Schools continue to strive for the use of evidenced-based interventions and policies to foster well-managed classrooms that promote improved student outcomes. The present study examined the effects of the Class-Wide Function-related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT), a group contingency intervention, on the on-task and disruptive behavior of elementary school students with or at risk for emotional behavior disorders (EBD). Seventeen elementary schools, 159 general education teachers, and 313 students participated in the randomized-control group design study. Fidelity of implementation was strong for intervention group teachers and was measured across groups and throughout baseline conditions. Results suggest that CW-FIT can be used to increase on-task behavior and reduce the disruptive behavior of students with or at risk for EBD. In addition, teachers in intervention classes increased praise and reduced reprimands to individual students and along with their students, reported high levels of consumer satisfaction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrieschA.ChafouleasS. (2009). A review and analysis of the literature on self-management interventions to promote appropriate classroom behaviors (1988–2008). School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 106–118. doi:10.1037/a0016159
2.
CampbellS.SkinnerC. H. (2004). Combining explicit timing with an interdependent group contingency program to decrease transitions times: An investigation of the Timely Transition Game. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 20, 11–27. doi:10.1300/J370v20n02_02
3.
CohenJ. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213. doi:10.1037/h0026256
4.
EmbryD. E. (2002). The Good Behavior Game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5, 273–297. doi:10.1023/A:1020977107086
5.
ErvinR. A.RadfordP. M.BertschK.PiperA. L.EhrhardtK. E.PolingA. (2001). A descriptive analysis and critique of the empirical literature on school-based functional assessment. School Psychology Review, 30, 193–210.
6.
FairbanksS.SugaiG.GuardinoD.LathropM. (2007). Response to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 288–310. doi:10.1177/001440290707300302
7.
FantuzzoJ. W.PoliteK. (1990). School-based, behavioral self-management: A review and analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 5, 180–198. doi:10.1037/h0090612
8.
GreshamF. M.ElliottS. N. (1990). The Social Skills Rating System. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
9.
HirschS.HumboldtS.JudgeJ.LloydJ. (2016). Effects of an interdependent group contingency on engagement in physical education. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(4), 1–5. doi:10.1002/jaba.328
10.
HornerR.SugaiG.AndersonC. (2010). Examining the evidence for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1–14.
KampsD.ConklinC.WillsH. (2015). Use of self-management with the CW-FIT group contingency program. Education and Treatment of Children, 38, 1–32.
13.
KampsD.WendlandM.CulpepperM. (2006). Active teacher participation in functional behavior assessment for students with emotional and behavioral disorders risks in general education classrooms. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 128-146.
14.
KampsD.Wills.H.BannisterH.Heitzman-PowellL.KottwitzE.HansenB.FlemingK. (2015). Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams “CW-FIT” efficacy trial outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 134–145. doi:10.1177/1098300714565244
15.
KampsD.WillsH.Heitzman-PowellL.LaylinJ.SzokeC.HobohmT.CuleyA. (2011). Class-Wide Function-Based Intervention Teams: Effects of group contingency programs in urban classrooms. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13, 154–167. doi:10.1177/1098300711398935
16.
LitowL.PumroyD. K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 341–347. doi:10.1901/jaba.1975.8-341
17.
LloydJ. W.LandrumT. J. (1990). Self-recording of attending to task: Treatment components and generalization of effects. In ScruggsT. E.WongB. Y. L. (Eds.), Intervention research in learning disabilities (pp. 235–262). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
18.
LohrmannS.TalericoJ. (2004). Anchor the boat. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 113–120. doi:10.1177/10983007040060020601
19.
MacLeanW. E.Jr.TappJ. T.JohnsonW. L. (1985). Alternate methods and software for calculating interobserver agreement for continuous observation data. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 7, 65–73. doi:10.1007/BF00961847
20.
MagginD. M.JohnsonA. H.ChafouleasS. M.RubertoL. M.BerggrenM. (2012). A systematic evidence review of school-based group contingency interventions for students with challenging behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 50, 625–654. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2012.06.001
21.
McDougallD. (1998). Research on self-management techniques used by students with disabilities in general education settings: A descriptive review. Remedial and Special Education, 19, 310–320.
22.
MitchemK. J.YoungK. R.WestR. P.BenyoJ. (2001). CWPASM: A classwide peer-assisted self-management program for general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children, 24, 111–140.
23.
StageS. A.QuirozD. R. (1997). A meta-analysis of interventions to decrease disruptive classroom behavior in public education settings. School Psychology Review, 26, 333–368.
24.
TappJ. T.WehbyJ. H.EllisD. (1995). MOOSES: A multi-option observation system for experimental studies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 27, 25–31. doi:10.3758/BF03203616
25.
TheodoreL. A.BrayM. A.KehleT. J. (2004). A comparative study of group contingencies and randomized reinforcers to reduce disruptive classroom behaviors. School Psychology Quarterly, 19, 253–271. doi:10.1521/scpq.19.3.253.40280
26.
TheodoreL. A.BrayM. A.KehleT. J.DioGuardiR. J. (2003). Contemporary review of group-oriented contingencies for disruptive behavior. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 20, 79–101. doi:10.1300/J370v20n01_06
27.
TingstromD. H.Sterling-TurnerH. E.WilczynskiS. M. (2006). The Good Behavior Game: 1969 to 2002. Behavior Modification, 30, 225–233. doi:10.1177/0145445503261165
28.
WalkerH. M.SeversonH. H.FeilE. G. (1991). Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders: SSBD. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
29.
WillsH. P.IwaszukW. M.KampsD.ShumateE. (2014). CW-FIT: Group contingency effects across the day. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 191–210. doi:10.1353/etc.2014.0016
30.
WillsH. P.KampsD.HansenB. D.ConklinC.BellingerS.NeaderhiserJ.NsubugaB. (2010). The Class-Wide Function-Based Intervention Team (CW-FIT) program. Preventing School Failure, 54, 164–171. doi:10.1080/10459880903496230
