Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams

Study: Kamps, Conklin, & Wills (in press)

Study Type: Single-Subject Design

Descriptive Information Usage Acquisition and Cost Program Specifications and Requirements Training

CW-FIT is a classroom management system with four primary components: teaching classroom rules/skills, using group contingency plans with differential reinforcement of appropriate behaviors (goal setting and points), minimizing social attention to inappropriate behavior (extinction) and the use of self-management, and help cards for individual students who need enhancements to the group contingency.

Three target skills are taught in class-wide lessons (1) gaining the teacher’s attention, (2) following directions, and (3) ignoring inappropriate behaviors.  The teaching component uses scripted lessons that last 3-5 days; and pre-corrects for skills are then implemented throughout all intervention sessions. 

The group contingency component of CW-FIT consists of a game format with class teams of 2-5 students (typically rows of students), and the use of a token economy.  During the CW-FIT intervention period, the teacher sets the timer to beep every 2-3 minutes. At the beep, the teacher awards a point on the team chart to each team with ALL members engaged in appropriate behaviors.  At the end of the class period, rewards were given to each team (all students on the team) who met the stated goal.

Teachers provide differential reinforcement in the form of frequent, specific praise for appropriate behaviors and use of the skills when awarding team points, and to individuals and groups throughout the lesson.

The self-management enhancement is designed for students who continue to have some difficulty during the initial sessions of CW-FIT intervention. Self-management consists of (a) two small group booster sessions for individual students and peers, and (b) use of a mini-chart on the students’ desk that matched the team goal chart posted for the class. Booster sessions focus on CW-FIT rules that are problematic for the target students, and modeling use of the self-management chart (self-evaluation and self-recording points for appropriate behaviors).

Following booster sessions, self-management is implemented for target student during the CW-FIT session. The teacher initially prompts the self-management of behaviors during the CW-FIT sessions until students are able to record their points on the mini-charts independently.  At the sound of the beep, the teacher marks team points on the goal chart, and then verbally directs self-management students to award themselves a point if they are engaged appropriately.  

CW-FIT is intended for use in kindergarten through fifth grade. The program is intended for use with students with disabilities, learning disabilities, emotional or behavioral disabilities, English language learners, or any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties.

The area of focus is externalizing behavior, which includes: noncompliance, high levels of disengagement, and disruptive behavior.

Where to Obtain: Debra Kamps

Address: 444 Minnesota Ave, Kansas City, KS, 66101

Phone: 913-321-3143

CW-FIT is designed for use with small groups of 3-8 students or with a classroom of students (20-30). Only one interventionist is needed to implement the program.

Program administration time is 30-45 minutes, 3-4 sessions/week for 16+ weeks.

The program includes highly specified teacher manuals or instructions for implementation.

The program is not affiliated with a broad school or class wide management program.

The program does not require technology for implementation.

Four to eight hours of training are required for the interventionist. Training consists of a 3 hour workshop, followed by demonstration and modeling in the classroom by a CW-FIT coach for 2-3 sessions, followed by bi-weekly fidelity checks.

A school-based coach can assume the role of CW-FIT coach. The interventionist must be a professional. It is assumed that the interventionist has expertise in classroom teaching experience, though it is appropriate for first year teachers as well.

Practitioners may obtain ongoing support on a limited basis as the research for a 2nd RCT is ongoing.

 

Participants: Unconvincing Evidence

Risk Status: Students were nominated by their teacher based on frequent disruptive behavior and ranking using the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Walker et al.). Students met the cut score for 'at-risk' on the SSRS Problem Behavior subscale.

Demographics:

 

Age/ Grade

Gender

Race-ethnicity

Socioeconomic status

Disability Status

ELL status

Other Relevant Descriptive Characteristics

Case 1: Student 1

1st grade

Female

African-American

Low income status

None

No

 

Case 2: Student 2

1st grade

Male

African-American

Low income status

None

No

 

Case 3: Student 3

4th grade

Male

African-American

Low income status

None

No

 

Case 4: Student 4

4th grade

Male

Caucasian

Low income status

None

No

 

Training of Instructors: Teachers were the interventionists. It was the first year of teaching for the female first grade teacher, and the second year for the male fourth grade teacher. Researchers provided training and in class monitoring was provided twice weekly by a building coach who was trained by the researchers.

Design: Unconvincing Evidence

Does the study include three data points or sufficient number to document a stable performance within that phase? No

Is there opportunity for at least three demonstrations of experimental control? No

If the study is an alternating treatment design, are there five repetitions of the alternating sequence? Not applicable

If the study is a multiple baseline, is it concurrent? Not applicable

Implemented with Fidelity: Partially Convincing Evidence

Description of when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained: A 13-item procedural fidelity checklist (see Figure 1) was used to determine the use of CW-FIT intervention components during sessions (e.g., skills are prominently displayed on posters, pre-corrects on skills occur at beginning of session, point goal is determined, points are awarded to individuals/teams for use of the skills at set intervals).  The ratings were scored as yes or no. Fidelity probes were conducted in the two classes during all data sessions in baseline and intervention phases. 

Results on the fidelity of treatment implementation measure: Fidelity during intervention averaged 87.9% for the first grade teacher (range of 33-100%), and 93.8% for the fourth grade teacher (range 75-100%). No fidelity data were collected for self-management procedures (accuracy or consistency of awarding points). However, the checklist did indicate that self-management was used during self-management conditions.

Measures Targeted: Partially Convincing Evidence

Targeted Measure

Reliability statistics

Relevance to program focus

Exposure to related support among control group

On task - student level

Inter-rater reliability, mean 91%, range 75-100%

Directly related to CW-FIT skills

 

Disruptive behaviors - student level

Inter-rate reliability, mean 71%, range 57-86%

Directly related to CW-FIT skills

 

 

Broader Measure

Reliability statistics

Relevance to program focus

Exposure to related support among control group

N/A

 

 

 

 

Mean ES Targeted Outcomes: N/A

Mean ES Administrative Outcomes: N/A

Effect Size:

Visual Analysis (Single-Subject Designs): Partially Convincing Evidence

Description of the method of analyses used to determine whether the intervention condition improved relative to baseline phase (e.g. visual analysis, computation of change score, mean difference): Visual inspection, mean difference

Results in terms of within and between phase patterns:

On-Task Data:

Student 1 baseline mean was 59.9% (range 24-90%, standard deviation 33); CW-FIT increased to a mean of 78.6%, however behavior was variable across sessions ranging from 47-100% (standard deviation 18). The range in on task behavior across both self-management conditions was 92-100% with a mean of 96.1%, standard deviation 2.6.

Student 2 baseline mean baseline was 41% (range 5-76%, standard deviation 29.9). CW-FIT increased on task to mean of 80.4%, (range 70-91%, standard deviation 7.9). On task decreased during the reversal condition (range 26-81.8%). The use of self-management improved on task to even higher levels averaging 93.8% across both self-management conditions (range 88-98%, standard deviation 3.8).

Student 3 baseline mean was low and fairly stable, ranging from 33-52.4% (mean 44.7%, standard deviation 10.3). CW-FIT did not improve his on task levels (mean 58%, standard deviation 18.2), but the use of self-management had immediate positive effects for on task behavior averaging 96.1%. The reversal showed a decrease to baseline levels. In the final self-management condition, behaviors again improved with two sessions at 100% and a mean across both self-management conditions at 96% (range 90-100%, standard deviation 3.5). 

Student 4 on task behavior started high and decreased during baseline (range 22.8-100%, standard deviation 38.9) and reversal (27-44%) conditions. The CW-FIT intervention helped improve the on task behavior averaging 72% (range 48-77%, standard deviation 13.9), but the use of self-management showed more stable increases with an average of 94.4% (range 79-100%, standard deviation 6.2) on task across both self-management conditions.

Disruptive Behavior Data:

All four students displayed frequent and sometimes very high levels of disruptive behaviors during the baseline conditions. 

Student 1's disruptive behaviors ranged from 25 to 96 incidents during baseline probes, a mean frequency of 49.7 (standard deviation 40.2). The disruptive behavior decreased to a mean frequency of 23 (range 4-58, standard deviation 18.7) during CW-FIT, and showed further decreases with the addition of the self-management, ranging from 6-18. The reversal showed an increase with a mean of 46.5.  With the return to the CW-FIT plus self-management, disruptive behavior again decreased. The mean across both self-management conditions was 7.8 (range 3-11, standard deviation 4.9).

Student 2's disruptive behavior was also high and variable during baseline conditions with a mean frequency of 43.8 (range 15-80, standard deviation 27.7). The CW-FIT showed decreases in disruptive behaviors after the initial session, with an average of 20.4 (range 4-67, standard deviation 21.2). The use of self-management with the CW-FIT reduced disruptive behavior to a range of 4-6 per session. The reversal showed an increase to the baseline levels with a mean of 52 disruptive behaviors. The return to self-management again decreased the behaviors to a range of 2-6 per session. The mean across both self-management conditions was 5.4, with a range of 2-9 (standard deviation 2.3).

Student 3 frequency of disruptive behavior in baseline was 15.3 on average (range 11-18, standard deviation 3.8), with an increase during CW-FIT intervention to a mean of 37.7 (range 25-57, standard deviation 17). This was atypical to the improved effects for other participants, and thus the self-management procedures were added after three CW-FIT sessions. With the exception of one session (#10), CW-FIT + self-management reduced disruptive behaviors with a mean of 9.9 and a range of 0-47 (standard deviation 13.9) across both self-management conditions.

Student 4 disruptive behaviors showed high baseline levels (mean 74, range 31-132, standard deviation 52.1), a decrease during CW-FIT intervention (mean 29.2, range 11-37, standard deviation 14.1), and a further decrease during CW-FIT + self-management with a mean across both conditions of 7.2 (range 0-17, standard deviation 6.3).

Disaggregated Outcome Data Available for Demographic Subgroups: No

Target Behavior(s): Externalizing

Delivery: Small groups (n=3-25), Classrooms

Fidelity of Implementation Check List Available: Yes

☐ Primary Sheet     ☐ Reliability Sheet

Class-wide Function-related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT)

Procedural Fidelity Checklist

 

School: ____________________________         Teacher: ______________________________

Observer Name: _____________________        Observer 2/reliability: ____________________

Date: ______________________________        Time: _________________________________

 

Condition:                           ☐Control     ☐Experimental

Observation Condition:       ☐Baseline   ☐Intervention   ☐Training   ☐Comparison  ☐Reversal

Observation Type:              ☐On-Task   ☐MOOSES     ☐General   ☐Other

 

MOOSES File(s): _____________________________________________________________

Self-Managers: _______________________________________________________________

Help Card Use: _______________________________________________________________

 

CW-FIT Procedures

Observed

Quality

1.     Skills are prominently displayed on posters.

Y     N

1     2     3

2.     Precorrects on skills at beginning of session.

Y     N

1     2     3

3.     Corrections are instructive and refer to skills.

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

4.     Team point chart displayed.

Y     N

1     2     3

5.     Daily point goal posted.

Y     N

1     2     3

6.     Self-management charts given to individuals.

Y     N     N/A

 

6a. Teacher prompts SM students to give points/HC students to use HC.

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

6b. SM students give themselves points/Students use HC.

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

6c. Teacher praises SM/HC students (at least 2 times).

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

6d. Teacher supports SM/HC (proximity, checks for accuracy).

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

7.     Timer used & set at appropriate intervals.

Y     N

1     2     3

8.     Points awarded to teams for use of skills.

Y     N

1     2     3

9.     Points tallied for teams.

Y     N

1     2     3

10.  Winners immediately rewarded.

Y     N  

 

11.  Winners reward announced if delayed.

Y     N     N/A

1     2     3

12.  Frequent praise (points) given.

Y     N

1     2     3

13.  Behavior-specific praise given.

Y     N

1     2     3

14.  Praise (points) to reprimand ratio is approximately 4:1.

Y     N

1     2     3

 

Please subtract out any items marked N/A when computing your totals.

 

Total Fidelity Score_____                                   Total Quality Score_____

Total Score Possible_____                                Total Score Possible_____

Total Score divided by Total Possible = % yes_____                                                  Average_____

 

 

1 – Very Low           = 40% of students or time

2 – Moderately low  = 60% of students or time

3 – Average                        = 80% of students or time

4 – Moderately high = 90% of students or time

 

Classroom management – student behavior:

 

1.

Level of compliance during academic instruction

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

2.

Students follow rules appropriate to setting

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

3.

Transitions are short with only minor disruptions

☐0 – unable to code

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

4.

Students are focused and on task

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

5.

Level of lesson structure

(organized clear directions, sufficient work to keep students busy)

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

6.

Teacher ignores minor inappropriate behaviors

☐0 – unable to code

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

7.

Frequent and specific praise given

(points count toward frequency)

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

8.

Praise (points) ratio to reprimands approximately 4:1

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

9.

Three to five clearly and positively stated classroom expectations/rules are visibly posted

 

☐1

☐2

☐3

☐4

                   

Total Score _____

Total Score Possible _____

Total Score divided by Total Possible = % yes _____

 

10.

System of rewards observed:

☐Yes

☐No

 

 

 

 

Skills

Consult

Modeling

Follow-Up

Lessons/Precorrects

 

 

 

Instructive Corrections

 

 

 

Teams

 

 

 

Goals/Points

 

 

 

Rewards

 

 

 

Praise

 

 

 

Timer/Time Intervals

 

 

 

Logistical Questions

 

 

 

Transitions

 

 

 

Lesson Structure

 

 

 

General Behavior

 

 

 

Self-Management

 

 

 

Help Cards

 

 

 

FBA

 

 

 

OTHER

 

 

 

Time Spent:

 

 

 

 

 

Check any observed and approximate %

(Must total 100%)

 

☐Large Group*            ___________%

☐Small Group*              ___________%

☐Independent              ___________%

☐1 on 1                        ___________%

☐Transition                  ___________%

*Note: Large or Small Group must be led by teacher.

Check the primary lesson

☐ Reading                  ☐ Writing

☐ Math                       ☐ Science

☐ Other

 

 

 

CW-FIT Fidelity Definitions

 

  1. Skills are prominently displayed on posters.

3-5 POSITIVELY STATED rules or skills are posted and visible to students and each rule has 3-5 actionable/observable steps that students can reference when demonstrating that skill and/or follow the rule. Skills/rules address (1) How to Get the Teacher’s Attention, (2) Follow Directions the 1st Time, (3) Ignore Inappropriate Behavior, and other target skills. *Posted lists of character traits, expectations without steps to meet those rules, and posters with lists of more than 6 rules/expectations are all non-examples.

 

  1. Precorrects on skills at beginning of session.

Before instruction, the teacher briefly reminds students about the posted rules/skills (e.g., “Remember the way to get my attention is…” (Teacher reads the steps outlined on the poster).

 

  1. Corrections are instructive and refer to skills

When correcting inappropriate behavior, the teacher refers to the posted appropriate skill that the student should have used (i.e., “Next time, please raise your hand to get my attention the right way”). Corrections teach students specific ways to improve.

 

  1. Point chart displayed for appropriate behaviors

Points are used to reward appropriate student behavior. This definition excludes charts that track points for inappropriate behavior and excludes charts that remove points as a consequence for inappropriate behavior. In addition, the point chart is posted where the students can easily see it.

 

  1. Daily point goal posted

The point goal should be announced and written on a chart that is visible to the students before instruction begins.

 

  1. Self-management charts given to individuals

If target students have been chosen for self-management, the individual charts should be handed out before the instruction begins. In addition, the students should be reminded of their goal and the process for awarding points to themselves. Score other self-management charts, individual sticker charts on desktops, SR+ as a “yes”.

 

6a. Teachers should remind SM students to “check behavior & give themselves points for following the CW-FIT rules”/remind HC students to use their cards.

                        6b. SM students give themselves points/HC students use cards.

6c. Teacher praises SM/HC students.

6d. Teacher supports SM/HC students by visually observing them giving themselves points/using cards, spot checking for accuracy, and assisting if necessary.

 

  1. Timer used & set at appropriate intervals

The teacher sets a timer when instruction begins and resets it each time it goes off. The appropriate time interval is determined by the percent of on-task behavior the class demonstrates (i.e. 1-3 min at first etc...).

 

 

 

  1. Points awarded to teams for use of skills

Points should be given to teams who are exhibiting the appropriate skills at the exact moment the timer goes off. The teacher should quickly glance around the room to determine which teams are displaying the appropriate behavior. The teacher then marks a point for each team in which all team members were behaving appropriately. In addition, the teacher should specifically praise each team and explain to them why they earned a point at that interval (i.e. “Team one earns a point because they were doing a great job following directions!”). This specific praise should be done as often as possible, without significantly disrupting the lesson.

 

  1. Points tallied for teams

At the end of the interval, the teacher will add up each team’s points. Each team’s final score is written in their box. Each team’s points total is then compared with the predetermined point goal to determine winners. 

 

  1. Winners immediately rewarded.

After adding up point totals and comparing the totals with the goal, the teacher should announce the teams who met their goal. The winning teams should receive their prize or activity right away, without delay.

*Note: If reward is delayed but students are given a tangible representation of their reward, such as ticket or a token, code this item “YES”

 

  1. Winners reward announced if delayed.

If the reward is something that will take place later in the day (e.g., extra recess, lunch with the teacher) then the reward for the winning teams should be announced.

 

  1. Frequent praise (points) given.

Students should be praised frequently for exhibiting the skills/behaviors. It is not necessary that the teacher uses specific praise EVERY time she/he praises, just frequently. In addition, points awarded count toward the frequency of praise. If the points are specific (“team 1 gets a point because they were sitting in their seats”) then that counts towards the specificity criteria as well. This is measured with respect to the entire class, not just individual students.

 

  1. Behavior-specific praise given.

When praise is given, the teacher should be genuine and explicitly say what the students were doing well. This can be done on an individual or group basis (e.g., “Sally, nice job raising your hand to get my attention!” or “Class, I am really proud of how you have been ignoring inappropriate behavior!”). If the points are specific (“team 1 gets a point because they were sitting in their seats”) then that counts towards the specificity criteria as well as the frequency. This is measured with respect to the entire class, not just individual students.

 

  1. Praise (points) to reprimand ratio is approx. 4:1.

The teacher’s overall student interactions within the session included approximately 4 positive interactions (praise, comments, physical rewards, and points awarded) to every 1 negative interaction reprimands, comments, or removal of rewards). This is measured with respect to the entire class, not just individual students. 

 

 

 

 

Classroom Management –student behavior definitions

* Refer to percent scale on the fidelity checklist.

 

  1. Level of compliance during academic time.

Record the percentage of students that complied with teacher instructions throughout the session. 

 

  1. Students follow rules appropriate to settings.

Percentage of students that followed classroom rules as defined by class rules poster or school expectations. Also includes demonstrating appropriate behavior for particular activities (i.e., small group/pair-work vs. teacher leading large group activities).

 

  1. Transitions are short with only minor disruptions. 

Percentage of students that transitioned between activities, locations, subjects, or materials smoothly and without major disruptions. 

 

  1. Students are focused and on-task.

Percentage of students that remained focused on and engaged in the activity or lesson.

 

  1. Level of lesson structure

Quality of lesson structure: organized clear directions, well organized lessons, smooth operation of lessons, clear schedule of activities, few disruptions, and sufficient work to keep students busy

1=    Very low—much down time, lessons unclear, chaotic

2=    Moderately low—multiple occasions of down time or poorly structured lessons and/or disruptions

3=    Average—generally structured with some minor down time on 2+ occasions and/or occasional minor disruptions

4=    Moderately high—well structured, few disruptions

 

  1. Teacher ignores minor inappropriate behaviors.

Percentage of time that the teacher ignored minor inappropriate behavior. Minor inappropriate behavior is defined as behavior that is not harmful to the student or anyone else and is not extremely disruptive or disrespectful. Hitting, kicking, or cursing at the teacher would not be considered minor inappropriate behavior and probably should not be ignored.

 

  1. Frequent & specific praise given.

Percentage of time that students are being praised for exhibiting good behavior. When praise is given, the teacher should explicitly say what the students were doing well. This can be done on an individual or group basis (i.e. “Sally, nice job raising your hand to get my attention!” or “Class, I am really proud of how you have been listening respectfully.”). In addition, points awarded count toward the frequency of praise. If the points are specific (“team 1 gets a point because they were sitting in their seats”) then that counts towards the specificity criteria. The teacher should give at least 3 specific verbal praises throughout the lesson and/or accompany points with specific verbal praise every 4th time the timer goes off.

 

 

  1. Praise to reprimand ratio approx 4:1.

Percentage of the teacher’s overall student interactions within the session included approximately 4 positive interactions (praise, positive comments, physical rewards, and points awarded) to every 1 negative interaction (reprimands, negative comments, removal of rewards). This is measured with respect to the entire class, not just individual students.

1=    Very Low—More reprimands than praises.

2=    Moderately Low—Equal number of reprimands and praises.

3=    Average—Twice as many praises as reprimands

4=    Moderately High—Four times (or more) as many praises as reprimands.

 

  1. Three to five clearly and positively stated classroom rules/expectations are visibly posted.

Each poster is accessible to students (i.e., written in clear language and has illustrations that all students can access). There are between three and five stated rules/expectations Each rule has 3-5 actionable/observable steps that students can reference when demonstrating that expectation/rule.

*Posted lists of character traits, expectations without steps to meet those rules, and posters with lists of more than 6 rules/expectations are all non-examples.

 

  1. System of rewards observed.

At least once during the session, the teacher rewards some students with tickets, bracelets, points, tallies, etc… Color cards do not count unless they are moved to the positive side.

 

Minimum Interventionist Requirements: Paraprofessional 4-8 hours of training

Intervention Reviewed by What Works Clearinghouse: No

What Works Clearinghouse Review

This program was not reviewed by What Works Clearinghouse.

Other Research: Potentially Eligible for NCII Review: 1 study

Wills, H. P., Iwaszuk, W. M., Kamps, D., & Shumate, E. (2014). CW-FIT: Group Contingency Effects Across the Day. Education & Treatment Of Children, 37(2), 191-210.