Check-in/checkout (CICO) is a behavioral intervention that is used to provide systematic feedback about a student's behavior at the beginning and end of each school day. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CICO on decreasing problem behaviors and the collateral effects on mathematics performance for 4 at-risk elementary school students. A multiple-baseline across-participants design using dyads was used to analyze problem behavior collected through direct classroom observations. As ancillary measures, office discipline referrals per week as well as mathematic performance (i.e., digits correct per minute [DCPM]) were collected for each student. Treatment integrity and acceptability and social validity were also measured. Results indicate a decrease in problem behaviors as well as an increase in DCPM for each participant.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BurnsM., VanDerHeydenA., & JibanC. (2006). Assessing the instructional level for mathematics: A comparison of methods.School Psychology Review, 35, 401–418.
3.
CampbellJ. M. (2004). Statistical comparison of four effect sizes for single-subject designs.Behavior Modification, 28, 234–246.
4.
CampbellA., & AndersonC. (2008). Enhancing effects of check-in/check-out with function based support.Behavioral Disorders, 33(4), 233–245.
5.
CarrJ. E. (2005). Recommendations for reporting multiple baseline designs across participants.Behavioral Interventions, 20, 219–224.
6.
CroneD. A., HornerR. H., & HawkenL. (2004). Responding to problem behavior in the school: The behavior education program.New York: Guilford.
7.
DerenneA., & BaronA. (1999). Huan sensitivity to reinforcement: A comment on Kollins, New-land, and Critchfield's (1997) quantitative literature review.Behavior Analyst, 22, 35–41.
8.
DoggettR. A., EdwardsR. P., MooreJ. W., TingstromD. H., & WylczynskiS. M. (2001). An approach to functional assessment in general education classroom settings.School Psychology Review, 30, 313–328.
9.
DufreneB. A., DoggettR. A., HeningtonC., & WatsonT. S. (2007). Functional assessment and intervention for disruptive classroom behaviors in preschool and head start classrooms.Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 368–388.
10.
EdwardsR. P. (2002). A tutorial for using the functional assessment informant record for teachers.Proven Practice, 4, 31–33.
11.
ElliottS. N. (1988). Acceptability of behavioral treatments in educational settings. In WittJ. C., ElliottS. N., & GreshamF. M. (Eds.), Handbook of behavior therapy in education (pp. 121–150). New York: Plenum.
12.
ElliotS. N., & TreutingM. V. (1991). The Behavior Intervention Rating Scale: Development and validation of a pretreatment acceptability and effectiveness measure.Journal of School Psychology, 29, 43–51.
13.
FairbanksS., SugaiG., GuardinoD., & LathropM. (2007). Response to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in second grade.Exceptional Children, 73, 288–310.
14.
FilterK. J., McKennaM. K., BenedictE. A., HornerR. H., ToddA. W., & WatsonJ. (2007). Check in/check out: a post-hoc evaluation of an efficient, secondary-level targeted intervention for reducing problems behaviors in schools.Education and Treatment of Children, 30, 69–84.
15.
FlemingC. B., HarachiT. W., CortesR. C., AbbottR. D., & CatalanoR. F. (2004). Level and change in reading scores and attention problems during elementary school as predictors of problem behavior in middle school.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12, 130–144.
16.
HawkenL. S. (2006). School psychologists as leaders in the implementation of a targeted intervention.School Psychology Quarterly, 21(1), 91–111.
17.
HawkenL. S., & HornerR. H. (2003). Evaluation of a targeted intervention within a schoolwide system of behavior support.Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 225–240.
18.
HawkenL. S., MacLeodK. S., & RawlingsL. (2007). Effects of the behavior education program (BEP) of office discipline referrals of elementary school students.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 94–101.
19.
HornerR. H., SugaiG., ToddA. W., & Lewis-PalmerT. (2005). Schoolwide positive behavior support: An alternative approach to discipline in schools. In BambaraL., & KernL. (Eds.), Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans (pp. 359–390). New York: Guilford Press.
20.
IrvinL. K., HornerR. H., IngramK., ToddA. W., SugaiG., SampsonN. K., & BolandJ. B. (2006). Using office discipline referral data for decision making about student behavior in elementary and middle schools: An empirical evaluation of validity.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8, 10–23.
21.
IrvinL. K., TobinT. J., SpragueJ. R., SugaiG., & VincentC. G. (2004). Validity of office discipline referral measures as indices of school-wide behavioral status and effects of school-wide behavioral interventions.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 131–147.
22.
LeeY., SugaiG., & HornerR. (1999). Effect of component skill instruction on math performance and on-task, problem, and off-task behavior of students with emotional and behavioral disorders.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1, 195–204.
23.
MaguinE., & LoeberR. (1995). Academic performance and delinquency. In TonryM. (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 20, pp. 145–264). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
MarascuiloL. A., & BuskP. L. (1988). Combining statistics for multiple-baseline AB and replicated ABAB designs across subjects.Behavioral Assessment, 10, 1–28.
25.
MarchR. E., & HornerR. H. (2002). Feasibility and contributions of functional behavior assessments in schools.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 158–170.
26.
McCurdyB. L., KunschC., & ReibsteinS. (2007). Tier II prevention in the urban school: Implementing the Behavior Education Program.Preventing School Failure, 51, 12–19.
27.
McintoshK., FlanneryK., SugaiG., BraunD., & CochraneK. (2008). Relationships between academics and problem behavior in the transition from middle school to high school.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, 243–255.
28.
McintoshK., HornerR. H., ChardD. J., BolandJ. B., & GoodR. H. (2006). The use of reading and behavior screening measures to predict non-response to school-wide positive behavior support: A longitudinal analysis.School Psychology Review, 35, 275–291.
29.
MorrisonG. M., AnthonyS., StorinoM., & DillonC. (2001). An examination of the disciplinary histories and the individual and educational characteristics of students who participate in an in-school suspension program.Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 276–293.
30.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDE). (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation.Alexandria, VA: NASDE.
31.
OliveM. L., & SmithB. W. (2005). Effect size calculations and single subject designs.Educational Psychology, 25, 313–324.
32.
ParsonsonB. S., & BaerD. M. (1978). The analysis and presentation of graphic data. In KratochwillT. R. (Ed.), Single subject research: Strategies for evaluating change (pp. 101–166). New York: Academic.
33.
PelhamJ., FabianoG., & MassettiG. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents.Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 34, 449–476.
34.
RoeserR. W., & EcclesJ. S. (2000). Schooling and mental health. In SameroffA. J., LewisM., & MillerS. M. (Eds.), Handbook of developmental psychopathology (2nd ed., pp. 135–156). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
35.
ScruggsT. E., & MastropieriM. A. (2002). On babies and bathwater: Addressing the problems of identification of learning disabilities.Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 155–168.
36.
SugaiG., & HornerR. (2001). School climate and discipline: Going to scale. Paper presented at the National Summit on the Shared Implementation of IDEA, Washington, DC.
37.
TobinT. J., & SugaiG. M. (1999). Using sixth-grade school records to predict school violence, chronic discipline problems, and high school outcomes.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 7, 40–53.
38.
ToddA. W., CampbellA. L., MeyerG. G., & HornerR. H. (2008). The effects of targeted interventions to reduce problem behaviors: Elementary school implementation of check in-check out.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, 46–55.
39.
TreutingM., & ElliottS. N. (1991). The Behavior Intervention Rating Scale: Development and validation of a pretreatment acceptability and effectiveness measure.Journal of School Psychology, 29, 43–51.
40.
WalkerH. M., RamseyE., & GreshamF. M. (2004). Antisocial behavior in school with infotrac: Evidence-based practices.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
41.
WalkerH. M., & ShinnM. R. (2002). Structuring school-based interventions to achieve integrated primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention goals for safe and effective schools. In ShinnM. R., WalkerH. M., & StonerG. (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches (pp. 1–25). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
42.
WilkinsonL. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.American Psychologist, 54, 594–604.
