Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Special Education
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0022466907313349v1
42/2/108    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cheney, D.
Right arrow Articles by Templeton, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cheney, D.
Right arrow Articles by Templeton, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Applying Response to Intervention Metrics in the Social Domain for Students at Risk of Developing Emotional or Behavioral Disorders

Douglas Cheney

University of Washington, Seattle, dcheney{at}u.washington.edu

Andrea Flower

University of Washington, Seattle

Tran Templeton

University of Washington, Seattle

Response to Intervention (RtI) has become an important element of policy, practice, and research since the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In this article, five metrics recommended by Gresham (2005) were used to evaluate the progress of 127 students who were at risk of developing emotional disturbance and enrolled in a Tier 2 targeted group intervention. Student progress on a daily behavior report card was used to identify responders and nonresponders. Results suggest that percentage of change and effect size were the most useful metrics and identified 67% of the students as responders to the intervention. Additionally, 91% of the responders were not identified for special education, and over 50% reduced their problem behavior ratings on the Social Skills Rating System Teacher Form. These findings suggest that the intervention reduced the student's at-risk status and helped prevent the development of emotional and behavioral disabilities.

Key Words: assessment • behavior • children at risk • intervention

This version was published on August 1, 2008

The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 42, No. 2, 108-126 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0022466907313349
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?