - 90%
10 - 15%
1 - 5%
Tier III of Behavioral Intervention/Support
Tier II Targeted InterventionsTargeted Group Interventions
Social Skills TrainingSmall Groups
80 - 90%
10-15%
1-5%
Tier I Core InterventionsSchool-wide Discipline
Positive Behavior SupportsWhole-class Interventions
Tier I AssessmentsDiscipline Data (ODR)
Benchmark AssessmentUniversal Screening
Tier II AssessmentsBehavioral Observations
Intervention Data Gap Analysis
Tier III: Individualized InterventionsBehavior Intervention Plan
Individual CounselingSelf-Monitoring
Tier III: AssessmentsFBA
Progress Monitoring Graph/RtI(Eligibility Assessment)
Universal Screening
• Sources of screening data – Academic performance– Discipline data (ODR)– Records – Observation
• Screening Instruments/Systems– School Wide Information System (SWIS)– School Archival Records Search (SARS) – Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorder (SSBD)– BASC Emotional Screening System (BESS)– Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Performance
Screening
Multi-dimensional E/BD Assessment
• Multiple methods– Observation– Interview– Standardized Rating Scales
• Multiple sources– Parent– Teacher– Student
• Multiple settings– School (within school)– Home
Components of E/BD Evaluation (SP&P)
• Functional behavioral assessment - general ed interventions (Tier II/Tier III)
• Psychological evaluation
• Social-developmental history
• Educational evaluation
• Medical evaluation - when determined necessary by ESE Director or designee
Functional Behavioral Assessment
• Description of target/replacement behavior (Problem identification)
• Identification of environmental factors that may contribute to the behavior (Problem analysis)
• Determination of function of behavior (Problem analysis)
• Development of hypotheses regarding the function or purpose of the behavior (Problem analysis)
• Development of positive interventions in a written plan (BIP) - (Intervention design/implementation)
• Evaluation (Progress monitoring/RtI)
FBA Assessment Tools
• Architext - Pearson • Conducting School Based Functional Behavioral
Assessments - Watson & Steege, 2003• Four-Step Model Functional Behavioral Assessment
Skiba, et al., NASP Communiqué, May 1998 • Functional Assessment Interview Form (FAI) - O’Neill
et al., 1997• Functional Assessment and Intervention System
(FAIS) - Stoiber, 2004• Functional Behavioral Assessment and Behavioral
Intervention Plans - FLDOE, 1999 TAP (FY 1999-3)
Psychological Evaluation
• Assessment procedures identifying the internal or external factors that constitute an emotional/behavioral disability– Behavioral observations– Clinical interview– Assessment of emotional/behavioral functioning
• Information on developmental functioning and skills as needed - an intellectual evaluation is not required
• Identify the evidence-based interventions implemented and the criteria used to evaluate the student’s response to intervention
Observation Systems
• Academic Engaged Time Code (AET-SSBD) • Behavioral Observation of Students in Schools
(BOSS)• Direct Observation Form (DOF) - ASEBA• State-Event Classroom Observation (SECOS)• Student Observation System (SOS) - BASC-II
Portable Observation Program
Volpe, et al. (2005) Observing Students in Classrooms: A Review of Seven Coding Schemes. School Psychology Review.Hintze et al. (2002). Best Practices in the Systematic Direct Observation of Student Behavior. Best Practices in School Psychology IV.
Clinical Interviews
• Children’s Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes (ChIPS)
• Semi-structured Clinical Interview for Children and Adolescents (ASEBA)
• Semi-structured Parent Interview and Structured Diagnostic Interview for Parents (McConaughy)
• Social-Developmental History (BASC-2)
McConaughy (2005). Clinical Interviews for Children and Adolescents.
Rating Scales
• Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA)
• Beck Youth Inventories, Second Edition (BYI-II)• Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF)• Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition
(BASC-II)• Clinical Assessment of Behavior (CAB)• Emotional Disturbance Decision Tree (EDDT)• Personality Inventory for Children, Second Edition (PIC-2)
& (PIY)• Social Skills Rating System (SSRS)
Social-developmental History
• Structured interview with parent • Appraisal of interpersonal, familial, and environmental
factors impacting learning & behavior – Family composition and dynamics– Educational history– Health and developmental history– Emotional and behavioral status– Environment and cultural influence
• Address factors that extend beyond the school setting
Educational Evaluation
• Review educational history and current academic performance (e.g., state & district assessments, progress monitoring data, classroom performance, previous educational assessments)
• Address relationship between academic performance and emotional/behavioral disability
• Complete a formal academic evaluation if there is insufficient information or if academic performance data is not current
Behavioral Assessment and Diagnostic Issues
• Validity and reliability of instruments
• Differential diagnosis
• Base rates
• Sensitivity
• Specificity
The eligibility evaluation must document:
• Response to evidence-based interventions implemented with fidelity (intensity/severity of the behavior)
• Behaviors constitute an emotional/ behavioral disability (meet criteria for recognized emotional and/or behavior disability)
• Exclusionary factors do not explain emotions/behavior• Need for special education & related services
Intervention Implementation with IEP
• Continue progress monitoring (RtI) and problem solving
• Intervention implementation on IEP should identify:– The most effective interventions (not simply those that are
“available” or tied to a particular setting (e.g., EBD “room”)– Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) in which those
interventions will be successful– Personnel qualified to deliver the interventions– Setting(s) which offers the greatest potential for integration
with typical peers.
Web Resources
• Florida Problem-Solving/Response to Intervention Project http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/
• Florida Positive Behavior Support Project http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/
• Intervention Central www.interventioncentral.org• Managing On-site Discipline for Effective Learning
http://www.modelprogram.com/• OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior
Supports http://www.pbis/• The National Association of School Psychologists
www.nasponline.org• The IRIS Center http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/
Other resources
• Practitioner’s edition on promoting behavioral competence. Psychology in the Schools, Vol 44 (1) 2007.
• School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice. Vol 1 (2) 2007.
• Mini-Series: Current Perspectives on School-based Behavioral interventions. School Psychology Review, Vol 33 (3) 2004.
• Mini-Series: Direct observation assessment of student Behavior. School Psychology Review, Vol 34 (4) 2005.
• Howell & Nolet (2000). Curriculum-based evaluation (Chap 13 - Social Skills).
• Rutherford, Quinn, & Mathur (Eds.) (2004). Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral disorders.