Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams

Study: Wills, Kamps, Fleming, Miller, & Hansen (draft paper)

Study Type: Group-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: Partially Convincing Evidence

Sample size: 313 students (181 program, 132 control)

Risk Status: Students met the cut-points for "at-risk" on the Social Skills Rating System problem behavior subscale (Gresham & Elliott).

Demographics:

 

Program

Control

Number

Percentage

Number

Percentage

Grade level

  Kindergarten

24

13%

19

14%

  Grade 1

30

17%

23

17%

  Grade 2

26

14%

15

11%

  Grade 3

31

17%

27

20%

  Grade 4

34

19%

19

14%

  Grade 5

24

13%

28

21%

  Grade 6

3

2%

1

1%

  Grade 7

 

 

 

 

  Grade 8

 

 

 

 

  Grade 9

 

 

 

 

  Grade 10

 

 

 

 

  Grade 11

 

 

 

 

  Grade 12

 

 

 

 

Mean Age

 

 

 

 

Race-ethnicity

  African-American

70

39%

59

45%

  American Indian

6

3%

3

2%

  Asian/Pacific Islander

2

1%

2

2%

  Hispanic

37

20%

23

13%

  White

66

36%

42

32%

  Other

 

 

 

 

Socioeconomic status

  Subsidized lunch

117

65%

90

68%

  No subsidized lunch

 

 

 

 

Disability status

  Speech-language impairments

5

3%

0

0%

  Learning disabilities

13

7%

14

11%

  Behavior disorders

6

3%

3

2%

  Intellectual disabilities

5

3%

1

1%

  Other

7

4%

9

7%

  Not identified with a disability

135

75%

98

74%

ELL status

  English language learner

 

 

 

 

  Not English language learner

 

 

 

 

Gender

  Female

38

21%

37

28%

  Male

143

78%

95

72%

Training of Instructors: Teachers were the interventionists. Data were not collected on teachers' experience. Weekly feedback and monitoring of fidelity was conducted.

Design: Convincing Evidence

Did the study use random assignment?: Yes

If not, was it a tenable quasi-experiment?: Not Applicable

If the study used random assignment, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.25 SD on measures central to the study (i.e., pretest measures also used as outcomes)?: No

If not, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.50 SD on measures central to the study (i.e., pretest measures also used as outcomes), and outcomes were analyzed to adjust for pretreatment differences?: Yes

Were the program and control groups demographically comparable?: Yes

Was there differential attrition for the program and the control groups?: No 

Did the unit of analysis match the unit for random assignment (for randomized studies) or the assignment strategy (for quasi-experiments)?: Yes

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, etc.).

A total of 532 probes (mean, 5.8 sessions, range of 2-13 sessions across teachers) were collected in baseline for the experimental group and 1,484 (mean, 16.7, range, 3-29) during CW-FIT conditions across all four years. 

Results on the fidelity of treatment implementation measure: Teachers in CW-FIT classrooms implemented the intervention with high fidelity, across all 4 years; averaging 92.4%. Baseline levels (use of intervention) was low 1-2%. 

Measures Targeted: Convincing Evidence

Targeted Measure

Reliability statistics

Relevance to program focus

Exposure to related support among control group

On Task - direct observation MOOSES

Inter-rater, mean 96.32% (range, 39-100%)

Directly related to CW-FIT skills

No support from researchers, training provided after post measures collected

Disruptive behaviors - direct observation MOOSES

Inter-rater, mean 87.95%, (range 0-100%)

Directly related to CW-FIT skills

No support from researchers

Teacher praise - direct observation MOOSES

Inter-rater, mean to individual 93.7% (range 0-100%), mean to group 92.1% (range 0-100%)

Teachers were required to give points and praise for appropriate behaviors

No support from researchers

Teacher reprimands - direct observation MOOSES

Inter-rater, mean to individual 90.1% (range 0-100%), mean to group 89.1% (range 0-100%)

Teachers were encouraged to give minimal attention to inappropriate behaviors

No support from researchers

 

Broader Measure

Reliability statistics

Relevance to program focus

Exposure to related support among control group

N/A

 

 

 

 

Mean ES Targeted Outcomes: 0.93*

Mean ES Administrative Outcomes: N/A

Effect Size:

Targeted Measures

Measure

Effect Size

On task

1.46***

Disruptive behaviors

1.03***

Teacher Praise – individual

0.58***

Teacher Praise – group

1.58***

Teacher Reprimand – individual

0.68***

Teacher Reprimand – group

0.22

 

Broader Measures

Measure

Effect Size

None

 

 

Key

*        p ≤ .05

**      p ≤ .01

***    p ≤ .001

–      Developer was unable to provide necessary data for NCII to calculate effect sizes

u      Effect size is based on unadjusted means

†      Effect size based on unadjusted means not reported due to lack of pretest group equivalency, and effect size based on adjusted means is not available

 

Visual Analysis (Single-Subject Designs): N/A

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

10.

System of rewards observed:

☐Yes

☐No

Total Score _____

Total Score Possible _____

Total Score divided by Total Possible = % yes _____

 

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 allnon-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.