Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT )
Study: Kamps et al. (2015)

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:

Students were participating in CW-FIT intervention program and met criteria and had parental consent to monitor performance. Students were not as responsive to initial intervention as other students and thus were selected to also participate in self-management as a tier 2 level of CW-FIT.

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional/behavioral difficulties (BI):

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.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:

• below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
• identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?

%

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:

• emotional disability label,
• placed in an alternative school/classroom,
• non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
• designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?

%

Please describe the study design:

A reversal single subject design ABAB was used to demonstrate experimental control across both classes; and an ABCAC reversal was used for participants who received the self-management condition (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968; Kennedy, 2005). Conditions consisted of baseline (A), CW-FIT intervention (B), CW-FIT + self-management (C), return to baseline (A2), and return to CW-FIT + self-management (C2). During CW-FIT conditions, all students in the class participated. During CW-FIT + self-management all students participated in the CW-FIT and the target students also used self-management. The return to baseline was implemented for all students including the target students.

Clarify and provide a detailed description of the treatment in the submitted program/intervention:

CW-FIT as described in prior sections and self-management for the target students.

Clarify what procedures occurred during the control/baseline condition (third, competing conditions are not considered; if you have a third, competing condition [e.g., multi-element single subject design with a third comparison condition], in addition to your control condition, identify what the competing condition is [data from this competing condition will not be used]):

During baseline teachers used a response cost procedure consisting of a pocket chart for each students with colored cards. When students misbehaved the teacher would move the cards to the next color, and for each 'move' there was a consequence. Neither teacher used any token or point system to reinforce appropriate behaviors.

Please describe how replication of treatment effect was demonstrated (e.g., reversal or withdrawal of intervention, across participants, across settings)

The replication of treatment effect was demonstrated using a withdrawal design.

Please indicate whether (and how) the design contains at least three demonstrations of experimental control (e.g., ABAB design, multiple baseline across three or more participants).

ABAB design

If the study is a multiple baseline, is it concurrent or non-concurrent?

Concurrent

How was the program delivered?

Individually
Small Group
Classroom

Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:

• Targeted measures
  Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills, that the program was directly targeted to improve.
  • In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
  • In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
• Broader measures
  Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.
  • In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
  • In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be on-task behavior in another setting.
• Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates, which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.

If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:

Class-wide on task data and teacher praise and reprimand data are excluded. Only individual target data is reported.