EDUCATION AND TREATMENT OF CHILDREN - Vol. 39 - No. 4 - Effects of a Tier 3 Self-Management Intervention Implemented with and without Treatment Integrity

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by dhado

This study investigated the effects of a Tier 3 peer-matching self-management intervention for two elementary students who had been less responsive to earlier Tier 1 and Tier 2 supports. The Tier 3 package was delivered in general education classrooms and included daily electronic communication between teachers and parents. When implemented with treatment integrity, results showed reduced disruptive behavior and increased total engagement; without integrity, outcomes were variable.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages28

Reading Time1 h 11 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Keywords

Background and Rationale

Tiered PBIS support structure

CW-FIT framework and prior evidence

Tier 3 Intervention Components

Self-management

Parent involvement and electronic communication

EDUCATION AND TREATMENT OF CHILDREN Vol. 39, No. 4, 2016 Effects of a Tier 3 Self-Management Intervention Implemented with and without Treatment Integrity Ashley Lower K. Richard Young Lynnette Christensen Paul Caldarella Leslie Williams Brigham Young University Howard Wills University of Kansas Abstract This study investigated the effects of a Tier 3 peer-matching self-management intervention on two elementary school students who had previously been less responsive to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions. The Tier 3 self-management intervention, which was implemented in the general education classrooms, included daily electronic communication between the teachers and the children’s parents. Results indicated that this intervention effectively reduced disruptive behaviors and increased total engagement when implemented with integrity; without integrity results were variable. Keywords: behavior, Tier 3 intervention, treatment integrity, CW-FIT, selfmanagement, peer-matching, parent involvement, electronic messaging An increasing number of havior interventions and schools are implementing positive besupports (PBIS; Horner et al., 2014). PBIS Address correspondence to: Ashley Lower, Brigham Young University, McKay School of Education, 301 MCKB—BYU Provo, UT 84602. Email: ashley.lower@ [gmail.com](gmail.com). The research reported in this article was supported in part by a grant from the Institute of Education Sciences and the U.S. Department of Education (R324A120344), awarded to the University of Kansas, with subcontracts to Brigham Young University and Vanderbilt University. The opinions presented in this article are those of the authors, and no endorsement by the agency is intended or implied. 494 LOWER et al. is grounded in the assumption that all students can be successful when educators use a tiered system of support and evidenced-based behavioral interventions tailored to meet the needs of students at-risk (Lane, Menzies, Oakes, & Kalberg, 2012; Young, Caldarella, Richardson, & Young, 2012). In support of this, the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) included an increased focus on helping students with challenging learning and behavior problems succeed in general education. To achieve this end, schools need to implement interventions across a continuum of support. The majority of students in a school (70–90%) succeed academically and socially in general education settings (Tier 1), and do not require additional support (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2011). As students’ progress through school, some will be unresponsive to school discipline systems. Students at-risk (5–15%) often need targeted individual or small group attention to be successful (Tier 2). For example, Buffum and colleagues stressed that Tier 2 and 3 interventions provide increased time and/or support in general education classrooms. The remaining students, typically no more than 1–5%, may continue to have difficulty despite additional support and require even more intensive Tier 3 interventions (Young et al., 2012). PBIS is an effective system for decreasing inappropriate behavior (Anderson, Fisher, Marchant, Young, & Smith, 2006). The tiered system provides additional time and support to promote academic success as well as improve classroom behavior (Christensen, Young, & Marchant, 2007). Frequently, Tier 2 and 3 interventions are administered outside of the general education classroom. Successfully implementing Tier 2 and 3 interventions in general education classrooms allows students to continue to access the core curriculum (Basham, Israel, Graden, Poth, & Winston, 2010). Class-wide function-related intervention teams (CW-FIT) is a multi-tiered classroom management intervention to improve the behavior of all students (Wills et al., 2010). CW-FIT Tier 1 teaches classroom rules and social skills. It uses a group contingency based on differential reinforcement of appropriate behavi

FAQs

What was the purpose of the Tier 3 self-management intervention in this study?

To evaluate whether a Tier 3 peer-matching self-management approach could improve behavior and engagement for students who had not responded well to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions.

How was the Tier 3 intervention implemented in the general education classrooms?

It included daily electronic communication between teachers and the students’ parents as part of the peer-matching self-management program.

What role did treatment integrity play in the intervention outcomes?

When the intervention was implemented with integrity, it effectively reduced disruptive behaviors and increased total engagement; without integrity, results were variable.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by dhado