the effects of cw-fit on preschool behavior utah multi-tiered system of supports and effective...
TRANSCRIPT
The Effects of CW-FIT on Preschool BehaviorUtah Multi-Tiered System of Supports and Effective Practices ConferenceJune 18, 2014
KRYSTINE JOLSTEAD, ED.S. CANDIDATE
PAUL CALDARELLA, PH.D.
LESL IE WILL IAMS, ED.S.
BLAKE HANSEN, PH.D.
BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY
Overview• Overview of the Grant
• Preschool Behavior Concerns
• Present Study
• Implementation of CW-FIT
• Results
• Implications
CW-FIT: IES Goal 3 Grant• University of Kansas, Brigham Young University, Vanderbilt University
• 4 years, 18 schools, 144 classrooms, 2880 children
• Multiple geographic areas, low SES populations
• Implemented by school teachers
CW-FIT in Utah
• Year 1 – one school in Nebo School District
• Year 2 – three schools in Alpine School District
• Year 3 – two schools in Provo School District
• Year 4 – one school in ? district
Behavioral Issues and Positive Behavior Support• 33% of preschool children exhibit disruptive behaviors
• Preschool expulsion rates are three times as high as K-12 rates
• Prevention and early intervention are critical
• Few studies investigate preschool behavior in naturalistic, whole class settings
• Positive Behavior Support (PBS) – teach and reinforce desired behavior, extinguish unwanted behavior
• PBS has been shown to be effective in classrooms, including preschools
Praise
• Creates positive teacher-student relationship
• Fewer disruptions, increased engagement
• Teachers can be trained to praise.
Social Skills Training
• Negative correlation between social skills and problem behavior
• Skills should be modeled and expectations taught
• Pre-teaching social skills is important.
Group Contingencies• Three types:
• Dependent – reward of all based on behavior of one or few
• Independent – reward based on individual behavior
• Interdependent - reward of group based on all within group
• Teaches students how behavior affects others
• One example: The Good Behavior Game
Class-Wide Function-related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT)
• Interdependent group contingency program
• Minimize reinforcement of inappropriate behaviors, maximize reinforcement of appropriate
• Whole class and individual target students
• Shown effective with K-7, not yet tested with preschoolers
Previous Published CW-FIT Studies
Wills et al., 2010◦ 16 elementary school classrooms in Kansas◦ Increased teacher attention to appropriate behavior◦ Decreased student disruptive behavior and increased on-task behaviorKamps et al., 2011◦ 6 elementary school classrooms in Kansas; students at-risk for EBD◦ Decreased disruptive behavior and increased on-task behaviorWills et al., 2014◦ 1 first grade classroom; implemented across instructional periods◦ Similar positive effects on student and teacher behavior◦ Call for additional studies across other grade levels
Research Questions1. Are preschool teachers able to implement CW-FIT with fidelity?
2. Does the implementation of CW-FIT in a preschool classroom
result in increased teacher praise to reprimand ratios?
3. Does the implementation of CW-FIT in a preschool classroom
result in increased levels of group on-task behavior within the
classroom?
4. Do preschool teachers believe CW-FIT is socially valid?
Methods• Design: single-subject multiple baseline with embedded reversals
• Participants and Setting◦ 2 Title I schools◦ 4 preschool classrooms◦ 3 teachers
Preschool DemographicsTable 1Preschool Student Demographics
Classroom 1 Classroom 2 Classroom 3 Classroom 4 N % N % N % N %Males 9 69 8 57 7 50 10 71
Females 4 31 6 43 7 50 4 29
ELL 7 54 10 71 6 43 5 36
Caucasian 4 31 2 14 6 43 7 50
Hispanic 8 62 12 86 8 57 6 43
African American 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7
Total 13 100 14 100 14 100 14 100
Measurement Observations
◦ Group on-task (paper and pencil)◦ 20 minutes◦ Praise, reprimands, points recorded
Social validity questionnaire – teachers and students Interobserver agreement
◦ Trained observers with at least 90% accuracy◦ 28.13% of observations
CW-FIT Main Components• Lessons
• Teams
• Goals & Points
• Rewards
• PRAISE!
CW-FIT Main Components
Social Skills Lessons
◦ Social skills instruction
◦ Taught explicitly with rationale
◦ Define, model, role-play, feedback, practice
◦ Precorrects– reminder of expectations each day
Standard Skills
Additional Skills
CW-FIT Main Components• Class-wide Teams
o Class teams of 3-6 students
o Each student must be on-task for the team to earn points
CW-FIT Main Components
• Goals, Timer, and Points
o Daily point goal set
o Points awarded every 2-4 minutes, at the beep
o Praise for use of social skills CW-FIT GAME POINTSDATE: REWARD: GOAL:TEAMS: 1 2 3 4 5 6
POINTS:
1. How to gain teacher attention2. Following directions3. Ignoring inappropriate behaviors
Game Chart
CW-FIT GAME POINTSDATE: REWARD: GOAL:
TEAMS: 1 2 3 4 5 6
POINTS:
1. How to gain teacher attention
2. Following directions
3. Ignoring inappropriate behaviors
6/18/14 Sticker 5
Game Chart
CW-FIT GAME POINTSDATE: REWARD: GOAL:
TEAMS: 1 2 3 4 5 6
POINTS:
1. How to gain teacher attention
2. Following directions
3. Ignoring inappropriate behaviors
6/18/14 Sticker 5
• Praiseo To students for using social skillso That is behavior-specifico To prompt and reinforce good behavioro When timer sounds and throughout lessono Focuses on groups and individuals, especially those with
challenging behavior
CW-FIT Main Components
Examples of PraiseBEHAVIOR SPECIFIC GENERAL PRAISE
“I like the way you are sitting straight and tall, I know you’re ready to learn!”
“Excellent job getting your materials ready, this helps us move forward with the lesson!”
“Excellent job listening and following directions the first time.”
“Your eyes are on me and your mouth is quiet. Thank you for being ready to learn.”
"Way to go! You asked for help and followed the steps to complete your math work before the end of class!”
“Good job!”
“Way to go!”
“Excellent!”
“Awesome!”
“Well done!”
CW-FIT Main Components• Rewards for Good Behavioro Given at end of class to all groups who met goalo Tangible or nontangibleo Reinforcing to studentso Feasible for teachers
Examples of Rewards Tangibleo Snacko Stickerso Pencilso Eraserso Show & Tell ticket
Non-tangibleo Extra read-aloudo Simple gameso You-tube dance videoo Art projecto Extra recess timeo Shoes offo Limboo Snowball fight
CW-FIT in Preschool Video goes here
Results: Classroom 1
1 2 3 4 50
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
On Task
BaselineCW-FITReversal
Session
Perc
ent o
n ta
sk p
er 3
0 se
cond
inte
rval
change in seating arrangment
1 2 3 4 50
10
20
30
40
50
Praise
Praise_BasePraise_CW-FITPraise_Reversal
Session
Num
ber o
f pra
ise co
mm
ents
to in
divi
dual
&
grou
p
Results: Classroom 2
1 3 5 7 9 110
102030405060708090
100
On Task
BaselineCW-FITReversal
Session
Perc
ent o
n ta
sk p
er 3
0 se
cond
inte
rval
1 4 7 1005
101520253035404550
Praise
Praise_BasePraise_CW-FITPraise_Reversal
Session
Num
ber o
f pra
ise co
mm
ents
to in
-di
vidu
als a
nd g
roup
Results: Classroom 3
1 2 3 4 50
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
On Task
BaselineCW-FITReversal
Session
Perc
ent o
n ta
sk p
er 3
0 se
cond
inte
rval
s
1 2 3 4 505
101520253035404550
Praise
Praise _BasePraise_CW-FITPraise_Reversal
Session
Num
ber o
f pra
ise co
men
ts to
indi
vidu
als a
nd
grou
p
Results: Classroom 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 70
102030405060708090
100
On Task
BaselineCW-FITReversal
Session
Perc
ent o
n ta
sk p
er 3
0 se
cond
inte
rval
s
1 2 3 4 5 6 705
101520253035404550
Praise
Praise_BasePraise_CW-FITPraise_Reversal
SessionNum
ber o
f pra
ise co
mm
ents
to in
divi
d-ua
ls an
d gr
oup
Results: Overall On-Task
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Class-wide On-Task Average
Pre Post
Perc
ent o
f Cla
ss O
n-Ta
sk
Results: Overall Praise
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
Teacher Praise Statements
Pre Post
Prai
se p
er 2
0 M
in. I
nter
val
Fidelity Checklist
Fidelity• Teachers were able to implement the procedures with 93.4%
fidelity• Overall quality ratings averaged 92.25%• High fidelity (100%):
o Displaying posters and game charto Using timer at appropriate intervalso Awarding teams for the use of skllso Giving frequent praise and points
• Lower Fidelity:• Precorrects at beginning of sessions (89.4%)• Giving an immediate reward (40.4%)• If reward not immediate, announced and given later same day
(98%)
Social ValidityTEACHER
Likes• Less talking out• Get more done• More chances for teacher praise
Dislikes• Difficulties with teamwork• Keeping flow of instruction
STUDENT
Likes• Team points• Fun• Prizes
Dislikes• When people are on their own teams• Team members get mad when don’t
listen• Timer
Limitations• Same teacher taught AM and PM classes at one school
• Possible reactivity from having observers in classroom
• Small sample size
• Limited diversity of teachers and students
• Only implemented in Title I preschools
• No measurement of generalization or maintenance
• No measurement of effects on student academics
• Need for replication in more preschools
Implications• Simple, effective class-wide management system
• Group contingencies work as early as preschool
• Flexible to fit teachers’ needs
• Increased on-task engagement
• Decreased disruptive behaviors
• Promising results for preschool implementation
• Other
Thank you!
Questions?
Krystine [email protected]
Paul [email protected]
Leslie Williams
Blake [email protected]
ReferencesBarrish, E. E., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. M. (1969). Good behavior game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on
disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1969(2), 119-124. doi:10.1901/jaba.1969.2-119
Blair, K. C., Fox, L., & Lentini, R. (2010). Use of positive behavior support to address the challenging behavior of young children within a community early childhood program. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 30(2), 68-79. doi: 10.1177/0271121410372676
Carter, D. R., & Pool, J. L. (2012). Appropriate social behavior: Teaching expectations to young children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40, 315-321. doi:10.1007/s10643-012-0516-y
Duda, M. A., Dunlap, G., Fox, L., Lentini, R., & Clarke, S. (2004). An experimental evaluation of positive behavior support in a community preschool program. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24(3), 143-155. doi: 10.1177/02711214040240030201
Fullerton, E. K., Conroy, M. A., & Correa, V. I. (2009). Early childhood teachers’ use of specific praise statements with young children at risk for behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 34(3), 118-135. Retrieved from http://www.ccbd.net/behavioraldisorders/
Gilliam, W. S. (2005). Prekindergartners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Child Study Center.
Hemmeter, M. L., Ostrosky, M., & Fox, L. (2006). Social and emotional foundations for early learning: A conceptual model for intervention. School Psychology Review, 35(4), 583-601. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/publications
Kamps, D., Wills, H. P., Heitzman-Powell, L., Laylin, J., Szoke, C., Petrillo, T., & Culey, A. (2011). Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams: Effects of group contingency programs in urban classrooms. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(3), 154-167. doi:10.1177/1098300711398935
ReferencesLeGray, M. W., Dufrene, B. A., Mercer, S., Olmi, D. J., & Sterling, H. (2013). Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior in center-
based classrooms: Evaluation of pre-teaching the alternative behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22, 85-102. doi:10.1007/s10864-013-9170-8
Poduska, J. M., Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Brown, C. H., Ialongo, N. S., & Toyinbo, P. (2007). Impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based behavior intervention, on young adult service use for problems with emotions, behavior, or drugs or alcohol. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95S, S29-S44. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.10.009
Renshaw, T. L., Young, K. R., Caldarella, P., & Christensen, L. (2008, November). Can school-wide positive behavior support be an evidence-based practice? Paper presented at the Teacher Educators for Children with Behavioral Disorders Conference, Tempe, AZ.
Rescorla, L. A., Achenbach, T. M., Ivanova, M. Y., Harder, V. S., Otten, L., Bilenberg, N., . . . Verhulst, F. C. (2011). International comparisons of behavioral and emotional problems in preschool children: Parents’ reports from 24 societies. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40(3), 456-467. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2011.563472
Stormont, M. A., Smith, S. C., & Lewis, T. J. (2007). Teacher implementation of precorrection and praise statements in Head Start classrooms as a component of a program-wide system of positive behavior support. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 280-290. doi: 10.1007/s10864-007-9040-3
Wills, H. P., Kamps, D., Hansen, B., Conklin, C., Bellinger, S., Neaderhiser, J., & Nsubuga, B. (2010). The classwide function-based intervention team program. Preventing School Failure, 54(3), 164-171. doi:10.1080/10459880903496230
Wright, R. (2008). An examination of the good behavior game and behavior specific praise statements on student and teacher behavior (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/