A school-wide intervention with primary and secondary levels of support for elementary students: outcomes and considerations.

A school-wide intervention with primary and secondary levels of support for elementary students: outcomes and considerations. Abstract This study extends previous work by implementing and evaluating amulti-level intervention with primary and secondary levels of supportwith 210 students attending an "at-risk" elementary school elementary school:see school. inSouthern California. Student outcomes were assessed from multipleperspectives including curriculum-based measures, statewide achievementtests, behavior rating scales, and school record reviews. Findings ofmultivariate procedures suggest that a multi-level intervention programcontaining literacy and behavioral components has the potential toimprove reading achievement of students, regardless of level of risk, asmeasured by district multiple measures and curriculum-based measures.Despite the improvements in reading skills, statistically significantchanges on behavioral measures and overall risk status were notobtained. Nonetheless, inspection of effect sizes scores revealed thatupper elementary students showed moderate decreases in negativenarrative comments and low magnitude decreases in risk scores. Further,primary and upper elementary students demonstrated low magnitude changeson absenteeism. Limitations of this study and directions for futureschool-based intervention programs are discussed. ********** Today's schools are charged with the task of serving a diverserange of learners who vary dramatically in their academic, behavioral,and social competencies. Students who deviate from normative nor��ma��tive?adj.Of, relating to, or prescribing a norm or standard: normative grammar.nor performancein these domains are at risk for learning and behavior problems. Forexample, if a second-grade student's decoding de��code?tr.v. de��cod��ed, de��cod��ing, de��codes1. To convert from code into plain text.2. To convert from a scrambled electronic signal into an interpretable one.3. skills are poor, itis difficult for him or her to build fluency flu��ent?adj.1. a. Able to express oneself readily and effortlessly: a fluent speaker; fluent in three languages.b. and comprehension skill.Over time, the problem of decoding broadens to deficits in other readingskills as well as less interaction with print as compared to studentswho are more competent readers (O'Shaughnessy, Lane, Gresham, &Beebe-Frankenberger, 2003). This dis parity between "poor"readers getting "poorer" and "rich" readers getting"richer" has been called the Matthew Effect The term "Matthew effect" may refer, depending on context, to a number of ideas all related to a parable in the Gospel of Matthew: BiblicalThe "Matthew effect , based on thebiblical story of Matthew (Stanovich, 1986, 1988). The same is true in the social and behavioral domain as well. Forexample, students who exhibit antisocial antisocial/an��ti��so��cial/ (-so��sh'l)1. denoting behavior that violates the rights of others, societal mores, or the law.2. denoting the specific personality traits seen in antisocial personality disorder. behavior are at risk for morepejorative pejorativeMedtalk Bad…real bad behavioral problems such as conduct disorders and antisocialpersonality disorder antisocial personality disordern.A personality disorder characterized by chronic antisocial behavior and violation of the law and the rights of others. (Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995; Walker &Severson, 2002). Antisocial behavior is defined as persistent violationsof socially prescribed behavior patterns (Simcha-Fagan, Langer, Gersten,& Eisenberg, 1975). Without intervention, antisocial behavior servesas the foundation for conduct disorders, a clinical term to describe abehavior disorder behavior disordern.1. Any of various forms of behavior that are considered inappropriate by members of the social group to which an individual belongs.2. A functional disorder or abnormality. that often requires mental health services health servicesManaged care The benefits covered under a health contract (AmericanPsychiatric psy��chi��at��ricadj.Of or relating to psychiatry.psychiatricadjective Pertaining to psychiatry, mental disorders Association, 1994; Gresham, Lane, & Lambros, 2000). Given that reading and aggressive behavior problems becomeincreasingly stable over time (Kazdin, 1987, 1993; O'Shaughnessy etal., 2003; Walker, Shinn, O'Neill, & Ramsey, 1987), it isimportant that schools employ proactive practices to identify andintervene with learning and behavior problems during the earlyeducational years. Preferably, intervention should occur before thirdgrade if prevention is the primary objective (Bullis & Walker, 1994;O'Shaughnessy et al., 2003). Further, it is important that schoolsalso employ evidenced-based reactive, selective interventions to meetthe academic, social, and behavioral needs of students who arenonresponsive to primary intervention efforts. One method of providing graduated support for students is through athree-tiered multileveled model (Lane & Menzies, 2002; Lewis &Sugai, 1999; O'Shaughnessy, Lane, Gresham, &Beebe-Frankenberger, 2002; Walker & Severson, 2002). By designingand implementing a data-driven model with primary, secondary, andtertiary levels of support, schools can both prevent and remediate re��me��di��a��tion?n.The act or process of correcting a fault or deficiency: remediation of a learning disability.re��me academic and socio-behavioral problem (Gresham, 2002; Kamps, Dravits,Stolze, & Swaggart, 1999; Walker & Severson, 2002). The first level, primary intervention, consists of universalinterventions to prevent harm by providing support to all students.Primary interventions conducted to date have focused on a number ofareas some of which include positive behavior support Positive behavior support strives to use a system to understand what maintains an individual’s challenging behavior. Students’ inappropriate behaviors are difficult to change because they are functional, they serve a purpose for the child. (Lohrinann-O'Rourke, Knoster, Sabatine, Smith, Horvath, &Llewellyn, 2000; Scott, 2001; Taylor-Greene, & Kartub, 2000;Turnbull et al., 2002), social skills (Jones, Sheridan, & Binns,1993; Lewis, Sugai, & Colvin, 1998), and school violence (e.g.,Second Step Violence Prevention Curriculum, Committee for Children,1992). All students in a given school participate in these primaryprevention programs. Eligibility decisions are nonexistent non��ex��is��tence?n.1. The condition of not existing.2. Something that does not exist.non : all studentsparticipate. The expectation is that 80% of the student population willrespond favorably fa��vor��a��ble?adj.1. Advantageous; helpful: favorable winds.2. Encouraging; propitious: a favorable diagnosis.3. to this level of support (Colvin, Sugai, &Kame'enui, 1993). Students who are nonresponsive to primary levelsof support are identified for the second level of support, secondaryinterventions. Secondary interventions provide more intensive interventions toreverse harm (Walker & Severson, 2002). Typically, secondaryinterventions employ evidenced-based practices for specific skill orperformance deficits (Gresham, 2002). Examples include social skills andliteracy groups based on common areas of deficits (e.g., self-control orreading comprehension strategies).The expectation is that 10- 15% ofstudents will require secondary support. Students who are nonresponsiveto secondary interventions or who are exposed to a substantial number ofrisk factors (e.g., poverty, poor parenting practices) are identifiedfor the third level of support, tertiary interventions. Tertiary interventions provide highly individualized in��di��vid��u��al��ize?tr.v. in��di��vid��u��al��ized, in��di��vid��u��al��iz��ing, in��di��vid��u��al��iz��es1. To give individuality to.2. To consider or treat individually; particularize.3. interventionsto reduce risk (Walker & Severson, 2002). Tertiary interventions areindividualized interventions such as functional assessment- basedinterventions (Dunlap, Foster-Johnson, Clarke, Kern Kern,river, 155 mi (249 km) long, rising in the S Sierra Nevada Mts., E Calif., and flowing south, then southwest to a reservoir in the extreme southern part of the San Joaquin valley. The river has Isabella Dam as its chief facility. , & Childs, 1995;Umbreit, 1996) and personalized per��son��al��ize?tr.v. per��son��al��ized, per��son��al��iz��ing, per��son��al��iz��es1. To take (a general remark or characterization) in a personal manner.2. To attribute human or personal qualities to; personify. reading instruction (Torgesen,Alexander, Wagner, Rashotte, Voeller, & Conway, 2001). When designing and implementing such multi-leveled models, it isimportant that decisions about who, how, and when to provide the moreintensive levels of support be empirically grounded. Namely, decisionsabout how and when to move students through secondary and tertiarylevels of support need to be data-based. Although a number ofpsychometrically sound instruments and procedures are available tomonitor student progress at the various levels, it is important thatissues of reliability, sensitivity, and feasibility be considered whenselecting outcome measure (Lane & Beebe- Frankenberger, in press).For example, in the ideal situation, a wide range of data includingstandardized reading, behavior rating scales, curriculum-basedmeasurement Curriculum-based measurement, or CBM, is an assessment method used in schools to monitor student progress by directly assessing basic academic skills in reading, spelling, writing, and mathematics. , and direct observation measures would be collected on everystudent participant. Yet, due to resource and time constraints, thisrange of measures often is not feasible, particularly when monitoringstudent responsiveness to primary interventions. Some primaryinterventions conducted to date have collected a limited range ofoutcome variables (e.g., office referrals, rewards allocated) which hasmade it difficult for researchers to detect changes in the targeteddomain. This study extends previous work by implementing a multi-levelmodel of intervention with primary and secondary levels of support. Withfew exceptions (Kamps et al., 1999), most primary intervention programshave focused on one primary domain such as disruptive behavior(MacGregor, Nelson, & Wesch, 1997), aggression (Clarke &Kiselica, 1997; Olweus, 1993), or social skills (Lewis et al., 1998). Incontrast, the primary intervention level in this study addressedliteracy and behavioral components and implementation fidelity wasmonitored using behavioral checklists. Further, all student wereassessed using a wide scope of assessment tools including standardizedtests, curriculum-based measures, teacher report, and school recorddata. Decisions regarding responsiveness and participation in secondaryinterventions were empirically grounded with clearly-defined operationalcriteria using data collected at the onset and midpoint mid��point?n.1. Mathematics The point of a line segment or curvilinear arc that divides it into two parts of the same length.2. A position midway between two extremes. of the primaryintervention program. This project addressed four questions: To what extent does a multileveled intervention program influence the reading performance andbehavioral performance of primary and upper elementary students? Was theprogram equally effective for students with varying degrees of risk asmeasured by the Student Risk Screening Scale (Drummond, 1994)? To whatdegree was risk status influenced by the two-level model of support atthe end of the school year? To what degree did this program influencethe number of students receiving special education services? Method Student Participants Participants included 210 general education school students, 53 %males (n = 111) and 47% females (n = 99), attending a southernCalifornia elementary school. Fifty-eight percent (n = 122) of thesample consisted of primary (first though third grade) students. Theremaining 42% (n = 88) were upper elementary students. Morespecifically, the sample included 12.86% (n = 27) first- grade, 20.00%(n = 42) second-grade, 25.24% (n = 53) third-grade, 26.67% (n = 56)fourth-grade, 0% (n = 0) fifth-grade, and 15.24% (n = 32) sixth-gradestudents. Kindergarten kindergarten[Ger.,=garden of children], system of preschool education. Friedrich Froebel designed (1837) the kindergarten to provide an educational situation less formal than that of the elementary school but one in which children's creative play instincts would be students' outcomes were excluded from thismanuscript as some of the dependent measures used to monitor theprogress of first- through sixth-grade students were not suitable foruse with kindergarten students. Procedure This school-wide intervention was conducted in a large district inSouthern California serving approximately 37,000 kindergarten throughtwelfth-grade students. The elementary school in this study is a small,culturally and ethnically diverse school. It is the smallest school inthe district enrolling 372 preschool through sixth-grade students. Themajority of the students were nonwhite non��white?n.A person who is not white.nonwhite adj. with 53% Hispanic, 33% Caucasian,12% African American African AmericanMulticulture A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.See Race. , 1% Asian Pacific Islander Pacific Islandern.1. A native or inhabitant of any of the Polynesian, Micronesian, or Melanesian islands of Oceania.2. A person of Polynesian, Micronesian, or Melanesian descent. See Usage Note at Asian. , and 1% othernationalities. The school was considered to be at-risk by virtue ofexceeding the district average in the transiency rates (64%) andstudents participating in the free and reduced lunch program (78%). The school employs 21 faculty members: 16 general educationteachers (3 kindergarten, 8 primary, and 5 upper grades), 3 specialeducation teachers (two of which taught in self-contained settings), and2 Title I reading teachers (one of whom was part time). The majority ofthe faculty members held clear credentials with only 3 teachers workingunder emergency credentials. Teachers had an average of 11 yearsteaching experience. Of the 16 general education teachers, 3 teachers did not consent toparticipate in this investigation by completing Drummond's (1994)Student Risk Screening Scale. However, by the midpoint of the study(Lane & Menzies, 2002), one of the teachers who had initiallydeclined later asked to participate and another was on maternity leave maternity leaven → baja por maternidadmaternity leavematernity n → cong�� m de maternit��maternity leavematernity n .During the last 3 months of the school year, one teacher withdrewconsent. Thus, this paper will present summative Adj. 1. summative - of or relating to a summation or produced by summationsummationaladditive - characterized or produced by addition; "an additive process" findings of theschool-wide intervention only for students of teachers who participatedduring the entire academic year (n = 10). Student data reflects theprogress of 210 students, 122 (58.10%) primary and 88 (41.90%) upper,elementary students attending an at-risk elementary school. All students participated in the primary intervention as describedbelow. Seventeen students who completed both data collection points(onset and midpoint) and were not responsive to the primary interventionafter the first 3 months of the school year (see Lane & Menzies,2002) were invited to participate in more intensive secondaryinterventions beginning in January. Nonresponsiveness was operationally defined as maintaining ormoving into high risk status as measured by the Student Risk ScreeningScale (SRSS SRSS Sun Ray Server SoftwareSRSS Square Root of the Sum of the SquaresSRSS SQL Reporting ServicesSRSS Server Resources Server SuiteSRSS Sudden-Reality Shock Syndrome (The Onion)SRSS Surface Rescue Swimmer School ; Drummond, 1994). The SRSS is a psychometrically sound,seven-item universal screening tool used to identify elementary studentswho are at-risk for antisocial behavior patterns (Drummond, Eddy, &Reid, 1998a, 1998b). Teachers rated each students on seven items: (a)steals, (b) lies, cheats, sneaks, (c) behavior problems, (d) peerrejection, (e) low achievement, (f) negative attitude, and (g)aggressive behavior using a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 to3 (never = 0, occasionally = 1, sometimes = 2, frequently = 3). Totalscores range from 0 to 21 with high scores indicating high levels ofrisk. Students are assigned to the low (total score, 0 to 3), moderate(total score, 4 to 8), or high risk (total score, 9 or more) categories.The SRSS is a cost-effective, psychometrically sound method fordiscriminating dis��crim��i��nat��ing?adj.1. a. Able to recognize or draw fine distinctions; perceptive.b. Showing careful judgment or fine taste: between students who do and do not exhibit earlyindicators of antisocial behavior tendencies. One parent did not provide consent, however parental consent andchild assent An intentional approval of known facts that are offered by another for acceptance; agreement; consent.Express assent is manifest confirmation of a position for approval. were obtained for the remaining 16 students. Thus, 16students went on to participate in secondary interventions. Teachersrated 8 students, all of whom were in the first grade, as performing inthe bottom third of their class in early literacy skills. These studentswere randomly assigned to one of two groups to received additionalsupport in early literacy from the literacy coordinator (interventiondescription to follow; see Lane, Wehby, Menzies, Gregg, Doukas, &Munton, 2002 for outcomes of the secondary level early literacyintervention). The remaining 8 students received a SRSS problem behaviorscore of 2 or 3. These students were invited, along with 7 non at-riskpeers, to participate in a social skills intervention led by threedoctoral students in school psychology (intervention description tofollow; see Lane, Wehby, Menzies, Doukas, Munton, & Gregg, 2003 foroutcomes of the secondary level social skills intervention). Multi Level School- Wide Intervention The school-wide intervention was comprised of two phases. Phase onewas a primary intervention containing literacy and behavioralcomponents. Phase two was a collection of secondary interventionsfocusing on academic and social skills instruction. Students who werenonresponsive to primary interventions efforts after the first 3monthsof the school year participated in the secondary interventions. Adescription of primary and secondary interventions including trainingand treatment integrity information are provided below. Primary intervention. The primary intervention consisted of theDistrict Literacy Plan (DLP (Digital Light Processing) A data projection technology from TI that produces clear, readable images on screens in lit rooms. DLP is used in all types of projection devices, from data projectors that weigh only a few pounds to large rear-projection TVs to electronic ) and the School-wide Behavior Plan (SBP SBPSpontaneous bacterial peritonitis, see there ).Detailed information about both of these components is printed in thepaper about the preliminary findings (Lane & Menzies, 2002). Inbrief, the DLP is a district-wide plan comprised of three categories ofinstruction: whole group, small group, and individual. Whole groupinstruction is used to present literature pieces, reading strategies,and elements of literature. Small group instruction is used to addressstudents' specific skill deficits or strengths. Small groupinstruction, which occurs a minimum of twice a week, allows students anopportunity engage in independent reading at their instructional level.The teacher meets with these groups at least two times a week to providefocused instruction. Students are expected to engage in extensivereading at their independent reading levels and to participate in morefocused evidenced-based comprehension strategies (e.g., reciprocalteaching Reciprocal Teaching is a remedial reading instructional technique which applies a problem-solving heuristic to the process of reading comprehension, thereby promoting thinking while reading (Alfassi, 2004). ). In addition, small group instruction also included guidedreading Guided reading is a method of teaching reading to children. It forms part of the National Literacy Strategy for England and Wales and is therefore a preferred approach employed within primary schools. Guided Reading sessions involve a teacher and a group of around six children. , phonics phonicsMethod of reading instruction that breaks language down into its simplest components. Children learn the sounds of individual letters first, then the sounds of letters in combination and in simple words. instruction, skills practice, and writing activities.An instructional aide or certificated personnel was assigned to eachteacher for 30 minutes per day during small group instruction time.Teacher-created lesson plans adhered to district standards andbenchmarks were developed from the California State Framework inLanguage Arts language artspl.n.The subjects, including reading, spelling, and composition, aimed at developing reading and writing skills, usually taught in elementary and secondary school. (1997). Teachers were trained in the DLP prior to the onset of the academicyear. Training included a programmatic pro��gram��mat��ic?adj.1. Of, relating to, or having a program.2. Following an overall plan or schedule: a step-by-step, programmatic approach to problem solving.3. overview as well as an overviewof the DLP. Each teacher received a copy of the plan which included asample schedule for language arts, grade level standards and benchmarks,a description of evidence-based reading comprehension and writingstrategies, scoring rubrics, and anchor papers. A literacy coachprovided ongoing training over the course of the school year withspecific assistance on how to schedule, plan, and implement small groupinstruction. The coach also provided in class demonstrations to modelstrategy lessons and observed teacher-taught lessons to providefeedback. Monthly grade level meetings, supervised by the literacycoach, were held to set and monitor goals for students' writingprogress. The SBP, which was selected by the principal and staff, was basedon Lee Canter's Assertive Discipline Assertive discipline is an approach to classroom management developed by Lee and Marlene Canter. It involves a high level of teacher control in the class. It is also called the "take-control" approach to teaching, as the teacher controls their classroom in a firm but positive Plan (Canter cantera gallop at an easy pace. The rhythm is three-time, first one hind, then the opposite hind with the diagonal fore, then the opposite fore, the leading limb.collected canter , 1990; Canter& Canter, 1992). Assertive discipline focuses on empowering teachersto manage their classrooms responsibly by responding to all behaviors ina respectful re��spect��ful?adj.Showing or marked by proper respect.re��spectful��ly adv. fashion in order to meet students' needs andfacilitate the learning process as conceptualized by the classroomteacher. Specific components include (a) constructing positively wordedrules, clear consequences, and meaningful rewards for reinforcingcompliance, (b) delivering consequences and rewards according to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. theplan, (c) teaching the behavioral expectations to all students, (d)interacting positively with students on a consistent, frequent basis,(e) responding effectively to students exhibiting behavioral problems,and (f) assisting students who demonstrate problem behaviors (Charles,1996). Teachers were also trained in the SBP prior to the onset of theschool year. Faculty and staff members attended a 3-hour trainingdesigned to introduce the plan, provide teachers with a copy of thetext, and design rules, consequences, and rewards for their classrooms.Emphasis was placed on the importance of implementing behavioralexpectations consistently and meeting students' individual needs ina respectful, timely manner. During the school year, two additional1-hour trainings were held during staff meetings to view the Harry Wongvideo series (Wong & Wong, 1998) on how to design and implementclassroom routines to enhance classroom management skills. Another1-hour training was held to discuss Canter's (1990; Canter &Canter, 1992) strategies for implementing classroom discipline plans.Although on-going trainings were held over the course of the academicyear, in class demonstration and follow up was not afforded in the SBPdue to resource constraints. Treatment integrity of the DLP and SBP was monitored usingbehavioral checklists that contained germane intervention components.All teachers were observed once a month for approximately 15 minutes byproject staff. Each component was rated on a 3-point Likert-type scale(no opportunity to observe during the session = 0; not observed = 1;observed = 2). Session integrity was computed for each observation bydividing the number of components observed by the total number ofcomponents (number of components observed plus the components notobserved) and then multiplying the quantity by 100 to obtain apercentage. Mean session integrity ratings for the DLP were 90.31% (SD =27.99) and 80.38% (SD = 30.25) for the SBP. Secondary interventions. The academic secondary intervention wasled by the school literacy coordinator (second author) who was adoctoral candidate in special education. Each group participated in 3030-minute lessons conducted in the general education classroom 3 to 4days a week over a 9-week interval. The intervention was based on JohnShefelbine's Phonics Chapter Books (Shefelbine, 1998) program. Thisprogram contains six books that provide students a forum for developingphonics skills via "independent, sound-controlled reading materialsand systematic phonics instruction" (p. 3). The lessons containfour components: (a) phonemic awareness Phonemic Awareness is a subset of phonological awareness in which listeners are able to distinguish phonemes, the smallest units of sound that can differentiate meaning. For example, a listener with phonemic awareness can break the word "Cat" into three separate phonemes: /k/, /a/, , (b) connect sound-symbol andintroduce high-frequency words; (c) read the chapter, and (d) dictateand write. This same intervention was also used on an individual basiswith a kindergarten student also identified as at-risk. The social skills secondary intervention consisted of directinstruction in social skills acquisition deficits 2 days a week for 30minute sessions over a 10-week interval. Acquisition deficits of eachstudent were identified using the Social Skills Rating System (Gresham& Elliott, 1990). Specifically, acquisition deficits were any skillrated by the teachers as never observed (frequency score = 0) andcritically important (importance score = 3). A list of acquisitiondeficits was compiled for each group and the corresponding lesson planswere taken from Elliott and Gresham's (1991) Social SkillsIntervention Guide: Practical Strategiesfor Social Skills Training toserve as the social skills curriculum for each group. Lessonsincorporated effective instructional techniques modeled after a directinstruction paradigm (tell, show, do follow through, and practice) whichwere presented in a role-play format (Elliott & Gresham, 1991; seeLane et al., 2003 for findings of this secondary intervention). Dependent Variables Participants in the school-wide intervention were assessed frommultiple perspectives at three time points: at the onset of the schoolyear (Time 1), 3 months later (midpoint, Time 2), and again at the endof the year (Time 3) to monitor student progress. Data collected at themidpoint of the year were used to make decisions about which studentsneeded more intensive support in the form of secondary interventions. Aspreviously mentioned, data in this manuscript reflect the performance ofstudents who attended the school for the entire academic year and whowere present for Time 1 and Time 3 data collection points. District Multiple Measures: Reading (DMR (Digital Media Receiver) See digital media hub. ). Primary students'literacy skills were assessed using Scholastic Comprehension Tests(1996) Grades which contain three domains: (a) comprehension, (b) studyskills, and (c) grammar, usage and mechanics. The reading domain iscomprised of 20 short answer and multiple choice items measuring skillsand strategies in comprehension, vocabulary, and literacy elements. Anadditional 10 items assess grammar, usage, and mechanics skills, and 5items assess study skills. The district converts raw scores toproficiency pro��fi��cien��cy?n. pl. pro��fi��cien��ciesThe state or quality of being proficient; competence.Noun 1. proficiency - the quality of having great facility and competence levels (outstanding = 4, proficient pro��fi��cient?adj.Having or marked by an advanced degree of competence, as in an art, vocation, profession, or branch of learning.n.An expert; an adept. = 3, basic = 2, andbelow basic = 1). Upper elementary students' literacy skills were assessed usingHarcourt Brace Reading Comprehension Tests (Harcourt Brace, 1997).Criterion-referenced grade level tests are comprised of two readingpassages, each of which contains eight multiple choice and twoopen-ended short answer questions. Selections are drawn fromchildren's literature children's literature,writing whose primary audience is children.See also children's book illustration. The Beginnings of Children's LiteratureThe earliest of what came to be regarded as children's literature was first meant for adults. and are designed to determine the extent towhich a student's reading comprehension skills are at grade level.Raw scores were also converted to proficiency levels as described above. Curriculum Based Measures: Reading (CBM-R). Reading comprehensionwas assessed using grade-level reading comprehension passages from theMultiple Skills Series (Boning, 1976). Each level contains a series ofreading passages that are accompanied by five questions to assessreading comprehension skills (e.g., main idea, detail, inference (logic) inference - The logical process by which new facts are derived from known facts by the application of inference rules.See also symbolic inference, type inference. , andvocabulary). Percentage of items correct was computed by dividing thetotal number of correct responses by the total number of problems. Standford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition, Form T (SAT-9). TheStanford 9 is a national norm-referenced achievement test published byHarcourt Educational Measurement for grades 2-11. The test is designedso that each year's results can be compared to previous year'sscores. It measures student progress in mathematics, reading and writtenexpression. The reading comprehension assessment includes questionsabout process strategies, critical analysis, interpretation, and initialunderstanding. It also includes questions about recreational,functional, and textual reading (see www.cde.ca.gov/star2002/ forfurther information). Scores from the previous academic year serve asTime I data (onset) and scores from the current academic year served asTime 3 (year end) data. Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1994). The SRSS is amass screening tool used to identify elementary students who are at-riskfor antisocial behavior patterns (see previous description). Negative Narrative Comments, Absenteeism, and Special EducationEnrollment. These three variables were assessed using the SchoolArchival Record Search (SARS; Walker, BlockPedego, Todis, and Severson,1991). The SARS quantifies school record data on 11 archival variables(e.g., demographics The attributes of people in a particular geographic area. Used for marketing purposes, population, ethnic origins, religion, spoken language, income and age range are examples of demographic data. , attendances, retentions, etc.). Negative NarrativeComments (NNC NNC NASCAR Nextel Cup (stock car racing circuit)NNC National Neighborhood CoalitionNNC Naga National Council (India)NNC Neural Network Council (IEEE)) refer to written statements contained in thestudent's cumulative file that describe problematic behaviors andpoor work performance that occurred within the past year. Absenteeismrefers to the number of days the student was absent from school withinthe past 12 month period. Special Education Enrollment (SPED) refers towhether or not the student was receiving special education services forany portion of the school day. Interrater reliability for the SARS totalform is 96% with individual estimates ranging from 94% to 100%. Experimental Design The experimental design was a 2 X 2 (Grade Level X Time) mixedmodel. Grade level served as a between-subjects factor and time as arandom effects Random effects can refer to: Random effects estimator Random effect model factor. This mixed model design produced an interactionof Grade Level X Time, main effects for grade level (two levels: primary1-3, upper 4- 6) and time (two levels: onset, year end). Results Question 1: To what extent did the multi-leveled interventioninfluence the reading performance, behavioral performance, and riskstatus of upper and lower elementary school students? Statistical Procedures Univariate procedures were employed to analyze data given that theassumption of sphericity was met (Hatcher & Stepanski, 1994).Repeated measures ANOVAS were conducted for each of the dependentvariables (district multiple measures of reading, curriculum-basedreading performance, SAT-9 scores, negative narrative comments, andattendance) assessing reading and behavioral performance. Given thatmultiple ANOVAs were conducted, the Bonneferoni correction procedure wasemployed to protect against Type 1 errors (Klienbaum, Kupper, Muller,& Nizam, 1998). Effect sizes were also calculated for primary andupper elementary students on each measure to examine the magnitude ofthe change between the onset and year end scores. Onset mean scores weresubtracted from year end mean scores and divided by the pooled standarddeviation Pooled standard deviation is a way to find a better estimate of the true standard deviation given several different samples taken in different circumstances where the mean may vary between samples but the true standard deviation (precision) is assumed to remain the same. of both time points (Busk busk?intr.v. busked, busk��ing, busksTo play music or perform entertainment in a public place, usually while soliciting money. & Serlin, 1992). In brief,effect sizes can be interpreted as follows: .2 small effects, .5 mediumeffects, and .8 large effects (Cohen cohenor kohen(Hebrew: “priest”) Jewish priest descended from Zadok (a descendant of Aaron), priest at the First Temple of Jerusalem. The biblical priesthood was hereditary and male. , 1988). Reading Performance District Multiple Measures: Reading (DMR). Results were analyzedvia a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA anovasee analysis of variance.ANOVAAnalysis of variance, see there with time as the repeated factor.The grade level X time interaction was not significant, F (1,167) =0.07, p = .80. The main effect of grade level was significant, F (1,167) = 4.19, p = .04 indicating that primary and upper elementarystudents displayed significant differences in DMR scores at the onset ofthe study. The main effect of time was also significant, F (1,167) -13.05, p = .0004. Post-hoc contrasts revealed that students displayedsignificant increases in DMR scores between the onset and end of theschool year (p =.0004). Effect sizes indicated that primary and upperelementary students experienced small changes on DMR scores as evidencedby respective effect size scores of 0.31 and 0.25 (see Table 1). Curriculum-Based Measures: Reading (CBM-R). Results were analyzedvia a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA with time as the repeated factor.The grade level X time interaction was significant, F (1,167) = 6.22, p=.0136. Tests for simple effects revealed that primary student madesignificant improvements on CBM-R scores over time, F (1, 95) = 30.43, p=.0001 (effect size = 0.63). Tests of simple effects also indicated thatupper level students' CMB-R scores approached significance, F (1,72) = 5.18, p = 0.0258 (effect size = 0.27). However, given the need toemploy the Bonneferoni correction, the p-value of 0.0258 could not beconsidered significant. SAT-9. Results of a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA with time asthe repeated factor revealed that the interaction of grade level X timeinteraction was not significant, F (1, 94) = 0.04, p =.8447. The maineffect of grade level was not significant, F (1, 94) = 0.20, p =.6571,nor was the main effect of time, F (1, 94) = 2.25, p =. 1366. Thus,there was not a significant difference between primary and upperelementary students' SAT-9 scores at the onset of the school year,nor were there significant differences in SAT-9 scores between the onsetof the school year and year end (effect sizes; primary = 0.11, upper =-0.02). Behavioral Performance Negative Narrative Comments. Results of a two-way, repeated measureANOVA with time as the repeated factor revealed that the interaction ofgrade level X time interaction approached significance, F (1,169) =3.62, p = .0590. The main effect of grade level was not significant, F(1,169) = 1.15, p = .2848, nor was the main effect of time significant,F (1, 169) 2.39, p =. 123 7. Thus, there was not a significantdifference in the negative narrative comments scores recorded forprimary and upper elementary students at the onset of the school year.Further, there were no significant differences in these scores betweenthe onset of the school year and year end. However, effect sizecalculations indicated that upper elementary students experiencedmoderate decreases in negative comments (-0.45). Absenteeism. Results of a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA with timeas the repeated factor revealed that the interaction of grade level Xtime interaction was not significant, F (1,148) = 1.68, p =. 1974. Themain effect of grade level was not significant, F (1,148) = 0.54, p =.4639, nor was the main effect of time significant, F (1, 148) = 1.60, p= .2074. There were no significant differences in the absentee rates ofprimary and upper elementary students at the onset of the school yearnor were there significant differences in these scores between the onsetof the school year and year end. Effect size calculations indicated thatboth primary and upper elementary students showed movement in thedesired direction with effect sizes of -0.04 and -0.20, respectively. Question 2: Did the two-level model ofsupport dififerentiallyinfluence the reading performances of students with varying degrees ofrisk? Statistical Analysis Two one way univariate analysis of covariance CovarianceA measure of the degree to which returns on two risky assets move in tandem. A positive covariance means that asset returns move together. A negative covariance means returns vary inversely. (ANCOVAs) wereperformed to evaluate students' performance on the districtmultiple measures and curriculum based measures. Preintervention scoresfor each measure were used as covariates to take into account theinitial variability in reading scores (see Table 2 for means, standarddeviations, and adjusted means). Effect sizes were also computed toexamine the magnitude of change. Responsiveness Relative to Risk Status Results of an ANCOVA ANCOVA Analysis of Covariance indicated that the main effect of time wassignificant, F (1,163) = 32.99, p = 0.0001. Further, the main effect ofrisk status was significant F (2, 163) = 6.57, p =.0018; there weresignificant differences in the DMR scores of students with low,moderate, and high risk classifications once the preinterventiondistrict multiple measure reading score was taken into account. Studentsas a whole improved between the onset of the school year and year end.Students with moderate and high risk classifications had significantlylower DMR scores as compared to students with low risk status; however,they did not have significantly different scores from each other (seeTable 2 for mean scores by risk status). Effect sizes suggest that lowand moderate risk students demonstrated a small-to-moderate degree ofchange with respective effect sizes of 0.34 and 0.42. However, studentsin the high risk category showed only nominal improvement between theonset and year end (effect size = 0.06) In terms of CBM-R scores, the main effect of time was significant,F (1, 164) = 4.76, p = 0.0306. The main effect of risk status was alsosignificant F (2, 164) = 3.87, p = .0227. All students' CBM-Rscores improved over time; however, there were significant differencesbetween students with low and moderate risk status. Students with lowrisk status had significantly higher CBM-R scores relative to studentsof moderate risk. There were no significant differences between studentswith moderate and high risk statuses, nor were there significantdifferences between students with low and high risk statuses. Note, thismay be because of the secondary levels of support given to students withhigh risk status. Effect size scores indicate that all three risk groups(low, moderate, and high) showed improvement with the low and high riskgroups exhibiting moderate effects (effect sizes: 0.65, 0.39, and 0.60,respectively). Results of an ANCOVA for SAT-9 scores indicated that the maineffect of time was significant, F (1, 90) 125.95, p = 0.0001. The maineffect of risk status was not significant F (2, 90) = 0.70, p = .4977.There were not significant differences in SAT-9 scores of students withlow, moderate, and high risk classifications once the preinterventionSAT-9 reading score was taken into account. Students in each risk groupimproved between the onset of the school year and year end. Question 3: To what degree was risk status influenced by thetwo-level model of support at the end of the school year? Statistical Analysis Univariate procedures were used to analyze data given that theassumption of sphericity was met (Hatcher & Stepanski, 1994). Arepeated measures ANOVA was conducted to examine risk status totalscores. Effect sizes were also calculated for primary and upperelementary students to examine the magnitude of the change between theonset and year end scores. Descriptive procedures were used to examinechanges in risk status (low, moderate, and high) between onset and yearend scores. Risk Status Results of a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA using the SRSS datawith time as the repeated factor revealed that the interaction of gradelevel X time interaction was not significant, F (1, 174) = 1.30, p=.2561. The main effect of grade level was not significant, F (1, 174) =1.20, p =.2744. The main effect of time was also not significant, F (1,174) = 1.30, p =.2561. Thus, there were not a significant differencebetween primary and upper elementary students' risk status at theonset of the school year, nor were there significant differences in SRSSscores between the onset of the school year and year end (effect sizes:primary = 0. 12, upper = -0.04; see Table 1). Of the students for whom SRSS data were available for Time 1 andTime 3, 71 % of the students did not experience change in their riskstatus. Whereas 13% (n = 28) improved as indicated by moving into alower risk category (e.g., from high or moderate risk to low risk; fromhigh risk to moderate risk) on the SRSS, 16% (n = 35) moved into higherrisk categories. It should be noted, however, that only a small subset A group of commands or functions that do not include all the capabilities of the original specification. Software or hardware components designed for the subset will also work with the original. of students actually had data at Time 1 and Time 3. Question 4: To what degree did this program influence the numberofstudents receiving special education services ? Statistical Procedures Univariate procedures were employed to analyze data given that theassumption of sphericity was again met (Hatcher & Stepanski, 1994).A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted for risk status. Special Education Enrollment Results of a two-way, repeated measure ANOVA with time as therepeated factor revealed that the interaction of grade level X timeinteraction was not significant, F (1,168) 2.34, p =. 1277. The maineffect of grade level was not significant, F (1,168) = 0.01, p =.9277.The main effect of time was also not significant, F (1,168) = 0.33, p=.5659 (see Table 1 for group means). Thus, there were not a significantdifference between the number of primary and upper elementarystudents' enrolled in special education at the onset of the schoolyear, nor were there significant differences in special educationenrollment between the onset of the school year and year end. However,there was movement in the desired direction for upper elementary student(effect size = -0.05). Discussion Students who lack the requisite skills to successfully meet theirteacher's academic and behavioral expectations are at risk for anumber of negative outcomes including academic underachievement andantisocial behavior patterns (Walker et al., 1991; Walker &Severson, 2002). To prevent problems from occurring and manage existingproblems, interventions of varying scope, focus, and intensity arenecessary as not all students will respond uniformly to more global,primary interventions (Colvin et al., 1993). Schools provide an important context for intervention support,particularly when interventions are designed using progressively moreintensive levels of support and monitored using psychometrically soundprocedures and tools (O'Shaughnessy et al., 2002; Walker &Severson, 2002). This study extended previous school-wide interventionwork by implementing a multi-level intervention model with primary andsecondary levels of support. The primary level of support, unlike mostschool-wide interventions, addressed both literacy and behavioraldomains and included a wide range of outcomes variables to monitorstudent progress (e.g., standardized tests, curriculum-based measures,teacher report, and school record data). Further, decisions regardingresponsiveness and potential participation in secondary interventionswere data- based. Moreover, clearly-defined operational criteria wereused to identify responsiveness to the primary intervention andsubsequently determine the appropriate focus of secondary interventions. Findings of this study suggest that a multi-level interventionprogram has the potential to improve reading achievement as measured bydistrict multiple measures and curriculum-based measures for a largenumber of students. Although statistically significant improvements werenot evident on the statewide reading assessment, primary students showedlimited improvement as evidenced by effect sizes. Similarly, whereas theprogram was not associated with statistically significant changes onbehavioral measures and overall risk status, effect sizes scoresrevealed that upper elementary students showed moderate decreases innegative narrative comments and low magnitude decreases in risk scores.Further, primary and upper elementary students exhibited low magnitudechanges on absenteeism. It is interesting to note that all students, regardless of riskstatus (low, moderate, or high) showed significant improvement inreading (DMR, CBM-R, and SAT-9) scores once initial variability wastaken into account. This finding is particularly noteworthy given thatstudents with antisocial behavior patterns are characterized as lessamenable AMENABLE. Responsible; subject to answer in a court of justice liable to punishment. to intervention efforts (Kazdin, 1987; Walker & Severson,2002). Further, on the CBM-R measures there were no significantdifferences between students with high and low risk status althoughthere were significant differences between low and moderate riskstatuses. This difference may be due, in part, to the fact that studentsin the high risk category participated in secondary interventions andthat the CBM-R measures most closely paralleled the academic contentcovered in the secondary academic intervention. Yet, despite the improvement in reading skills, the interventiondid not significantly impact either the risk status of students in thissample or special education enrollment. Seventy-one percent of thestudents remained stable in their risk status producing a low magnitudeeffect for change. Of the students who did experience change, 13% movedinto lower risk categories whereas 16% move into higher risk categories.Further, although the mean rates of special education enrollment werelower for upper elementary students at year end, the magnitude of thechange was low (-0.05). Thus, it appears that the multi-level intervention has the greatestimpact in the area of reading. This finding is not surprising given that(a) additional resources were afford to the literacy side of thisprogram and (b) the literacy component was implemented with a higherdegree of fidelity as compared to the behavioral component. Although theprimary intervention contained literacy and behavioral components, themajority of resources were focused on the literacy domain. Facultyreceived in-class demonstrations and follow-up by the literacy coach.This on-going follow-up included the literacy coach demonstratingstrategies for providing differentiated small group instruction based onstudents' skill areas and methods for promoting independent readingby students (Lane & Menzies, 2002). Grade level meetings alsoprovided explicit guidance on how to monitor student progressing usingDMR and CBM-R data and how to use these data to adjust small- groupinstruction. Substantially less time and personnel were devoted to implementingthe behavioral component of the primary intervention. Although informaldiscussions and feedback were provided to classroom teachers who askedfor input on their classroom management, few teachers solicited thisinformation and formal meeting times beyond those mentioned in thetraining procedures were not dedicated to the refining the school-widebehavior plan. This lack of equity in resources may account, in part, for thelower treatment integrity ratings for the school-wide behavior plan ascompared to the district literacy plan and for the more modest changesin behavioral measures (Lane & Menzies, 2002). Although teachersreceived training in strategies to promote effective classroommanagement, the lack of ongoing coaching and feedback may have impeded im��pede?tr.v. im��ped��ed, im��ped��ing, im��pedesTo retard or obstruct the progress of. See Synonyms at hinder1.[Latin imped more successful and uniform implementation. Teachers' verbalbehavior (Bergan & Kratochwill, 1990) suggested that they werefamiliar with strategies for increasing academic engaged time, promotingsmooth transitions across activities, and managing undesirablebehaviors. Yet, treatment integrity data suggest that teachers may havelacked the skills to systematically and consistently implement thesestrategies (Vaughn, Klingner, & Hughes, 2000). In some instances itappeared that teachers employed punitive discipline techniques whenconfronted with challenging behavior. Further, some teachers continuedto employ reactive classroom management strategies rather than proactivetechniques (e.g., explicitly teaching, modeling, and reinforcing desiredbehaviors; Walker et al., 1995). It is also possible that the behavioral outcome variables employedin this study were not sensitive enough to detect more subtle changes instudent behavior (Lane, 1999; Lane & BeebeFrankenberger, in press).Many school-wide studies implementing positive behavior support monitorstudents' disciplinary contacts or office referrals as an outcomevariable (Sugai, Sprague, Homer, & Walker, 2000) which appears, inmany cases, to have been sensitive to intervention outcomes.Disciplinary contacts were not recorded in this study given that theelementary school was without an onsite principal or vice-principalduring the previous academic year. The previous principal resignedmid-year and the district was not able to hire a principal until thefollowing summer. As such, office referrals were not an option duringthe later portion of the prior year given that there was not anadministrator present to address the behavioral concerns. Thus, changesin office referrals could not be attributed entirely to theintervention. The outcome variables in this study (negative narrativecomments, absenteeism, and risk status) are more likely to not beinfluenced by the absence of an administrator. Future investigationswould, however, be wise to monitor contacts with the school'sdisciplinarian dis��ci��pli��nar��i��an?n.One that enforces or believes in strict discipline.adj.Disciplinary.disciplinarianNouna person who practises strict disciplineNoun 1. . Despite the noted limitations, this study provides insight into thecomplexity and feasibility of conducting multi-level interventions toaddress learning and behavior problems. This project was implementedwith university support, but without any funding. Consequently,decisions had to be made about how and where to devote limitedresources. This is a common dilemma for many of today's school asthey attempt to provide a range of services to better educate anincreasingly diverse student population. In this study, the principal, literacy coordinator, and universityrepresentative agreed that the most pressing component was literacydomain. Future studies providing a more balanced distribution ofresources across intervention components will provide an important lookinto the feasibility and effectiveness of multi-level interventions forpreventing and responding to academic, social, and behavioral concerns.Table 1.Mean Scores by Grade Level: Onset and Year End Elementary Level Primary Effect UpperMeasure Time M SD Size M SDDMR Onset 2.68 0.98 0.31 2.50 1.03(n=169) Year End 2.95 0.78 2.74 0.91CBM-R Onset 71.11 32.01 0.63 79.75 24.34(n=169) Year End 88.77 24.06 85.32 17.16SAT-9 Onset 42.87 22.91 0.11 44.65 28.59(n=94) Year End 45.60 27.39 44.22 26.25NNC Onset 0.39 1.20 0.03 0.44 1.52(n=171) Year End 0.43 1.53 0.04 0.26Absenteeism Onset 9.94 9.04 -0.04 12.14 14.72(n=150) Year End 9.62 7.87 9.57 10.89SRSS Onset 3.43 4.23 0.12 3.22 3.90(n=176) Year End 3.96 4.35 3.05 3.83Special Onset 0.03 0.17 0.15 0.05 0.23EducationEnrollment Year End 0.06 0.24 0.04 0.20(n=170) EffectMeasure SizeDMR 0.25(n=169)CBM-R 0.27(n=169)SAT-9 -0.02(n=94)NNC -0.45(n=171)Absenteeism -0.20SRSS -0.04(n=176)Special -0.05EducationEnrollment(n=170)Note. DMR refers to District Multiple Measures: Reading. CBM-R refersto Curriculum Based Measures--Reading. SAT-9 refers to StandfordAchievement Test, Ninth Edition, Form T.SRSS refers to Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1994). NNCrefers to Negative Narrative Comments (SARS; Walker, Block-Pedego,Todis, & Severson, 1991).Table 2.Mean Scores by Risk Status: Onset and Year EndMeasure Risk Low [M.sup.d] SD [M.sup.b] Effect SizeDMR Onset 2.80 0.94 0.34Year End 3.07 0.67 3.00CBM Onset 77.48 27.80 0.65Year End 91.64 15.56 91.33SAT-9 Onset 45.66 24.41 0.08Year End 47.52 24.24 44.67Measure Risk Moderate [M.sup.d] SD [M.sup.b] Effect SizeDMR Onset 2.20 0.93 0.42Year End 2.60 0.96 2.73CBM Onset 69.32 28.41 0.39Year End 80.14 27.14 81.64SAT-9 Onset 36.00 25.71 0.25Year End 43.00 29.48 47.66Measure Risk High [M.sup.d] SD [M.sup.b] Effect SizeDMR Onset 2.13 1.15 0.06Year End 2.19 0.98 2.34CBM Onset 69.21 37.20 0.60Year End 85.53 16.82 86.11SAT-9 Onset 28.14 36.54 0.01Year End 28.43 31.85 39.19Note. DMR refers to District Multiple Measures: Reading. CBM-R refersto Curriculum Based Measures--Reading. SAT-9 refers to StandfordAchievement Test, Ninth Edition, Form T. Effect sizes were computedusing unadjusted means. a = unadjusted mean; b = adjusted means. References American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statisticalmanual of mental disorders Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders/Di��ag��nos��tic and Sta��tis��ti��cal Man��u��al of Men��tal Dis��or��ders/ (DSM) a categorical system of classification of mental disorders, published by the American Psychiatric Association, that delineates objective (4th ed.). Washington, DC: AmericanPsychiatric Association. Bergan, J. R., & Kratchowill, T. R. (1990). Behavioralconsultation and therapy. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of , NY: Plenum In a building, the space between the real ceiling and the dropped ceiling, which is often used as an air duct for heating and air conditioning. It is also filled with electrical, telephone and network wires. See plenum cable. Press. Boning, R. (1976). Multiple Skills Series. Lowell & Lynwood,Baldwin, NY. Bullis, M., & Walker, H. M. (1994). Comprehensiveschool-based systems for troubled youth. Eugene: University of Oregon The University of Oregon is a public university located in Eugene, Oregon. The university was founded in 1876, graduating its first class two years later. The University of Oregon is one of 60 members of the Association of American Universities. ,Center on Human Development. Busk, P. L., & Serlin, R. C. (1992). Meta-analysis forsingle-case research. In T. Kratochwill & J. Levin lev��in?n. ArchaicLightning.[Middle English levene, levin; see leuk- in Indo-European roots.] (Eds.) Singlecase research design and analysis, pp. 187-212. Hillsdale, N.J.:Erlbaum. California State Framework in Language Arts. (1997). CaliforniaDepartment of Education The California Department of Education is a California agency that oversees public education. The Department oversees funding, testing, and holds local educational agencies accountable for student achievement. . Canter, L. (1990). Lee Canter's back to school with assertivediscipline. Santa Monica, California: Canter & Associates. Canter, L., & Canter, M, (1992). Lee Canter's assertivediscipline. Santa Monica, California: Canter & Associates. Charles, C. M. (1996). Building classroom discipline (5th ed.).White Plains, NY: Longman. Clarke, E. A., & Kiselica, M. S. (1997). A systemic counselingapproach to the problem of bullying BullyingChowne, Parson Stoyleterrorizes parish; kidnaps children. [Br. Lit.: The Maid of Sker, Walsh Modern, 94–95]Claypole, Noahbully; becomes thief in Fagin’s gang. [Br. Lit. . Elementary School Guidance &Counseling, 31,310-325. Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Kameenui, E. (1993). Proactiveschoolwide discipline: Implementation manual Project PREPARE, BehavioralResearch and Teaching, College of Education, University of Oregon,Eugene. Committee for Children. (1992). Second Step: Violence preventioncurriculum for preschool grade 9. Seattle: Author. Drummond, T. (1994). The Student Risk Screening Scale. Grants Pass,OR: Josephine County Mental Health Program. Drummond, T., Eddy, J. M., & Reid, J. B. (1998a). Follow-UpStudy #3; Risk Screening Scale: Prediction of Negative Outcomes by 10thGrade from 2nd Grade Screening. Unpublished technical report. Eugene,OR: Oregon Social Learning Center. Drummond, T., Eddy, J. M., & Reid, J. B. (1998b). Follow- UpStudy #4; Risk Screening Scale: Prediction of Negative Outcomes in TwoLongitudinal Samples. Unpublished technical report. Eugene, OR: OregonSocial Learning Centen Dunlap, G., Foster-Johnson, L., Clarke, S., Kern, L., & Childs,K (1995). Modifying activities to produce functional outcomes: Effectson the problem behaviors of students with disabilities. Journal of theAssociation for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20,248-258. Elliott, S. & Gresham, E M. (1991). Social skills interventionguide. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance. Gresham, E M. (2002). Social skills assessment and instruction forstudents with emotional and behavioral disorders. In K. L. Lane, E M.Gresham, and T. E. O'Shaughnessy (Eds.), Interventions for childrenwith or at risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. (pp. 242- 258).Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social Skills RatingSystem (SSRS SSRS SQL Server Reporting Services (Microsoft SQL Server 2005)SSRS Single State Registration SystemSSRS Social Skills Rating SystemSSRS SQL Server Resolution Service (Microsoft SQL Server 2000)). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. Gresham, E M., Lane, K. L., & Lambros, K. (2000). Comorbidityof conduct and attention deficit hyperactivity problems: Issues ofidentification and intervention with "fledgling psychopaths."Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 83-93. Harcourt Brace Reading Comprehension Tests (1997). Signatures. NY,New York: Harcourt Brace. Hatcher, L., & Stepanski, E. J. (1994). A step by step approachto using the SAS system (1) Originally called the "Statistical Analysis System," it is an integrated set of data management and decision support tools from SAS that runs on platforms from PCs to mainframes. for univariate and multivariate statistics.Cary, NC: SAS Institute SAS Institute Inc., headquartered in Cary, North Carolina, USA, has been a major producer of software since it was founded in 1976 by Anthony Barr, James Goodnight, John Sall and Jane Helwig. . Jones, R. N., Sheridan, S. M., & Binns, W. R. (1993).Schoolwide social skills training: Providing preventive services tostudents at-risk. School Psychology Quarterly, 8, 57-80. Kamps, D., Kravits, T., Stolze, S., & Swaggart, B. (1999).Prevention strategies for at-risk students and students with EBD EBDEmotional or behavioral disorder inurban elementary schools. Journal (if Emotional and BehavioralDisorders, 7, 178-188. Kazdin, A. E., (1987). Treatment of antisocial behavior inchildren: Current status and future directions. Psychological Bulletin,102, 187-203. Kazdin, A. E. (1993). Treatment of conduct disorders: Progress anddirections in psychotherapy psychotherapy,treatment of mental and emotional disorders using psychological methods. Psychotherapy, thus, does not include physiological interventions, such as drug therapy or electroconvulsive therapy, although it may be used in combination with such methods. research. Development and Psychopathology psychopathology/psy��cho��pa��thol��o��gy/ (-pah-thol��ah-je)1. the branch of medicine dealing with the causes and processes of mental disorders.2. abnormal, maladaptive behavior or mental activity. ,5, 277-310. Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E., & Nizam, A.(1998). Applied regression analysis In statistics, a mathematical method of modeling the relationships among three or more variables. It is used to predict the value of one variable given the values of the others. For example, a model might estimate sales based on age and gender. and other multivariate methods.(3rd). Boston: PWS-Kent. Lane, K. L. (1999). Young students at-risk for antisocial behavior:The utility of academic and social skills interventions. Journal ofEmotional and Behavioral Disorders, 7, 211-223. Lane, K. L., & Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E. (in press). Schoolbased Interventions: The tools you need to succeed. Boston, MA: Allyn& Bacon. Lane, K. L., & Menzies, H. M. (2002). Promoting achievement andminimizing risk--phase 1: The impact of a school-based primaryintervention program. Preventing School Failure, 47, 26-32. Lane, K L., Wehby, J., Menzies, H., Doukas, G., Munton, S., &Gregg, R. (2003) Social skills training for students at-risk forantisocial behavior: The effects of small group instruction. BehavioralDisorders, 28, 229-248. Lane, K. L., Wehby, J. H., Menzies, H. M., Gregg, R. M., Doukas,G.L., & Munton, S. M. (2002). Early literacy instruction forfirst-grade students at-risk for antisocial behavior. BehaviorDisorders, 28, 229-248. Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior support: Asystems approach to proactive schoolwide management. Focus onExceptional Children, 31, 1-24. Lewis, T. J., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1998). Reducing problembehavior through a schoolwide system of effective behavior support:Investigation of a schoolwide social skills training program andcontextual variables. School Psychology Review, 27, 446-459. Lohnnann-O'Rourke, S., Knoster, T., Sabatine, K., Smith, D.,Horvath, B., & Llewellyn, G. (2000). Schoolwide application of PBS PBSin full Public Broadcasting ServicePrivate, nonprofit U.S. corporation of public television stations. PBS provides its member stations, which are supported by public funds and private contributions rather than by commercials, with educational, cultural, in the Bangor area school district. Journal of Positive BehaviorInterventions, 2, 238-240. MacGregor, R. R., Nelson, J. R., & Wesch, D. (1997). Creatingpositive learning environments: The school-wide student managementprogram. Professional School Counseling, 1, 33-35. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: "what we know and cando. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. O'Shaughnessy, T., Lane, K.L., Gresham, F.M, &Beebe-Frankenberger, M. (2003). Children placed at-risk for learning andbehavioral difficulties: Implementing a school-wide system of earlyidentification and prevention. Remedial REMEDIAL. That which affords a remedy; as, a remedial statute, or one which is made to supply some defects or abridge some superfluities of the common law. 1 131. Com. 86. The term remedial statute is also applied to those acts which give a new remedy. Esp. Pen. Act. 1. and Special Education, 24,27-35. O'Shaughnessy, T., Lane, K. L., Gresham, E M., &Beebe-Frankenberger, M. (2002). Students with or at-risk for learningand emotional-behavioral difficulties: An integrated system ofprevention and intervention. In. K.L. Lane, E M. Gresham, & T. E.O'Shaughnessy (Eds.), Interventions for children with or at-riskfor emotional and behavioral disorders. (pp. 3-17). Boston, MA: Allyn& Bacon. Scholastic Comprehension Tests (1996). Literacy Place. New York,New York: Scholastic. Scott, T. M. (2001). A School-wide Example of Positive BehavioralSupport. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3, 88-94. Shefelbine, J. (1998). Phonics chapters books 1-6: Teachers guide.New York, NY: Scholastic. Simcha-Fagan, O., Langner, T., Gersten, J., & Eisenberg, J.(1975). Violent and antisocial behavior: A longitudinal study longitudinal studya chronological study in epidemiology which attempts to establish a relationship between an antecedent cause and a subsequent effect. See also cohort study. of urbanyouth. (OCD-CB-480) Unpublished report of the Office of ChildDevelopment. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Someconsequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy.Reading Research Quarterly, 21,360-407. Stanovich, K. E. (1988). The right and wrong places to look for thecognitive locus of reading disability. Annals an��nals?pl.n.1. A chronological record of the events of successive years.2. A descriptive account or record; a history: "the short and simple annals of the poor" of Dyslexia dyslexia(dĭslĕk`sēə), in psychology, a developmental disability in reading or spelling, generally becoming evident in early schooling. To a dyslexic, letters and words may appear reversed, e.g. , 38, 154-177. Sugai, G., Sprague, J. R., Homer, R. H., & Walker, H. M.(2000). Preventing school violence: The use of office disciplinereferrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(2), 94- 10 1. Taylor-Greene, S. J., & Kartub, D. T. (2000). Durableimplementation of school-wide behavior support. Journal of PositiveBehavior Interventions, 2,233-234. Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A.,Voeller, K. S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instructionfor children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-termoutcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of LearningDisabilities, 34, 33 -58. Turnbull, A., Edmonson, H., Griggs, P., Wickham, D., Sailor Person who navigates ships or assists in the conduct, maintenance, or service of ships.Sailors have historically received special treatment under the law because of the nature of their work. , W.,Freeman, R., Guess, D., Lassen, S. McCart, A., Park, J., Riffel, L.,Turnbull, R., & Warren, J. (2002). A blueprint for schoolwidepositive behavior support: Implementation of three components.Exceptional Children, 68, 377-402. Umbreit, J. (1996). Functional analysis of disruptive behavior inan inclusive classroom. Journal of Early Intervention ear��ly interventionn. Abbr. EIA process of assessment and therapy provided to children, especially those younger than age 6, to facilitate normal cognitive and emotional development and to prevent developmental disability or delay. , 20, 18-29. Vaughn, S., Klingner, J., & Hughes, M. (2000). Sustainabilityof research-based practices. Exceptional Children, 22,163-171. Walker, H. M., Block-Pedago, A., Todis, B., & Severson, H.(1991). School Archival Records Search. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocialbehavior in school: Strategies and Best Practices. Pacific Grove Pacific Grove,residential and resort city (1990 pop. 16,117), Monterey co., W central Calif., on a point where Monterey Bay meets the Pacific Ocean; inc. 1889. , CA:Brooks/Cole. Walker, H. M., & Severson, H. (2002). Developmental preventionof at risk outcomes for vulnerable antisocial children and youth. In K.L. Lane, E M. Gresham, & T. E. O'Shaughnessy (Eds.),Interventions for children with or at-risk for emotional and behavioraldisorders (pp. 177-194). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Walker, H. M., Shinn, M. R., O'Neill, R. E., & Ramsey, E.(1987). A longitudinal assessment of the development of antisocialbehavior in boys: Rationale, methodology and first year results.Remedial and Special Education, 8, 7-16. Wong, H., & Wong, R. (1998). How to be an effective teacher:The first days of school. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong. Kathleen Lynne Lane Peabody College Peabody College was founded in 1875 when the University of Nashville, located in Nashville,Tennessee, split into two separate educational institutions. The preparatory school, Montgomery Bell Academy separated from the college, which was originally called of Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University,at Nashville, Tenn.; coeducational; chartered 1872 as Central Univ. of Methodist Episcopal Church, founded and renamed 1873, opened 1875 through a gift from Cornelius Vanderbilt. Until 1914 it operated under the auspices of the Methodist Church. Holly Mariah Menzies California State University, Los Angeles California State University, Los Angeles (also known as Cal State L.A., CSULA, or "'CSLA"') is a public university, part of the California State University system. Address: Dr. Kathleen Lane, Department of Special Education,Peabody College/ Vanderbilt University, Box 328 Peabody, Nashville, TN37203