Peer Reviewed Journals on Emotionally or Behaviorally Disturbed Students

• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts
• PMC5619674

Kid Youth Serv Rev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2017 Sep 28.

Published in final edited form every bit:

PMCID: PMC5619674

NIHMSID: NIHMS854968

Refining an intervention for students with emotional disturbance using qualitative parent and instructor information

Rohanna Buchanan

^aOregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton McMurphey Blvd., Eugene, OR 97401, USA

Rhonda N.T. Nese

^bUniversity of Oregon, Educational and Community Supports, 1235 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, Us

Lawrence A. Palinkas

^cSchool of Social Work, University of Southern California, Montgomery Ross Fisher Edifice, Room 339, Los Angeles, CA 90089, Us

Traci Ruppert

^aOregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton McMurphey Blvd., Eugene, OR 97401, U.s.

Abstract

Intensive supports are needed for students with emotional disturbance during loftier-chance transitions. Such interventions are virtually likely to be successful if they address stakeholder perspectives during the development process. This newspaper discusses qualitative findings from an iterative intervention development projection designed to comprise parent and teacher feedback early on in the evolution process with applications relevant to the adoption of new programs. Using maximum variation purposive sampling, we solicited feedback from five foster/kinship parents, four biological parents and seven teachers to evaluate the feasibility and utility of the Students With Involved Families and Teachers (SWIFT) intervention in home and school settings. SWIFT provides youth and parent skills coaching in the dwelling house and schoolhouse informed past weekly educatee behavioral progress monitoring. Participants completed semi-structured interviews that were transcribed and coded via an independent co-coding strategy. The findings provide support for school-based interventions involving family participation and lessons to ensure intervention success.

Keywords: Parents, Teachers, Transition, Intervention, Collaboration

ane. Introduction

Students with emotional disturbance (ED) are at risk for multiple negative outcomes, including school failure, low rates of employment in adulthood, and involvement with mental health and social work agencies (U.S. Department of Education, 2005). Students with ED often are removed from mainstream educational settings and placed in treatment classrooms. Once their treatment programs have been completed, they are then transitioned back to their abode schools. However, national data show that when reintegrating students with ED into less restrictive school environments the intensive services provided in more restrictive settings are not replicated, and that the intensity of supports abruptly decreases (Wagner & Davis, 2006). Consequently, students with ED who have experienced success in highly structured, well supervised, and encouraging settings typically are at risk when they transition to larger schools with less teacher attention (Wagner & Davis, 2006). For example, data from the Education Service Commune (ESD) participating in this study indicates that the majority of students who transitioned from a mean solar day-treatment school (DTS) were not successful in district public school (DS) settings during the 4 years prior to this written report. Specifically, inside 1 yr of transitioning back to DSs in their home commune, the bulk of the middle schoolhouse students in the ESD's DTS were placed in cocky-contained classrooms, alternative placements, treatment centers, or received out-of-school tutoring due to emotional and behavioral bug. In addition, over l% of students had high rates of truancy, loftier rates of involvement in social services (east.g., child welfare, mental health, and juvenile justice), and low levels of parental support. These national and local data conspicuously indicate that intensive supports for students with ED are critical to promote their successful transition to less restrictive environments.

Prior research has shown that students with emotional and beliefs disorders respond to intensive efforts that incorporate individualized behavioral interventions involving their parents as partners and that apply information to guide treatment decisions (Vernberg, Jacobs, Nyre, Puddy, & Roberts, 2004). Parents accept the nearly information regarding the history of their kid and are the about knowledgeable about their child's history and domicile environment. Therefore, it is essential for parents to exist actively involved in planning and implementing behavioral interventions to maximize their effectiveness (Ingersoll & Dvortcsak, 2006; Lucyshyn, Horner, Dunlap, Albin, & Ben, 2002; Park, Alber-Morgan, & Fleming, 2011). Data that is constructive to monitor and guide treatment must exist easy to collect and reviewed oft, while sufficiently dynamic to inform parents and teachers of behavioral changes (Fisher, Burraston, & Pears, 2005; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1999).

Evolution of intensive supports for transitioning at-risk students maps on to the public health model of prevention and intervention (Pluymert, 2014), which has informed the triangle of support that outlines a three-tiered structure of supports for students. Within these tiers, Tier 3 consists of the almost intensive interventions reserved for students at greatest gamble for significant behavior bug (Gresham, 2004; Pluymert, 2014). Consequent with prior research on interventions for students with emotional and behavior disorders (Chamberlain & Reid, 1998; Leve, Chamberlain, & Reid, 2005), the need for intervention development at the tertiary level of support is imperative for students, especially during a difficult transition phase that is oft accompanied by school failure.

1.i. The iterative evolution process

Leaders in education accept long advocated for the integration of feasible, socially valid, data-based, comprehensive, useful, and well-coordinated schoolhouse-based prevention and intervention efforts (Greenberg et al., 2003; Merrell, Ervin, & Peacock, 2012; Reschly & Ysseldyke, 2002; Upah & Tilly, 2002). Family involvement equally collaborative partners with an active voice in the process and decision-making for student supports is essential if researchers are to learn what works for students and their families (Albin, Dunlap, & Lucyshyn, 2002). Additionally, intervention collaboration between parents and teachers has been shown to ameliorate the fit and feasibility every bit well as the sustainability of supports (Albin, Lucyshyn, Horner, & Flannery, 1996). The present study was designed to produce an intervention that met these criteria for transitioning students with ED using the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) intervention evolution funding mechanism. The guidelines for the IES intervention development process crave, "a systematic procedure for creating and refining the intervention" (IES, 2011, p. 42) that emphasizes qualitative data collection and assay to inform intervention development and revision based on consumer feedback. Under these guidelines, researchers implement intervention components or the intervention as a whole, collect and analyze relevant data, then make refinements or revisions to the intervention or components based on the data.

Show-based programs oftentimes neglect when implemented in real-globe environments because they fail to have into consideration local perspectives and input (Elliott & Mihalic, 2004; Hurlburt & Knapp, 2003). A truly collaborative intervention planning and implementation approach should reduce the likelihood that interventions will neglect (Marshall & Mirenda, 2002). Collaboration facilitates the evolution, implementation, and evaluation of comprehensive behavioral interventions to not only improve the contextual fit for students and their families, but also to improve the sustainability of supports over time (Albin et al., 1996). Farther, interventions implemented consistently as a result of a good contextual fit are more probable to produce outcomes that are generalizable to new settings and situations (Kuhn, Lerman, & Vorndran, 2003). The iterative process outlined here is designed to introduce stakeholder input early in the development process, which is only starting time to be described in the literature (e.g. Kern, Evans, & Lewis, 2011, Mautone et al., 2012). This paper was written to describe and reflect on that process and produce some lessons learned that could apply to the adoption of any innovative program.

1.2. Students With Involved Families and Teachers: SWIFT

SWIFT is an intervention to back up at-take a chance students during difficult schoolhouse transitions. The intervention includes four-components adapted for implementation in schoolhouse settings from two evidence-based interventions for youth with emotional and behavioral disorders that include progress monitoring and a parent component: Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC; Chamberlain & Reid, 1998; Leve et al., 2005) and Keeping Foster Parents Skilled and Supported (Proceed; Chamberlain, Moreland, & Reid, 1992; Chamberlain et al., 2008; Price et al., 2008). MTFC and Go along are based on social learning theory (run across Patterson, 1982) and were selected because they intended to serve youth with similar behaviors and experiences every bit those eligible for SWIFT. Students eligible for SWIFT include students receiving intensive and individualized schoolhouse-based supports for severe emotional and behavioral problems (i.e., Tier 3 interventions). See Methods, beneath, for boosted details on the intervention and participants.

1.three. The purpose of this paper

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to illustrate the development of a viable domicile and schoolhouse intervention, SWIFT, and 2d, to outline the process by which stakeholder feedback was actively solicited to amend the feasibility of the intervention. Qualitative interview data was collected from parents of transitioning students, DTS teachers, and DS teachers for the purposes of highlighting features of the intervention that should be retained because of their likeability and ease of use, features that should be modified or intensified to better their effectiveness in their students' transition process, and features that should be removed from the intervention based on the level of resources needed to implement them. This newspaper provides researchers and practitioners an example of the iterative evolution process with the goal of improving the sustainability of evidenced-based interventions.

two. Method

2.1. Participants and setting

Maximum variation purposive sampling was used to capture a range of perspectives from informants with experience related to the development project goals (Berg & Lune, 2012; Padgett, 2008). Of interest, were the perspectives of the parents and teachers of students involved in a DTS's transition process and our strategy to constitute a range of perspectives was to include: (a) parents of middle school age students (grades half dozen–eight) with ED, participating in SWIFT, and transitioning from a DTS to DS, (b) the students' teachers from the DTS, and (c) the students' postal service-transition center and high schoolhouse teachers from multiple school districts. All participants were recruited by a report representative and participated in an in-person Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved informed consent procedure.

ii.ane.1. Parents

Nine parents were recruited for participation in the qualitative interviews. The majority of the parents were female (n = viii, 89%) and identified as Caucasian (n = 7, 78%) or African American (n = 2, 22%). The human relationship to the student included foster parents (north = 4, 44%), biological parents (north = 4, 44%), and a grandparent guardian (n = 1, 11%). Six parents (67%) reported that there was a secondary caregiver in the home. Highest education included GED (n =ane, 11%), customs college (n = 3, 33%), four-year college (n = two, 22%), and some graduate courses/graduate degree (north = iii, 33%). The median household income was $35,000 and five parents reported that their family unit participated in some type of assistance (e.g., food stamps or depression-income housing). Each parent had a student displaying severe emotional (east.g., anxiety, depression) or behavioral (e.thousand., aggression, disobedience, belongings destruction) problems who was transitioning from the DTS to the DS in their home. Students were eligible for school-based Tier 3 interventions due to the severity of their behavior at school.

2.ane.2. Teachers

Seven teachers working with transitioning students at the DTS or post-transition in DS's were recruited from six schools across three school districts. Each teacher had worked with at least 1 of the students in the homes described in Parents, higher up. Four teachers were female (57%) and the bulk identified as Caucasian (n = 6, 86%) and one identified every bit more i race (Pacific Islander and White, 14%). They reported instruction special teaching classes (n = v, 71%) or general educational activity classes in alternative high schoolhouse classrooms (n = two, 29%) with caseloads of vii–50 students. The hateful years of teaching experience was eleven.86 (SD = 10.68) with between 13 and 31 years for four of the teachers and less than 3 years for the other teachers. Teachers likewise reported a range of experiences working with students with astringent emotional or behavior problems including setting behavior goals, designing and implementing school-based beliefs support plans, and coordinating with mental health professionals.

two.2. The SWIFT intervention

SWIFT includes four master components: (a) behavioral progress monitoring, (b) case management of the intervention elements and coordination with the new schoolhouse as the student transitions, (c) parent back up to promote parent engagement/collaboration with the school and study routines in the dwelling house, and (d) behavioral skills coaching for students. These components are intended to provide customized supports to each student to enhance the transition process. Meet Fig. one for an illustration of the SWIFT intervention procedure. Behavioral progress monitoring data is collected weekly through the Parent Daily Report (PDR; Chamberlain & Reid, 1987) and Teacher Daily Written report (TDR; Buchanan & Pears, In review). The PDR and TDR are iii–5 min assessments that provide a snapshot of a student's behaviors in the home and at schoolhouse in the concluding 24 h. The PDR and TDR includes both problem (east.g., arguing, destructiveness, and swearing) and prosocial (e.chiliad., at-home, flexible, and on-task) behaviors. SWIFT case managers and the intervention team use PDR and TDR data to identify students' behavior patterns across DTS and DS settings, generate intervention ideas, and evaluate students' progress. The case manager'due south role inside the SWIFT intervention is to ensure regular communication across team members (SWIFT staff, parents, and schoolhouse staff at both schools) and to provide weekly grouping supervision to the SWIFT staff. Once a participating educatee is fully transitioned to the DS, the schoolhouse-based instance management for the pupil transfers from a DTS homeroom teacher to a special education teacher at the DS. The part of the parent coach is to provide participating families with supports related to developing strategies at home for setting up consistent rules, expectations, and systems of reinforcement to enhance students' positive behavior modify. Parent coaches meet with parents weekly to work on home-based strategies and to rails progress of students' behaviors. Lastly, skills coaches provide weekly sessions to students earlier, during, and afterward their transition to the DS. Skills coaches model appropriate behaviors beyond community and schoolhouse settings, double-decker the youth on developing prosocial skills, and reinforce the employ of positive adaptive skills and peer relations. These four components of the SWIFT intervention are initiated when the students are in their treatment settings and follow them as they transition to their new schools, for a total of 9–12 months of support.

SWIFT intervention process.

two.three. qualitative interviews

A semi-structured, individually administered interview format was used for all interviews. Questions in the interview protocol were designed to solicit feedback on each of the four components of SWIFT, the intervention timeline, and the transition process every bit it related to each of the transitioning students. An practiced on qualitative methods (3rd author) reviewed and approved the interview protocol outlining questions and procedures, and all materials and procedures were approved by our IRB. An experienced interviewer who was trained in techniques to arm-twist feedback from the participants, remain neutral to a range of responses to reduce response bias, and move the discussion through the semi-structured format conducted all interview assessments. The interviewer was non involved in the intervention. Interviews were scheduled iii months autonomously and at the convenience of the participants. One 60 minutes was scheduled for each interview though well-nigh were shorter in length (parent: M = twenty min, Range = 10–52 min; teacher: G = 30 min, Range = 17–54 min). All interviews were collected once participants had been involved in SWIFT for at least 3 months. Most parent interviews took place at our inquiry eye (northward = 17, 89%) with i conducted at abode and another at a private work office. 19 parent interviews were collected for eight students and all families participated in an initial interview and one (l%) or ii (l%) follow-up interviews. All instructor interviews took place at the schoolhouse. Fourteen interviews were nerveless for the viii students with 1–three teachers interviewed for each pupil. Four teachers completed i interview (57%) and three teachers (43%) completed follow-upwardly interviews. Due to instructor changes over the course of the twelvemonth at the eye schools, follow-up interviews were simply conducted with teachers who maintained continuing involvement with the student at subsequently interview waves. Follow-up interviews with parents and teachers were conducted every 3 months to collect timely feedback on whether refinements made to the intervention sufficiently addressed concerns raised in initial interviews.

2.4. Analysis

All qualitative interviews were sound-recorded and transcribed verbatim by a trained transcriptionist supervised by the lead researcher (first writer). One time initial transcriptions were complete, the interviewer verified all transcripts past comparing 100% of the audio to the text and entered bracketed notes to provide context to the transcripts. All caregivers, teachers, students, and schools referenced in the transcribed interviews were assigned an identification number to protect confidentiality, increase cross-group comparisons, and reduce subjectivity in the analysis (Padgett, 2008).

An independent co-coding strategy was used where the second author was the primary coder who adult a codebook and coded the majority (north = 25, 76%) of the interview transcripts (Padgett, 2008). A 2nd coder coded the remaining transcripts. Side by side, the lead researcher reviewed each coded interview in detail and worked with the coding team to arrange or update the codebook. The codebook evolved over the course of the longitudinal data collection with new codes added or modified over time and previously coded transcripts updated with the new codes as necessary. The coders assigned portions of text (ranging in size from individual words to short phrases) to one or more codes, then compared the coded content across each interview. Using the method of constant comparison (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), codes were so grouped into categories or themes that mapped on to questions in the interview, with anywhere from 5 to 30 subthemes inside each primary theme.

3. Results

Parent and instructor feedback was largely positive and included specific suggestions to meliorate the intervention. Six themes emerged from the parent and teacher interviews to inform the intervention refinement: (a) the recruitment and intervention timeline, (b) length of transition supports, (c) behavioral progress monitoring collection and information entry, (d) case management coordination, (east) benefits of skills coaching supports, and (f) the parent motorcoach role. These themes are described beneath.

3.1.i. Recruitment and intervention timeline

The typical transition from the DTS to the DS takes approximately five months. During this time, the student begins attending one or two periods per 24-hour interval at the DS, and maintains a schedule for the rest of the day at the DTS. Additional periods are added as the student demonstrates success, or the timeline may be modified if the student does not meet their behavioral targets. The initial recruitment plan for the study was to invite students to participate with an predictable 3 months earlier the full transition to the DS. However, in the first twelvemonth, participating parents and DTS teachers suggested that establishing these supports four–half dozen weeks earlier would be beneficial to establishing rapport with the student and the family before their contact began with the DS. One parent commented, "I wish he had a picayune more than fourth dimension earlier the transition with you guys," while a teacher stated, "The before that we tin get them signed up with SWIFT and then, you know, getting on board with the program, the ameliorate." Several parents and teachers commented that many students need more fourth dimension to make a connection with SWIFT staff before starting their transition. I teacher reported, "I think that it's pretty important to having that up-front time…and and so easing into the transition, I think, is the platonic style to go," with a parent reiterating the importance of utilizing the fourth dimension, "…before the actual transition to build rapport and a relationship." The parent and teacher information were consistent with SWIFT staff reports that some participating students seemed overwhelmed by meeting SWIFT staff so close in time to coming together new teachers and students at the DS.

Starting in the fall of Year 2, student recruitment was timed to include 4–half dozen weeks of additional back up at the DTS. After the adjustment, parents and teachers reported feeling that this change allowed adequate time for the student and their family unit to build rapport with SWIFT staff. When asked if two students who transitioned at the end of the 2d twelvemonth had enough time to get acquainted with SWIFT, one teacher said "More than than enough time."

3.2. Length of transition supports

The initial timeline for transition supports included up to 9 months: Iii months at the DTS, then six at the DS. As students progressed through the intervention, information technology became clear that many students were not fully settled at the DS within the 9-month window. The demand for more time was increasingly true once 4–6 weeks were added to the beginning of the intervention. Parents and teachers reported that extending services would be benign to ensure maintenance of gains at the district setting. A participating parent stated, "I would want as much of you lot guys really in the transition part where she'southward going to the school." Likewise, 1 teacher specifically highlighted the demand for additional time at the DS by proverb, "…the more support you can provide until they are fix to go off on their ain the better" and went on to explicate that although the target student had many supports at the school, he had been enrolled full time for 3 months and he wasn't seeking them out. Rather, it seemed that he was all the same getting those supports from SWIFT staff.

At the stop of Year 1, the intervention timeline was modified to include up to a full yr of support, including: (a) contact over the summertime months, (b) schoolhouse readiness skills for students and parents at the end of summertime in the four weeks prior to the start of schoolhouse, (c) additional fourth dimension at the DTS, and (d) additional time at the DS. Teachers reported existence pleased with this modify, and noted that transitions were smoother with the addition of more than time. For example, with regard to one students' smoothen transition, a teacher stated,

She, [educatee's experience] to me, should be like the standard. The amount of time that SWIFT provided, the amount of back up that her home school provided, the amount of support that nosotros provided, the communication that happened betwixt all three, um, and yeah simply the corporeality of fourth dimension that it took. We didn't blitz it at all, we took our time.

Similarly, the parent of this student stated, "I think just her starting off going there [the DS] slowly a couple hours a twenty-four hour period, and then working her way up till she was there all day was really the key."

3.iii. Behavioral progress monitoring collection and data entry

Parents and teachers described the behavioral progress monitoring tools (PDR for parents, TDR for teachers), as easy to complete and time efficient. For example, "… doesn't take long to do them. The system seems pretty articulate" and, "… convenient…the whole process is practiced." A teacher working with multiple SWIFT students remarked, "The TDRs are manageable" and "I find it [the TDR data entry system] very user friendly." A parent shared that, "I never found them [PDRs] to exist a burden… they're so quick but they're real idea provoking." Almost teachers said that they preferred an online directly-entry method and every bit teachers tested the system, we were able to refine the program to provide a more than streamlined experience. Many parents and some teachers preferred a weekly phone call saying, "Is there any way you lot guys could simply call me?" Others talked about how they liked getting a call from the PDR/TDR caller, "She's very wonderful." One parent shared how pleasant and efficient the interactions with the caller were: "She's very professional person and sticks right to the questions and we practise them and we tell each other accept a great mean solar day and nosotros're done, and information technology'south very like shooting fish in a barrel." Throughout the projection, parents and teachers said that they liked getting weekly phone, email, or text reminders for the PDR/TDR based on their preferred method of contact, and one said, "She [the PDR/TDR caller] actually will give me like the pre-alarm… I got some other email today!"

Some teachers talked about how reporting the TDR reminded them to pay attending to student beliefs in a different way, "I'm much more in tune to how they are doing now… I'm really making mental notes." Parents reiterated that feeling, with one commenting that, "The PDRs just make you lot always remind yourself of what y'all already know and desire to keep doing and and then things that you perchance haven't thought of." Another teacher fabricated a similar statement,

It just keeps me aware of what he is doing fifty-fifty though other things might be going on in the day and … I demand to be watching and observing because these questions are going to be asked to me later on.

Teachers who were newer to the project reported not knowing what the TDR was for, wanting to know more most how the TDR data were used for controlling purposes, and what they showed in regards to behavior change. One teacher merely stated, "I don't know how the TDRs are used." Some other guessed about the long-term utility of the TDR past saying,

I would imagine that yous guys are using that information as the educatee moves forwards, and so I don't know how helpful it is in the firsthand, while they are working with united states, only I would guess that the data I provide in the TDRs is being used to make decisions for that educatee as they move on in their transition.

The defoliation nearly the TDR and requests for more data about the data led to case managers showing the teachers TDR graphs and bringing them to school meetings. Additionally, parent coaches began showing participating parents PDR data at their weekly meetings and discussing behavior changes that they were seeing both at dwelling house and at school. In follow-up interviews, parents and teachers more than oft reported that they understood the purpose of the PDR/TDR information. For example, later in the project ane teacher new to SWIFT demonstrated greater understanding about the TDR saying that, "It gives you some other prepare of data to look at and run into if…the behaviors are increasing or decreasing." One parent noted that the PDR data helped her keep rails of her student'southward behaviors and gave her direction for the skills she wanted to work on with him:

I've plant it as a tracking tool and a reminder tool for things I wanted to be able to focus on and piece of work on… it was the positive behaviors you know, noticing in him, ever keeping rail of that, how ofttimes that didn't happen, and trying to help him.

The utility of the TDR as a tool for tracking behavioral change over time came upwardly in several interviews in one case the TDR data were shared more routinely, for example,

It's just kind of information to bear witness, 'Is this working or is it not?' And at what points?…what were nosotros doing when the student had all these smashing days? What were we doing when there was all this really not so great beliefs?

3.4. Example management coordination

Throughout the interviews, parents and teachers described the SWIFT instance managers equally existence instrumental in organizing the transition procedure, maintaining communication between the school and the family, and coordinating pupil supports across schools. The importance of the case manager in facilitating advice among team members was illustrated in the showtime parent interview: "I think her role was to just try and keep things moving forward, keep it going smoothly, making certain in that location was a lot of communication for everybody…" as well as the outset instructor interview: "Equally a student begins to transition, starts to spend more time over there, I'yard relying more on her to communicate and facilitate…" and repeated in nearly all of the post-obit interviews related to communicating with the family and with the various school staff: "But keeping them apprised of what's happening" and, "…coordinates between the school and the coaches and me" and, "…does a neat task of making sure they stay coordinated with us…" and, "Coordinates us all…there are multiple students, and other staff members and many sites that she'due south trying to put all together."

Participating parents saw the SWIFT case manager equally supportive individuals who could brand things run smoothly, describing the role every bit, "The overseer of things, the burn down puter-outer" and "The buck stops here person. She's also at the meetings and is very supportive of me and my son" and "Her role is to troubleshoot… and deal with big problems." Parents also viewed the case manager'south ability to coordinate services and necktie information together as extending outside of the school supports:

She listens to everything like from the PDRs to what the parent bus says. I knew with my answers on the PDR I was going to get a call from her saying, 'What's going on? How tin I assistance?' and that's reassuring.

DS teachers described the existing human relationship with the student and family unit equally a benefit of the SWIFT case director, "that she has a relationship already with the family is helpful" and, "that there is someone to call to problem solve…someone else has some experience with the family unit and the student when I have never met the student before." Teachers in both the DTS and DS settings consistently reported wanting the SWIFT case director's help with organizing and coordinating team members for the students in transition. Ane teacher emphasized the need for coordination help by saying,

Anytime we take to make a big decision that involves gathering all the players, parents and staff members at the dwelling house school, simply gathering all those players together can be a challenge sometimes… And so having help from the [SWIFT] case manager with coordinating all that would exist helpful.

Feedback from parents and teachers led to refinements for the SWIFT case managing director role including working more closely with the DTS leadership to engage the DS in the early stages of the transition, then to work closely with the DS leadership to translate effective student supports and services to the district setting, and continuing to facilitate communication between the parents and both schools. In follow-upward interviews, teachers highlighted that this modification resulted in increased advice between the DTS and DS staff and fewer delays in implementing effective supports and services, "[The SWIFT case director] has really been taking the lead with these guys and setting upward meetings at the home schools and making the necessary contacts."

3.5. The benefits of skills coaching supports

Parents and teachers regularly emphasized the importance of the skills coaches in helping students encounter their behavioral goals. Ane parent commented,

The skills coach and my daughter were doing things I had asked, like my daughter learning about her facial expressions, her tones, learning how to hang out with kids at lunch and to do the social things that she'southward lacking in, and the skills coach was there to help and teach her.

With regard to a student'south behavior, one teacher said,

A lot of times I tin can only accost it on the fly and without as much detail or not in as much depth as I would like… just because of fourth dimension. Simply the skills coaches are able to have that one-on-in one case and tin accost those issues that I'm not able to thoroughly.

Teachers were very familiar with the skills coaches and their role, because most skills coaching sessions took place in the schools. Teachers draw the role every bit, "to help them [students] build the skills, y'all know, that they need to be successful in the new environment." Several parents commented that their knowledge about the role of the skills coaches came from information that was shared with them past their sons and daughters. One parent stated, "I run across him as a mentor, a role model, and a skill builder for my son, and my son views it that way" while some other parent shared, "My son actually talks near the skills he's working on."

Parents reported that they felt the skills coaches were a valuable support for their students during the transition, stating that they saw the skills coach as, "Someone who is in his court, and advocates for my son." Teachers reiterated that skills coaches were an important link between the DTS and the DS, where "merely existence in their abode school setting" meant that skills coaches could notice and jitney students' beliefs in both DTS and DS settings. Teachers also highlighted the skills coaches' office in the domicile-school connection saying that they were an "awesome span between what goes on hither in our classroom and so what's going on at home…they're also being able to see them outside of our schoolhouse likewise… that's key." Both parents and teachers shared that students enjoyed meeting with their skills coaches, were actively engaged in skills coaching sessions, saying things like, "… they look forward to it" and "they're excited to run into their coaches and have them encounter what they're doing and exist a part of what's happening."

Almost all participating parents commented that they felt involved and informed in the development of the skills coaching content and the progress of the skills coaching sessions. In regards to having input on the skills coaching sessions, ane parent commented, "absolutely, yeah, I never felt left out of that part" while another stated, "What I've talked to the parent motorbus about has come out in the skills coaching sessions based on interactions nosotros've had at the business firm with my son." However, teachers in all settings asked for more communication about the skills coaching sessions, such every bit the behavioral strategies that were existence discussed and practiced, and the goals that were fix with the students. This was illustrated by one instructor's suggestion that, "It could be helpful to kinda get a mini-epitomize. Like when she goes for her skills coaching in the school area…'these are the things we touched on,' and you know, 'this is how it went'" so that school staff could try the aforementioned things and they would, "continually be followed upwards on." To emphasize this betoken a teacher said,

And then if they worked on a specific skill and the skills double-decker said to me, 'we worked on this and this is the language I've taught her,' and so I can follow upwardly and reinforce that language and she [the student] sees that we're all working together.

Post-obit the requests for increased communication, case managers built in regular updates to teachers on the progress of skills coaching sessions. Additionally, case managers brash skills coaches to briefly check-in with teachers regarding session content and skills practise, so update the case manager on what was shared with teachers. Teachers reported that this change provided more consequent supports for transitioning students betwixt SWIFT and the classroom saying things similar, the skills coach "… would check-in with me either before or after" weekly sessions, and, "…sometimes she'd come in and say…'I did let him know almost this, he shared this with me.' And just in that brief dialogue it was pretty huge because sometimes you get information that I wasn't aware of!" The communication structure between SWIFT and the teachers expanded from the case manager alone to include the skills coaches, and teachers seemed to like that saying,

If I see things and I'm not able to accost it then I'll but shoot over a quick e-mail to the skills passenger vehicle and say hey, this kind of came to our attending, do you retrieve you could become over it when you have your one-on-one time?

three.6. The parent coach function

While parents were overwhelmingly positive virtually their interactions with the parent coaches and their part with helping facilitate a smooth transition process for their students, teachers had minimal or depression levels of contact with SWIFT parent coaches because communication with the schools was washed primarily through the example manager who and then met regularly with the parent and youth skills coaches. This function stratification was intended to provide the teachers with a single conduit for communication for the SWIFT team, a filter through which relevant information about the family was shared with the school, and a consistent source of data for the SWIFT staff. Therefore, information technology was not surprising that some teachers reported not knowing equally much about the office of the parent double-decker or the content of their sessions compared to other SWIFT components.

Participating parents described the role of the parent coach as one that was both supportive and helpful with developing appropriate structures for the students at dwelling, with one parent stating, "… it wasn't just supporting me only also giving me some ideas." While the parent coach was often described equally, "real understanding and existent supportive," other parents shared that, "she motivates me to put together the charts and to do the weekly cheque-ins and weekly supports." Several parents stated that these supports translated into more positive interactions betwixt them and their students. One parent shared,

She's helped back up me in any ideas or plans we've come up…in terms of bespeak charts, supporting my son, encouraging my son, listening to what I was maxim and coming upwards with some ideas that she thought might exist helpful.

In general, foster and kinship parents identified similar things that they liked about the parent coach office. One topic that was unlike was related to the unique experiences of foster/kinship parents, specifically that they liked working with a parent autobus who understood that foster/kinship parents of youth with pregnant beliefs problems can have unlike strengths and limitations than biological parents. One foster parent talked at length nigh how their family had a consistent high book of appointments for their foster children with "therapy and case workers coming…the certifier coming" and he appreciated that the parent bus would utilise "text or email" instead of a lot of phone calls and would continue sessions brusque, "a half an hour is wonderful." Other foster parents talked nearly frustration with other back up providers who didn't understand that they were experienced professional person parents and highlighted the importance of parent coaching sessions that focused on supporting skilled parents. One foster parent said that she was already "doing a homework routine" and had "rewards" for the youth and the SWIFT parent motorcoach would "encourage me with those things" and some other foster parent said that the parent autobus helped to "remind yourself of what yous already know and want to go on doing and so things that you mayhap oasis't thought of."

Many teachers reported that the parent coaches were an asset considering communication with parents increased dramatically, without teachers feeling like they were telling them, "how to parent" their students. Instead, "I relayed that information to the example manager and she relayed information technology to the parent coach and it hasn't been an event since. So yeah, it's been pretty helpful." Teachers described the support that parents received from their parent coach as pertinent to students' success beyond settings because, "The home has been a real focal point where their struggles kind of originate from and they are bringing those struggles to school" and every bit teachers, "nosotros have no control or say" in what happens at dwelling house. The instructor later gave an example of a educatee who was "having a really hard fourth dimension getting to bed on fourth dimension and that was actually impacting him at school." The parent autobus worked with his female parent to set upwardly "an incentive-based bedtime routine… after they worked on information technology a few weeks he was coming to class energetic and aware the whole twenty-four hours." In another interview, a teacher reflected on a positive change in a parent's response to planning and suggestions from the schoolhouse equally, "more open up, more trusting, and just calm…" In the same vein, another teacher said, "Collaboration not just demanding" and went on to explain her impression that the parent coach did, "some encouragement and some coaching and peradventure teaching and suggestions that are nearly contacting the teacher and asking them for what I desire."

Although all participating parents reported being comfortable with the role stratification that SWIFT provided, some teachers expressed that they didn't similar the lack of direct communication between teachers and parent coaches. One instructor said,

Information technology would be helpful for the parent omnibus to have more advice with the school, more information coming dorsum to united states of america, even if information technology's just positive stuff. Information technology allows us to get a fuller film of where or how dwelling is going.

This instructor later stated,

If I could communicate directly with the parent coach that might have been at least a little bit easier…it came to a indicate where I had the female parent's cell phone number and I was only texting her considering I was finding that stuff wasn't existence passed on. So it'd be great if I could merely maybe shoot the parent coach an email and say hey, if you talk to his mom can y'all just remind her of the meeting tomorrow?

1 upshot of this feedback was that example managers began providing teachers with more frequent updates on the progress of parent coaching sessions relevant to school. Case managers also introduced the concept of the case manager/parent coach role stratification and advice construction earlier in their first contacts with teachers to explain the limits to sharing family data with the school and the part parent coaches play in the transition process.

4. Discussion

The fit or feasibility of an intervention is a vital consideration when stakeholders are determining which programs to adopt (Glasgow, Lichtenstein, & Marcus, 2003; Merrell & Buchanan, 2006). In this study we actively solicited stakeholder feedback regarding the strengths of the multi-component intervention throughout the initial development phase. We also solicited feedback on and areas that needed comeback to learn what would make SWIFT, and interventions like it, sustainable in real-world school settings. The utilize of the structured iterative refinement process incorporating regular parent and teacher feedback was integral to the development of SWIFT as an intervention that is feasible to implement and useful for key stakeholders. Our qualitative findings provide initial evidence to advise that SWIFT and similarly intensive interventions are viable for home and schoolhouse implementation. The six themes that emerged from the teacher interviews fell under two broad categories: timeline for intervention supports and refinements to each of the four intervention components. Refinements made to the implementation process and intervention components, the relevance of the stakeholder informed iterative development for intervention/program adoption, limitations of this study, and directions for futurity research are further discussed.

4.i. Timeline for intervention supports

Parents and teachers regularly asked for more intervention time for their students. Our findings suggest that parents will appoint with socially valid, intensive school related supports and teachers are willing and even eager to connect their at-risk students to such supports. A clear bulletin from parents and teachers was that students should connect to transition supports well before planned transitions. This suggestion is consequent with all-time practices outlined for students with ED highlighting the importance of meaningful relationships (Wagner & Davis, 2006). The enthusiasm expressed by participating parents and teachers for ongoing involvement with SWIFT, an intensive intervention spanning home and school settings, might be due to the severity of students' needs and a lack of existing coordinated supports for students receiving third level supports.

4.2. Refinements to the intervention components

Throughout the interviews, communication and cross-setting consistency were identified past teachers for what to retain or refine inside each of the iv SWIFT components. Specifically, teachers consistently asked for more information on students' habitation life, wanted to know what students' were practicing in their i-on-one sessions, and said that this information helped them provide a more appropriate and consequent educational experience for students. Such consistent teacher requests for home and intervention information were not a surprise, given that the human relationship betwixt home and school is increasingly considered a primal ingredient for educational success by educators (Epstein, 2011). Our findings highlight the importance of conspicuously explaining the purpose of a advice construction specific to an intervention every bit well as the demand for proactive communication with all squad members. With our sample, the context of requests for more than home and intervention information indicated that: (a) teachers thought that the home context contributed to school-behavior, (b) teachers saw their students utilise their new skills in the classroom, and (c) teachers wanted their classrooms to be a consistent support along with skills coaching and the dwelling. In addition, we found that teachers spoke respectfully of the participating families and considered parents of import partners in their child'southward instruction.

Parents consistently noted how important the team arroyo was to making the transition of their students between day-handling and district settings successful. Specifically, parents valued having a case manager who was coordinating the transition of services that needed to be delivered in the new setting, a skills bus who was the champion for their educatee and an adult their student enjoyed spending fourth dimension with, a parent coach being the person they could bounce ideas off of and gain support from, and having several team members (case director, skills charabanc, and parent passenger vehicle) serve as the voice of support for participating students and their families at meetings with schoolhouse leadership.

As a result of the consistent feedback from parents and teachers, the case manager role was refined to include working more closely with the DTS leadership to engage the DS in the early stages of the transition, the skills motorbus and parent passenger vehicle began attending all transition meetings with both DTS and DS personnel, and the team continued to facilitate communication between the parents and both schools.

Parents and teachers reported that providing brief, weekly student behavioral ratings was non only non a brunt, simply in fact useful for their interactions with the students. This finding is consequent with inquiry showing that the act of participating in assessments can alter behavior (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 2004). Notably, parents and teachers talked nigh the ways in which completing regular PDR/TDR ratings helped them focus on tracking specific problem behaviors over fourth dimension and pay more attending to what students were doing well. Parent and teacher comments about the PDR and TDR also illustrate the importance of a quick, positive interaction with information collectors to maintain loftier levels of adherence to assessment protocols.

4.3. Iterative intervention development involving stakeholder input

Soliciting input from parents and teachers provided validation for the SWIFT intervention elements that had been working and gave us information into how we might modify those that were not working in order to improve fit. Examining qualitative data from stakeholder groups simultaneously non but enhanced a comprehensive comparison of feedback, but also immune for real-time adjustment to the packet of supports provided across settings. Our findings suggest that through the use of this iterative process, we were able to develop an intervention with potential to be implemented with fidelity and maintained over time in real-world settings, which are important considerations for schools and districts in selecting interventions for their systems (Merrell & Buchanan, 2006).

4.4. Limitations and future directions

A few important limitations of this study should exist noted. First, although the researchers sought to collect qualitative data from a variety of teachers across the DTS's and DS settings, the electric current study is express considering the majority of teachers were from DS settings. All participating students transitioned through the same DTS; therefore at that place were fewer DTS'south teachers to recruit for the interviews. However, the inclusion of a larger sample of DS teachers profoundly contributed to our agreement of SWIFT feasibility across multiple DS settings.

2nd, although all of the foster, kinship, and biological parents participated in two–3 interviews, nosotros were unable to interview all teachers more once due to the nature of participating center school students moving into new schools and new classrooms with new teachers throughout the yr. Thus, not all teachers were able to give follow-upward feedback. Additionally, nosotros did not include the perspectives of the students themselves. Follow-up studies should explore the consistency between parent and teacher feedback with that of the participating students. Interviews conducted with students may shed low-cal on intervention elements, aspects of the transition process, and the overall experience of transitioning into a new schoolhouse setting that parents and teachers may not be aware of. Since students are the primary recipients of SWIFT, and it is their growth and evolution that highlights the impact of this intervention, their vocalisation and experience through this process is vital to the intervention's long-term contextual fit.

Finally, this intervention was developed in one ESD in a mid-sized community in the Pacific Northwest with limited cultural diversity. Testing the intervention in regions with greater multi-cultural representation could contribute to our knowledge of how SWIFT can run across the needs of diverse students and their families.

Some additional next steps include collecting mixed-method research to evaluate pupil outcomes to evaluate the touch on of SWIFT. Questions remain related to differences between students, parents, and teachers receiving SWIFT supports and those who are not receiving such supports and for whom SWIFT is most effective. Specifically, nosotros program to examine mediators (e.g., whether changes in parent behavior mediate changes in student outcomes) and moderators (eastward.thou., whether factors such as family background characteristics, pupil cognitive functioning, or school characteristics moderate changes in student outcomes) in future studies of SWIFT. While the present report provides initial evidence of feasibility for parents and teachers, a randomized controlled trial could provide important data to plant the efficacy of SWIFT. We plan to test the impact of the SWIFT intervention on both short-term and long-term outcomes. Parent, teacher, and student engagement with SWIFT along with key educatee outcomes such as omnipresence, beliefs, and academic engagement in district settings will be important to examine.

v. Conclusion

Fit, feasibility, and utility of an intervention are important considerations for educators adopting innovative programs. The iterative evolution process described in this paper allowed united states of america to query parents and teachers at multiple timepoints and across multiple settings. This strategy provided ongoing stakeholder data equally we refined the intervention, and reflected increased satisfaction with the intervention over time. One important finding suggests that intensive school-based interventions that include parent and teachers every bit partners can be designed to be feasible and useful, and fit with the needs of stakeholders to support students with significant beliefs problems. Our data suggest that involving teachers and parents early on in the development of SWIFT contributed to the fit and feasibility of the intervention to the intended delivery surround. This collaborative and feedback-seeking arroyo serves to be incredibly useful when serving a population of Tier 3 students at take a chance for school failure. Every bit previously discussed, such students and their families typically exercise non receive the type of coordinated supports needed to improve the likelihood that they will be successful in their new schoolhouse environments. The candid feedback expressed by participating parents and teachers throughout this study make us hopeful that this model for soliciting central stakeholder feedback will serve as a mode of improving supports for at-risk students through a hard transition point in their academic careers.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Establish of Teaching Sciences under Grant R324A110370 and the Partition of Epidemiology, Services and Prevention Enquiry, NIDA, U.S. PHS nether Grant P50DA035763. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and exercise not correspond views of the Institute of Pedagogy Sciences or the National Found on Drug Abuse.

The authors would like to thank Patti Chamberlain for support on the design and implementation of this project; Alice Holmes, Janet Morrison, and Lizzy Utterback for conducting, transcribing, and coding interviews; Diana Strand for editorial back up; the SWIFT intervention squad; the school districts where we conducted this study; and the parents and teachers who participated in the interviews.

References

• Albin RW, Dunlap G, Lucyshyn JM. Collaborative research with families on positive behavior support. In: Lucyshyn J, Dunlap G, Albin RW, editors. Families and positive behavior back up: Addressing problem behaviors in family contexts. Baltimore, Dr.: Paul H Brookes; 2002. pp. 373–389. [Google Scholar]
• Albin RW, Lucyshyn JM, Horner RH, Flannery KB. Contextual fit for behavioral back up plans: A model for "goodness of fit. In: Koegel LK, Koegel RL, Dunlap G, editors. Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing Co; 1996. pp. 81–98. [Google Scholar]
• Berg BL, Lune H. Qualitative inquiry methods for the social sciences. 8th. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educational activity, Inc; 2012. [Google Scholar]
• Buchanan R, Pears K. The Instructor Daily Report: A cursory assessment tool for screening and monitoring problematic pupil behavior. 2015 In review. [Google Scholar]
• Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Parent ascertainment and report of child symptoms. Behavioral Assessment. 1987;9:97–109. [Google Scholar]
• Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Comparison of 2 community alternatives to incarceration for chronic juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1998;66:624–633. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-006X.66.4.624. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Chamberlain P, Moreland South, Reid K. Enhanced services and stipends for foster parents: Effects on retention rates and outcomes for children. Child Welfare. 1992;5:387–401. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Chamberlain P, Price J, Leve LD, Laurent H, Landsverk JA, Reid JB. Prevention of beliefs problems for children in foster care: Outcomes and mediation effects. Prevention Science. 2008;9:17–27. http://dx.doi.org/x.1007/s11121-007-0080-7. [PMC costless commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Elliott DS, Mihalic S. Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs. Prevention Science. 2004;five:47–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013981.28071.52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Epstein JL. Toward a theory of family-schoolhouse connections: Teacher practices and parent interest. In: Epstein JL, editor. School, family unit, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. 2nd. Philadelphia, PA: Westview Press; 2011. pp. 26–41. [Google Scholar]
• Fisher PA, Burraston B, Pears KC. The early intervention foster care program: Permanent placement outcomes from a randomized trial. Child Maltreatment. 2005;10:61–71. http://dx.doi.org/x.1177/1077559504271561. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Fuchs LS, Fuchs D. Monitoring student progress toward the evolution of reading competence: A review of three forms of classroom-based cess. School Psychology Review. 1999;28:659–671. [Google Scholar]
• Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative inquiry. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter; 1967. [Google Scholar]
• Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein Eastward, Marcus AC. Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Periodical of Public Wellness. 2003;93:1261–1267. http://dx.doi.org/x.2105/AJPH.93.8.1261. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Greenberg MT, Weissberg RP, O'Brien MU, Zins JE, Fredericks L, Resnik H, Elias MJ. Enhancing schoolhouse-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist. 2003;58:466–474. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Gresham FM. Electric current condition and hereafter directions of school-based behavioral interventions. School Psychology Review. 2004;33:326–343. [Google Scholar]
• Hurlburt M, Knapp P. The new consumers of evidence based practices: Reflections of providers and families. Information Matters. 2003;(Special Issue #6):21–23. [Google Scholar]
• Ingersoll B, Dvortcsak A. Including parent training in the early childhood special teaching curriculum for children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Positive Beliefs Interventions. 2006;8:79–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10983007060080020601. [Google Scholar]
• Found for Education Sciences. (CFDA Number: 84.324A). Asking for applications, Special Education Research Grants. 2011 Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2011_84324A.pdf.
• Kern L, Evans SW, Lewis TJ. Clarification of an iterative procedure for intervention development. Didactics and Handling of Children. 2011;34:593–617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/etc.2011.0037. [Google Scholar]
• Kuhn SAC, Lerman DC, Vorndran CM. Pyramidal preparation for families of children with trouble beliefs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2003;36:77–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-77. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Leve LD, Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Intervention outcomes for girls referred from juvenile justice: Effects on malversation. Periodical of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2005;73:1181–1185. http://dx.doi.org/x.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1181. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Lucyshyn JM, Horner RH, Dunlap M, Albin RW, Ben KR. Positive behavior support with families. In: Lucyshyn JM, Dunlap G, Albin RW, editors. Family and positive behavior support: Addressing problem beliefs in family contexts. Baltimore, Doctor: Paul H Brookes; 2002. pp. three–43. [Google Scholar]
• Marshall JK, Mirenda P. Parent-professional collaboration for positive behavior back up in the abode. Focus on autism and other developmental disabilities. 2002;17:216–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10883576020170040401. [Google Scholar]
• Mautone JA, Marshall SA, Sharman J, Eiraldi RB, Jawad AF, Power TJ. Development of a family-schoolhouse intervention for immature children with attending deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology Review. 2012;41:447–466. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Merrell KW, Buchanan R. Intervention choice in school-based practice: Using public health models to enhance systems capacity of schools. School Psychology Review. 2006;35:167–180. [Google Scholar]
• Merrell KW, Ervin RA, Peacock GG, editors. School psychology for the 21st century: Foundations and practices. 2d. New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 2012. [Google Scholar]
• Padgett DK. Qualitative methods in social work research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 2008. [Google Scholar]
• Park JH, Alber-Morgan SR, Fleming C. Collaborating with parents to implement behavioral interventions for children with challenging behaviors. Instruction Infrequent Children. 2011;43:22–thirty. [Google Scholar]
• Patterson GR. A social learning approach to family unit intervention III: Coercive family process. Eugene, OR: Castalia; 1982. [Google Scholar]
• Pluymert K. Problem-solving foundations for school psychological services. In: Harrison PL, Thomas A, editors. Best practices in school psychology: Information-based and collaborative decision making. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists; 2014. pp. 25–39. [Google Scholar]
• Price JM, Chamberlain P, Landsverk J, Reid J, Leve L, Laurent H. Effects of a foster parent preparation intervention on placement changes of children in foster intendance. Child Maltreatment. 2008;13:64–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077559507310612. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Reschly DJ, Ysseldyke JE. Epitome shift: The by is non the hereafter. In: Thomas A, Grimes J, editors. All-time practices in school psychology IV. one–2. Bethesda, MD: National Association of Schoolhouse Psychologists; 2002. pp. 3–20. [Google Scholar]
• Salvia J, Ysseldyke JE, editors. Cess in special and inclusive education. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin; 2004. [Google Scholar]
• U.S. Section of Education. Twenty-seventh annual written report to congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act. Washington, DC: Author; 2005. [Google Scholar]
• Upah KRF, Tilly WD., III . Best practices in designing, implementing, and evaluating quality interventions. In: Thomas A, Grimes J, editors. Best practices in school psychology IV. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists; 2002. pp. 483–501. [Google Scholar]
• Vernberg EM, Jacobs AK, Nyre JE, Puddy RW, Roberts MC. Innovative treatment for children with serious emotional disturbance: Preliminary outcomes for a school-based intensive mental health program. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. 2004;33:359–365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3302_17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wagner Chiliad, Davis Thou. How are nosotros preparing students with emotional disturbances for the transition to immature adulthood? Findings from the national longitudinal transition study-2. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 2006;14:86–98. http://dx.doi.org/ten.1177/10634266060140020501. [Google Scholar]

hallejuss1951.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5619674/

Share this post