Response to Intervention: Prevention/Early Intervention Strategies for Challenging Behavior
June 2–6 Online Discussion Summary
The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality completed the
TQ Connection’s fifth on-line discussion on June 6th. Dr. Frank Gresham of Louisiana State University served as the Center’s expert and provided answers, discussion points, and resources related to prevention and early intervention strategies for challenging behavior. Participants were invited to read Dr. Gresham’s paper,
Response to Intervention: Prevention/Early Intervention Strategies for Challenging Behavior and participate in the on-line discussion.
Three key topics emerged in the week-long discussion:
• Criteria to select evidenced-based practices and interventions for challenging behavior.
• Response to Intervention (RTI) as a process versus a program.
• Teacher preparation in classroom and behavioral management.
Criteria to Select Evidenced-based Practices and Interventions for Challenging BehaviorDr. Gresham responded to inquiries regarding the selection criteria for evidenced-based strategies by offering several available resources and suggestions for a process schools/districts might consider in the selection process. Specifically, Dr. Gresham recommended establishing a “Consensus Panel” to evaluate and recommend practices that are evidenced based. The panel can determine which practices are effective with a diverse population, are reliable and valid, and meet outcomes measures aligned with student needs and school/district priorities.
Dr. Gresham and TQ Center staff recommended the following resources that either identify evidenced-based practices and/or provide tools to support the selection of evidenced-based practices:
•
The Office of Special Education Programs: Ideas That Work•
What Works Clearinghouse•
Center for Evidenced-Based Practice: Young Children With Challenging Behavior•
The National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports•
The National Implementation Research Network (NIRN)•
Council for Exceptional Children: Evidenced Based Resources •
State Implementation and Scaling-Up of Evidence-Based Practices (SISEP) Center • Jimmerson, S., Burns, M. & VanDerHeyden, A. (Eds.)(2007).
Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York: Springer.
• Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent, Volume 31, Issue 1 (2008).
Special Issue: Evidenced-Based Psycho-social Treatment for Children and Adolescents: A 10 Year Update.
RTI Process vs. ProgramSeveral on-line participants shared concerns over the lack of an RTI “process” within their schools. In particular, a participant commented that within his/her school students are moved to level III without the benefit of high quality instruction. Another participant commented that level III has been interpreted as a “place” to receive services and interventions are not individualized. Dr. Gresham reiterated that RTI is a process whereby “some students need more behavioral supports than others”. Students are moved within each level of intervention depending on their responsiveness and their established, individualized goals. Determining student behavioral goals presents a challenge as we have no “well established benchmarks for social behavior”. Dr. Gresham described how behavioral goals are largely dependent on contextual factors (baseline data and teacher tolerance) and that an RTI process requires having evidenced-based Tier I interventions (e.g. Positive Behavioral Support) as the initial step and that Tier II and III interventions should be developed with problem solving approaches in a collaborative manner.
Dr. Gresham described that Tier I interventions begin in the general education classroom and as intensity increases, so does the need to collaborate with specialist (i.e. special education teachers, behavioral consultants, psychologist). A participant questioned if local and state RTI efforts contributed to a division in the general and special education fields or have joined the two fields as intended. Dr. Gresham noted that “in some places it is working as intended but in others not at all” and suggested it would be “worthwhile” data to collect.
Teacher Preparation in Classroom and Behavioral ManagementDr. Gresham identified two primary roadblocks to using RTI for addressing challenging behaviors: 1) lack of knowledge on the part of school staff concerning evidenced-based interventions for behavior, and 2) treatment integrity (fidelity) of interventions that are implemented. Both barriers have implications for teacher training. As Dr. Gresham indicated, “current teacher education programs are woefully inadequate” in terms of training on evidenced-based strategies in classroom and behavioral management. This comment parallels findings and recommendations described in the
National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Qualitiy's TQ Research & Policy Brief, Effective Classroom Management: Teacher Preparation and Professional Development. Dr. Gresham and the TQ Center documents underscore the need for teachers to possess the competencies to develop, implement, and sustain classroom and behavioral management plans.
The
TQ Center Research & Policy Brief, Effective Classroom Management: Teacher Preparation and Professional Development, also includes an Innovation Configuration (IC) that can be used to evaluate teacher preparation coursework in the area of classroom and behavioral management. Teachers equipped with the competencies identified on the IC are more likely to offer a positive classroom environment and address the individual behavior needs to students through the use of evidenced-based strategies. For additional information and/or training regarding the use of this innovation configuration, please contact Dan Reschly, Vanderbilt University, at
dan.reschly@vanderbilt.edu or 615-708-7910.
Thank you for taking the time to visit the
TQ Connection. For a complete account of the discussion, visit
http://www.tqsource.org/forum/index.php/topic,33.0.html.
The next
TQ Connection on-line discussion is scheduled to begin
September 8. Information regarding this discussion will be forwarded in mid-August. Though the TQ Center will not hold online discussions during the months of July and August, the resources and information will continue to be available on-line.
Much appreciation is extended to our online participants. The utility of this discussion board is largely dependent on participant questions, observations, and suggestions. If you have any topics you would like to see the TQ Center address, please feel free to contact Lynn Holdheide at
lynn.holdheide@vanderbilt.edu or Amy Potemski at
Amy.Potemski@learningpt.org.
