Search

Research conducted to date has highlighted barriers to initial adoption of universal behavior screening in schools. However, little is known regarding the experiences of those implementing these procedures and there have been no studies conducted examining the experiences of educators in different stages of implementing various tiered systems of supports. Universal screening is foundational to a successful Comprehensive, Integrated Three-Tiered (Ci3T) model of prevention-an integrated tiered system addressing academics, behavior, and social and emotional well-being. Therefore, the perspectives of Ci3T Leadership Team members at different stages of Ci3T implementation were solicited through an online survey that sought to understand (1) current school-based screening practices and (2) individual beliefs regarding those practices. A total of 165 Ci3T Leadership Team members representing five school districts from three geographic regions across the United States, all of whom were participating in an Institute of Education Sciences Network grant examining integrated tiered systems, reported the screening procedures were generally well-understood and feasible to implement. At the same time, results highlighted continuing professional learning may be beneficial in the areas of: (1) integrating multiple sources of data (e.g., screening data with other data collected as regular school practices) and (2) using those multiple data sources to determine next steps for intervention. We discuss educational implications, limitations, and directions for future inquiry.

Integration of multitiered academic, behavioral, and social-emotional efforts, such as the implementation of a Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered (Ci3T) model of prevention, is critical for supporting student development across domains of functioning. In particular, universal behavior screening has been shown to predict outcomes across these domains and as such is foundational to integrated systems. Thus, districts and schools are committed to continuing to learn how to implement behavior screening effectively and efficiently. As such, the purpose of this first qualitative study of systematic screening for behavior was to explore perspectives on benefits, challenges, and opportunities in behavior screening as gathered from members of school- and district-based leadership teams who were currently implementing Ci3T. Both individual interviews and focus groups were conducted, and thematic analysis was employed to identify themes that could be used to enhance the implementation and use of behavior screening. Ci3T Leadership Team members indicated knowledge about behavior screening procedures and relayed challenges with respect to using behavior screening data. Taken together, a need emerged for broader professional learning for all school staff members around increasing knowledge and use of behavior screening data. We discuss limitations and directions for future research.

We report findings from a multistate survey of 720 faculty and staff from 25 elementary schools in five districts across three states and geographic regions participating in an IES Network grant examining integrated tiered systems. In this preregistered study, we replicated and extended previous inquiry examining educators’ views of (1) implementation of core components of their school’s Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered (Ci3T) model of prevention; and (2) preference for professional learning (content and avenue). Results indicated more than half of respondents indicated high levels of implementation of core features of Ci3T across Tiers 1, 2, and 3. Educators reported high levels of implementation for 10 out of 19 research-based educational practices used within tiered systems with a statistically significant relation between ratings of implemented practices and the desire for support with most practices. Respondents identified their top three areas for professional development needed in the coming year as behavior deescalation techniques, small-group social skills instruction, and strategies for supporting students with internalizing behavior patterns. For potential professional learning avenues, respondents’ top ratings were in-district, during-school workshops, course for college credit on-line, teacher collaboratives/networks, and one-to-one coaching or mentoring. There were many similarities among educators’ ratings across implementation year and state. Low levels of implementation across many core Ci3T and common educational practices were reported by educators working within the most experienced schools. We conclude with a discussion of implications, limitations, and future directions. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43494-021-00049-z.

We report findings of two validation studies of the Student Risk Screening Scale for Early Childhood (SRSS-EC). Although previous exploratory inquiry suggested a two-factor solution, results of Study 1 conducted with 274 preschool-age youth suggested mixed support for a two-factor model, with only one fit index suggesting an adequate fit (incremental index, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.963). However, results did provide additional evidence of convergent validity between SRSS-EC and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores. In Study 2, results of convergent validity studies with 90 preschool-age children offered evidence between SRSS-EC and (a) Social Skills Improvement System–Performance Screening Guide and (b) Caregiver–Teacher Report Form (C-TRF) scores. Results suggested the following cutting scores: SRSS-EC E7 (0–5 low, 6–7 moderate, 8–21 high risk) and SRSS-EC I4 (0–2 low, 3–4 moderate, and 5–12 high risk), with C-TRF scores as the criterion. We discuss limitations and directions for future inquiry.