Daily Behavior Report Cards

Abstract

In this study, the consistency of on-task data collected across raters using either a Daily Behavior Report Card (DBRC) or systematic direct observation was examined to begin to understand the decision reliability of using DBRCs to monitor student behavior. Results suggested very similar conclusions might be drawn when visually examining data collected by an external observer using either systematic direct observation or a DBRC. In addition, similar conclusions might be drawn upon visual analysis of either systematic direct observation or DBRC data collected by an external observer versus a teacher-completed DBRC. Examination of effect sizes from baseline to intervention phases suggested greater potential for different conclusions to be drawn about student behavior, dependent on the method and rater. In summary, overall consistency of data across method and rater found in this study lends support to the use of DBRCs to estimate global classroom behavior as part of a multimethod assessment. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blechman, E.A. , Schrader, S.M. , & Taylor, C.J. (1981). Family problem solving versus home notes as early intervention with high-risk children. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 49, 919—926.

Chafouleas, S.M. , Riley-Tillman, T.C. , & McDougal, J. (2002). Good, bad, or in-between: How does the daily behavior report card rate? Psychology in the Schools, 39, 157— 169.

Chafouleas, S.M. , Riley-Tillman, T.C. , & Sassu, K.A. (2006). Acceptability and reported use of Daily Behavior Report Cards among teachers. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8, 174—182.

Chafouleas, S.M. , McDougal, J.L. , Riley-Tillman, T.C. , Panahon, C.J. , & Hilt, A.M. (2005). What do Daily Behavior Report Cards (DBRCs) measure? An initial comparison of DBRCs with direct observation for off-task behavior . Psychology in the Schools, 42, 669—676.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dougherty, E.H. , & Dougherty, A. (1977). The daily report card: A simplified and flexible package for classroom behavior management. In L. A. Hersov & M. Berger (Eds.), Aggression and anitsocial behavior in childhood and adolescence (pp. 73—93). London: Pergamon Press.

Hintze, J.M. , & Matthews, W.J. (2004). The generalizability of systematic direct observations across time and setting: A preliminary investigation of the psychometrics of behavioral observations. School Psychology Review, 33, 258—270.

Hyman, I.A. , Wojtowicz, A., Duk Lee, K., Haffner, M. E., Fiorello, C. A., Storlazzi, J. J., et al. (1998). School-based methylphenidate placebo protocols: Methodological and practical issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 581—594.

Merrell, K.W. (2003). Behavioral, social, and emotional assessment of children and adolescents (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

10.

Nolan, E.E. , & Gadow, K.D. (1994). Relation between ratings and observations of stimulant drug response in hyperactive children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23, 78—90.

11.

Pelham, W.E. (1993). Pharmacotherapy for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology Review, 22, 199—227.

12.

Pelham, W.E. , Hoza, B. , Pillow, D.R. , Gnagy, E.M. , Kipp, H.L. , Greiner, A.R. , et al. (2002). The effects of methylphenidate and expectancy on children with ADHD. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 320—325.

13.

Salvia, J. , & Ysseldyke, J.E. (2004). Assessment (9th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Houghton Mifflin.

14.

Sattler, J.M. , & Hoge, R.D. (2006). Assessment of children: Behavioral, social, and clinical foundations (5th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome Sattler.

15.

Saudargas, R.A. , & Lentz, F.E. (1986). Estimating percent of time and rate via direct observation: A suggested observational procedure and format. School Psychology Review, 15, 36—48.

16.

Shapiro, E.S. (1996). Academic skills problems workbook. New York: Guilford.

17.

Steege, M.W. , Davin, T. , & Hathaway, M. (2001). Reliability and accuracy of a performance-based behavioral recording procedure. School Psychology Review, 30, 252—261.

18.

Turco, T.L. , & Elliott, S.N. (1986). Students' acceptability ratings of interventions for classroom misbehaviors: A study of well-behaving and misbehaving youth . Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 4, 281—289.

19.

Witt, J.C. , Martens, B.K. , & Elliot, S.N. (1984). Factors affecting teachers' judgment of the acceptability of behavioral interventions: Time involvement, behavior problem severity, and type of intervention. Behavior Therapy, 15, 95—104.

20.

Wright, J. (2002). OKAPI: The Internet application for creating curriculum-based assessment reading probes [Internet software]. Retrieved October 28, 2003, from http://www.interventioncentral.org/htmdocs/tools/okapi/okapi.shtml