Several research studies have been conducted on the effectiveness of check-in/ check-out (CICO) procedures in behavior education programs (BEPs). However, little research has been conducted on implementing CICO procedures specifically for special education students. This study examined the effects of CICO procedures on six junior high students receiving special education services. Baseline data of targeted behaviors were collected during the first two weeks of the third six weeks grading period. The participants were receiving special education services due to a previous Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) committee decision. CICO procedures are part of a secondary level behavior support system typically found in the BEP. The CICO procedures include a morning check-in, teacher feedback on a daily behavior report card (DBRC), an afternoon check-out, and weekly parent notification of student performance. A token economy system and behavior team meetings are two components also involved in implementing the CICO procedures. Intervention data were collected during implementation of the CICO procedures during the remaining three weeks of the third six weeks grading period. The intervention was not implemented the last week of the grading period due to final exams. The CICO procedures had high social validity ratings. Reliability, limitations and implications for future research on the current study are discussed.

The initial and maintenance effects of a Daily Behavior Report Card (DBRC) intervention and fading procedure on Academic Engaged Time (AET) of a 6-year-old boy with Developmental Delay and Attention Deficits were evaluated with a reversal design. Following an initial baseline, the DBRC was implemented and then completely removed followed by reapplication of the DBRC. Subsequently, the report card was gradually reduced in the frequency of its use from very daily to every other day. Increased AET reliably varied with the application and then removal of the DBRC. Whereas complete removal of the DBRC resulted in substantial decreases in AET, response dependent fading of the card was associated with AET of 80% or above. Teacher intervention ratings demonstrated social validity of the intervention in terms of its effectiveness, acceptability and efficiency. Research and practical issues are discussed.

No description available.

The purpose of the study is to evaluate if the effectiveness of a check-in, check-out (CICO) intervention varies based on the function maintaining students’ target behaviors as determined by functional analyses prior to the implementation of the intervention. Participants in the study consisted of 6 children enrolled in general education Kindergarten classes across 6 teachers in the Southeastern United States. Upon completion of a functional analysis, participants were determined to fit into functional groups (i.e., combined attention and escape, attention, and escape), then a modified between groups design with a component of a multiple-baseline across participants design was completed. Overall, the current study found that the CICO intervention increased desired behavior as measured by points earned on the daily behavior report card ratings across baseline to intervention phases. All functional groups displayed an increase in average points earned from baseline phase across intervention phases. The results of the current study have implications within the educational systems for selecting interventions within the response to intervention framework, utilizing functional analysis for the CICO intervention, and acceptability of evidence based interventions. Limitations and recommendations for future research are presented.

This study examined teacher perceptions of an intervention including a daily behavior report (DBRC) with a measure of treatment integrity present (Experimental Group) and without a measure of treatment integrity present (Control Group) The study was conducted in an analog (i.e., vignettes) online format with teacher participants from a southeastern school district. Each participant was presented with a vignette describing a student with problem classroom behaviors, a summary functional behavior assessment, and a sample behavior intervention plan including a DBRC. Only the Experimental Group was then presented with a direct observation measure of treatment integrity correlating to the DBRC. All teacher participants then rated the intervention using the Usage Rating Profile-Intervention (URP-I). On average teachers evaluated both the DBRC intervention with and without a treatment integrity component positively (i.e., means ranged from slightly agree to agree across all measures). A t-test indicated that no statistically significant differences existed between the Experimental and Control Groups’ total scores on the URP-I. This indicated that the measure of treatment integrity did not impact teachers’ ratings of the intervention on the URP-I. A MANOVA procedure found no statistically significant differences in teachers’ ratings of the intervention using each of the four factor scores of the URP-I (i.e., Acceptability, Understanding, Feasibility, and Systems Support). A multiple regression procedure used to examine various raters’ demographic characteristics found no statistically significant predictability for URP-I scores based on race, grades taught, years experience, and teaching setting (special/gifted versus general education). Cautious generalizations should be made due to limitations including the analog nature of the study, limited geographical area and participant characteristics. Additionally, the URP-I, a direct observation treatment integrity checklist, and a behavior intervention plan with an emphasis on a DBRC were all used. Use of other variables such as different interventions, rating scales and treatment integrity measures should be investigated. Suggestions for future research include conducting similar lines of research in naturalistic settings with school teachers and children, continued research in the different ways to collect treatment integrity research, and conducting acceptability and teacher perception research for other behavior interventions, target behaviors, and with other teacher groups.