Choice as an Antecedent Intervention
Study: Kern et al. (2002)

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:

Participants include six boys between the ages of 13 and 14 who were in the same middle school classroom, which was selected because observation indicated that numerous students had difficulties with engagement and disruptive behavior.

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

All participants had a label of severe emotional disturbance in addition to a variety of other diagnoses.

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:

Reversal (ABAB)

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

During the treatment phase, the teacher was directed to implement two primary curricular modifications--providing opportunities for choice making and incorporating high-interest activities into each lesson. At the beginning of a lesson, students were presented with a choice of two different activities; the class voted and the activity with the most votes was conducted. Additionally, when a new group activity was initiated during the lesson, students were again provided with a group choice in the same manner as the initial activity. Group choices involved a choice of activity, materials, or task sequence and usually occurred two-three times during each lesson. Individual choices were also provided in each lesson and pertained to the manner in which individual work was completed. For example, allowing students to practice demonstrating knowledge on a computer or with a peer. High interest activities were also part of the intervention and based on the teacher's prior observations of activites that rendered high levels of engagement, student-voiced preferences, and students' personal experiences that could be connected to the topic. For example, hands-on experiments and developing own trivia questions.

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, the teacher was directed to maintain their traditional curriculum with respect to activities and presentation style.

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

Replication of treatment was demonstrated with a reveral 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?

N/A

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: