1. The Classroom Checkup: An Assessment/Intervention Tool for Improving Classroom Management
Wendy M. Reinke, Ph.D.
Johns Hopkins University
Bloomberg School of Public Health

2. Acknowledgement Teri Lewis-Palmer, Ph.D. George Sugai, Ph.D.
Tom Dishion, Ph.D.
Randy Sprick, Ph.D.
Ken Merrell, Ph.D.
Participating Classroom Teachers
Conspired and or inspired

3. Objectives Brief Rationale Overview of Classroom Check-up (CCU)
Review Case Examples and Research
Using CCU in real world

4. School-wide Positive Behavior Support Systems Classroom
Setting Systems
Nonclassroom
Setting Systems
Individual Student
Systems
School-wide
Systems

5. Rationale
Classrooms with poor behavior management produce negative student outcomes
classroom management linked to the number of students at risk for EBD
(National Research Council, 2002)
poor classroom management place students at risk of current and future behavior problems
(Aber, Jones, Brown, Chaudry, & Samples,1998; Ialongo, Poduska, Werthamer, & Kellam, 2001; Kellam, Ling, Merisca, Brown & Ialongo, 1998)
The rationale for the study really goes back to the belief that Schools can either inhibit or foster the development of behavior problems in students. There is a great deal of literature showing that classrooms with poor behavior management produce negative students outcomes. In fact, the number of students considered at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders have been linked to classroom organization and behavior management. Further, research supports that students in poorly managed classrooms are not only at risk for current behavior problems while in that classroom, but they are at greater risk for future behavior problems. For instance, Kellam…….1998 randomly assigned students to first grade classrooms either receiving a classroom management intervention or not (the Good Behavior Game) and they found that boys that were poorly managed were significantly more likely have behavior problems in sixth grade than similar boys in well managed classrooms. Further, these students are being followed and they are in their 20’s. They are finding that students in the first grade classroom who received the classroom management are less likely to be diagnosed with CD or antipersonality disorder. So, simply intervening and providing effective classroom management in 1st grade reduced long term negative outcomes. Therefore, finding ways to increase effective behavior management practices in the classroom is paramount.

6. Rationale Critical classroom management skills have been identified
(Good & Brophy, 2003; Gunter, Hummel, & Venn, 1998; Kame’enui & Darch, 1995; Paine, Raddichi, Rosellini, Deutchman, & Darch, 1983)
Consultation and feedback can be effective in increasing effective teaching practices
(Sheridan and Welch, 1996)
Treatment integrity problems are common to school-based consultation
(Gresham, 1991; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1996; Wickstrom, Jones, LaFleur, & Witt, 1998)
A number of critical classrooms variables influencing outcomes for students have been identified. These are some key ingredients to effective classroom behavior management.
Opportunities to respond: The use of brisk pacing during teacher led instruction is one variable that has been shown to decrease problem behavior and increase academic achievement.
Use of praise and reprimands: Teachers who deliver a high amount of praise typically experience lower off-task or disruptive behaviors from their students and therefore less need for providing reprimands
Physical Layout: simply have a well organized classroom layout that allows monitoring of students and easy transitioning between tasks will have lower levels of disruptive behavior.
We know that consultation and feedback to teachers increases their use of effective teaching practices. However, school-based consultation has been noted for having treatment integrity problems. In other words, the consultant meets with the teacher, tells them what to do, and then the teacher doesn’t follow through with the intervention.
The Classroom Check-up (CCU) was developed as a consultation model that addressed the need for classroom level support while minimizing treatment integrity problems common to school-based consultation.

7. Classroom Check-up
A consultation model designed to increase implementation of classroom interventions
Critical Classroom Variables are assessed
Feedback is provided to teachers
An individualized intervention plan is collaboratively designed
Teachers self-monitor/ and are provided with ongoing feedback and support
During this presentation, I will provide a quick overview of the study including………..

8. Goal
Improve student outcomes by creating effective classroom environments through providing teachers with feedback and support for implementing important classroom management skills.

10. Step 1: Assess Classroom
Teacher Interview (20-30 minutes)
Build rapport
Strengths and weaknesses
Identify areas of concern
Classroom Ecology Checklist
Instructional Management
Behavioral Management
Physical Environment
Classroom Observations
15 minute observation

12. Observation of Critical Classroom Variables
Opportunities to Respond (OTR)
4-6 per minute for new material
9-12 per minute for drill and practice
Correct Academic Responses (CAR)
80% for new material
90% for drill and practice
# CAR/ # OTR x 100%= Percent Correct Academic Responding

13. Critical Classroom Variables
Praise
Specific
General
Reprimands
Ratio of Interaction
# praise: # reprimands

14. Critical Classroom Variables
Classroom Academic Engagement
5 minute observation

16. Step 2: Feedback Meet with classroom teacher Summarize observations
Identify areas of strength
Identify areas of weakness
Provide both visual and verbal feedback
OTR
% CAR
% AET
Type of Praise
Reprimands
Positive to Negative Ratio
Monitoring
Transitions
Clear Expectations
Physical Environment

18. Example Feedback Form X
general praise only
X 1:2
X fluent

19. Step 3: Menu of Options
During Feedback Session identify potential interventions
Potential interventions are guided by consultant’s knowledge of research
Interventions build upon teacher strengths
Write down all potential interventions
Menu of interventions to choose from

20. Step 4: Choose an Intervention
Identify one or two interventions from menu
Intervention tailored to teachers needs
Develop plan with teacher for implementation
Guides self-monitoring

21. Step 5: Teacher Self-Monitoring
Teacher monitors daily implementation of the chosen intervention using an intervention procedural checklist
Date: XX/XX/XX
Check off those strategies you used TODAY.
1. Increased use of Praise and it was Behavior Specific Praise.
(goal of 5 praise to 1 reprimand)
2. Used a reminder to help increase praise.
3. Taught/ Reviewed Expectations (transitions and no talk outs)
4. Started math instruction at specified time (smooth transition)

22. Step 6: Visual Performance Feedback
Graphic of observed use of classroom management strategies
Nice!

23. Case Examples

24. Case Example 1

25. Case Example 2

26. The Research

27. CCU plus Performance Feedback
Effective in improving teacher implementation of classroom management strategies, especially total use of praise, use of behavior specific praise, and decreased use of reprimands.
Student disruptions decreased.

29. Proportion of Specific vs General Praise
Praise statements were categorized as either behavior specific praise statements (includes a reference to a behavior) or general praise statements (does not include reference to behavior, such as “good”). In general, all the teachers utilized general praise at a higher proportion during the baseline or pre-intervention phase. Classroom Teacher Four used specific praise statements in her classroom at a noticeably higher rate than any of the other teachers, including during the baseline phase of the study. However, each classroom teacher shows a trend toward the use of less general praise and an increase in the use of specific praise in their classrooms post-intervention and at follow-up. In fact, at follow-up Classroom Teacher Four used specific praise 100% of the time. Classroom Teachers One and Three have the most significant change in proportion of general praise to specific praise. Classroom Teacher One’s praise included 8% specific praise prior to the CCU and Visual Performance Feedback phases. At post-intervention Classroom Teacher One’s use of general praise dropped and specific praise increased to 62%, and at follow-up specific praise increased further to 72%. Classroom Teacher Two’s praise included 38% specific praise prior to intervention, increasing to 64% post intervention and to 74% at follow-up. Classroom Teacher Three’s praise included 25% specific praise prior to intervention, increasing to 70% post intervention and to 75% at follow-up. Finally, Classroom Teacher Four’s praise included 82% specific praise prior to intervention, increasing to 99% post intervention and to 100% at follow-up.

31. Praise and Disruptions
During the baseline phase of the study all classrooms were observed to have higher rates of classroom disruptions than praise. Classroom One demonstrated an initial decrease in the rate of disruptions along with a minor increase in praise during the CCU/Self-monitoring phase. Further, when Classroom Teacher One increased her rate of praise during the Visual Performance Feedback phase to above the rate at baseline, a dramatic shift occurs in which praise becomes consistently higher than the rate of classroom disruptions. A separation occurs by the end of the study in which the rate of praise delivered to students remains higher than classroom disruptions with no overlapping data points. Classroom Two also displays a distinct separation between rate of praise and rate of classroom disruptions. During the baseline phase the rate of disruptions for Classroom Two is higher than the rate of praise with only two exceptions. There is no noticeable change during the CCU/Self-monitoring phase for Classroom Two, but during the Visual Performance Feedback phase the data changes entirely with the rate of praise being higher than the rate of disruptions. This trend in the data occurs for all four classrooms.
Classroom Three showed similarities to Classroom One in that during baseline the number of disruptions each minutes were extremely high, exceeding the rate of praise observed in the classroom. However, Classroom Teacher Three delivered praise at the highest rate of all teachers during the baseline phase. During the CCU/Self-monitoring phase Classroom Teacher Three continued to increase her rate of praise delivered to students and the rate of classroom disruptions dropped. Thus the trends toward increasing praise correlating with decreasing classroom disruptions. Classroom Three has no data points during the Visual Performance Feedback phase in which the rate of praise is lower than the rate of classroom disruptions.
Classroom Four had a relatively low rate of classroom disruptions and praise during baseline. However, the majority of data points during baseline for rate of classroom disruptions were higher than the rate of praise. During the CCU/Self-monitoring phase and the Visual Performance Feedback phase, Classroom Four increased the rate of praise delivered to students, with little change in the rate of classroom disruptions. All classrooms had an overall decrease in the rate of classroom disruptions, although Classroom Four’s was less striking due to low levels of disruptions throughout the study
A distinct rotation in the data occurred for all four classrooms by the end of the Visual Performance Feedback phase. The data demonstrates that as rates of praise increased in the classrooms, disruptions decreased. Most remarkable was that at follow-up one month later all four classrooms continued to demonstrate high rates of praise and low rates of disruptions. The classrooms maintained the change in targeted behaviors.

32. CCU in the Real World

33. Interventions
Collaboration: (your relationship with the teacher is an intervention in itself)
What do you want to change?
What has been tried before?
What was helpful?
What was not helpful?
How confident are you that this will be useful?

34. CCU and Motivational Interviewing
CCU is modeled after the Family Check-up (FCU)
The FCU is based on the principles of Motivational Interviewing, a specific type of intervention that functions as a catalyst to the behavioral change process (Miller & Rollnick, 2002)
Motivational Interviewing strategies, including feedback and expert advice are used to guide the development of interventions during the CCU
A directive client centered counseling approach that is grounding in social psychological research about how people change behaviors.
Motivational interviewing has been implemented where the primary obstacle to success is lack of treatment compliance or treatment integrity.
Motivation to change, or implementing techniques within the consultation process that are likely to increase effective behaviors while decreasing ineffective behaviors, is an important variable when attempting to create change in behaviors that in some instances have been embedded within the teacher’s practice and within their classroom for years.
People are more likely to change when they say they want to, more likley to change when provided with a discrepancy between their beliefs and behaviors, People are more likely to do something they say, they are more likely to change when provided advice from someone they respect, more likely to change when provided with a menu of options that have worked for others

35. Ingredients to Effective Brief Interventions
Feedback
Responsibility
Advice
Menu
Empathy
Support Self-Efficacy

36. Linking Assessment to Intervention
Collaboratively design interventions to:
Teach Expectations
Increase use of praise
Increase use of specific praise
Decrease Reprimands
Increase OTR
Increase CAR
Change physical environment of classroom

37. Designing Interventions
Use data—objective information about behavior is more reliable than labels, conclusions, or stereotypes.
All students must be treated with dignity and respect.
Students should be taught the skills and behaviors necessary for success.
Motivation and responsibility should be encouraged through positive interactions.
Student misbehavior represents a teaching opportunity.

38. Teach Expectations Identify common misbehavior
Design a lesson plan to teach and reinforce the expectations that will replace the misbehavior
Model a lesson for the teacher
Teacher teach the lesson
Reinforce students who exhibit expectations

39. Increase Praise “Catch” students being good
Post a visual reminder to praise students
Double-up on Praise
Increase OTR
Publicly post samples of student work
Increase Non-contingent Positive Interactions with Students
Greet at door
Say hello in hallway

40. Decrease Reprimands Teach Expectations
Use planned ignoring for attention seeking behavior
Provide Specific Praise to students
Provide pre-corrections
Make Corrections fluent

41. Increase OTR (Pacing)
Ask drill and practice questions from a deck of note cards
Break down complex problems into smaller chunks
Mix in individual and whole group OTR
Ensure calling on various students   A
Teacher Desk
Chalk Board
A=Absent
04/24/06
Math 2nd period

42. Correct Academic Responding
Below optimal:
Review material to mastery
Provide ample guided practice
Review material to determine if material is at appropriate level
Above optimal
Be sure responses are not dominated by only a few
Review the material to determine if material level is at appropriate rigor

44. Conclusions Attention to Critical Variables is not enough
Consultation/ Coaching relationship is an intervention in itself
Interventions need to be sensitive to context
Combination of collaboration and effective interventions increase positive outcomes for students

45. Resources
Sprick, R., Knight, J., Reinke, W.M., & McKale, T. (in press). Coaching for Positive Classrooms: Supporting Teachers with Classroom Management. Pacific Northwest Publishing: Eugene, OR.
Sprick, R. Garrison, M., & Howard, L. (1998), CHAMPs: A proactive and positive approach to classroom management. Pacific Northwest Publishing: Eugene, OR.

46. Wendy M. Reinke, Ph.D.