A Systematic Review of Function-Modified Check-In/Check-Out

Check-in/check-out (CICO) is widely used as a Tier 2 intervention within school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports. Evidence suggests that traditional CICO is primarily effective for students demonstrating problem behavior maintained by adult attention. A growing body of research has investigated function-modified CICO to address behaviors maintained by other consequences. The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence-base for function-modified versions of CICO to identify (a) the procedures used to assess students’ behavior function and (b) the types of modifications and additions to CICO that have been empirically evaluated. We systematically reviewed 11 studies that examined the effects of function-based CICO. Researchers determined behavior function using a combination of direct observations and indirect assessments. These methods were more involved than a brief behavior screening. The modifications and additions to traditional CICO included changes that were functionally relevant and functionally independent. Based on the results of this review, more research is needed before function-based CICO can be considered an evidence-based practice. Moreover, the extent to which educators can implement function-based CICO without researcher support is also unknown. The implications of this review are discussed in terms of future research and practice.

[1]  Sarah E. Bloom,et al.  Teacher-conducted trial-based functional analyses as the basis for intervention. , 2013, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[2]  Brandi Simonsen,et al.  Comparing a Behavioral Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) Intervention to Standard Practice in an Urban Middle School Setting Using an Experimental Group Design , 2011 .

[3]  Robert H. Horner,et al.  Evaluation of a Targeted Intervention Within a Schoolwide System of Behavior Support , 2003 .

[4]  Barbara S. Mitchell,et al.  A Tier 2 Framework for Behavior Identification and Intervention , 2015 .

[5]  K. McIntosh,et al.  Differential Effects of a Tier Two Behavior Intervention Based on Function of Problem Behavior , 2009 .

[6]  Lindsay M. Fallon,et al.  Function-Based Modification of Check-In/Check-Out to Influence Escape-Maintained Behavior , 2016 .

[7]  R. Horner,et al.  Feasibility and Contributions of Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools , 2002 .

[8]  Ya-yu Lo,et al.  Teacher Implementation of Trial-Based Functional Analysis and Differential Reinforcement of Alternative Behavior for Students with Challenging Behavior , 2016 .

[9]  L. Hawken,et al.  A 2-Year Outcome Study of the Check, Connect, and Expect Intervention for Students At Risk for Severe Behavior Problems , 2009 .

[10]  C. Anderson,et al.  Addressing Task Avoidance in Middle School Students , 2014 .

[11]  Timothy J. Lewis,et al.  Essential Features of Tier 2 and 3 School-Wide Positive Behavioral Supports , 2016 .

[12]  Daniel M. Maggin,et al.  A Systematic Evidence Review of the Check-In/Check-Out Program for Reducing Student Challenging Behaviors , 2015 .

[13]  S. Stage,et al.  A Validity Study of Functionally-Based Behavioral Consultation with Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities. , 2008 .

[14]  L. Hawken,et al.  Combining Tier 2 and Tier 3 Supports for Students with Disabilities in General Education Settings , 2016 .

[15]  Elisa S. Shernoff,et al.  Evidence-Based Practice: Promoting Evidence-Based Interventions in School Psychology. , 2003 .

[16]  Jack L. Vevea,et al.  A survey of publication practices of single-case design researchers when treatments have small or large effects. , 2016, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[17]  K. Lane,et al.  A Review of Tier 2 Interventions Conducted Within Multitiered Models of Behavioral Prevention , 2014 .

[18]  C. Anderson,et al.  Enhancing Effects of Check-in/Check-out with Function-Based Support , 2008 .

[19]  Elise T. Pas,et al.  Secondary and Tertiary Support Systems in Schools Implementing School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports , 2012 .

[20]  Gregory P Hanley,et al.  Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior: Dispelling Myths, Overcoming Implementation Obstacles, and Developing New Lore , 2012, Behavior analysis in practice.

[21]  K. Herman,et al.  Differentiating Tier 2 Social Behavioral Interventions According to Function of Behavior , 2013 .

[22]  C. Anderson,et al.  Breaks are Better: A Tier II Social Behavior Intervention , 2013 .

[23]  Emily M. Lund,et al.  A Systematic Review of the Empirical Support for Check-In Check-Out , 2016 .

[24]  B. Iwata,et al.  TOWARD A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF SELF‐INJURY , 1994 .

[25]  R. Horner,et al.  A Promising Approach for Expanding and Sustaining School-Wide Positive Behavior Support , 2006 .

[26]  Catherine P. Bradshaw,et al.  Examining Variation in the Impact of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial. , 2014 .

[27]  Clayton R. Cook,et al.  Establishing and Evaluating the Substantive Adequacy of Positive Behavioral Support Plans , 2007 .

[28]  G. Sugai,et al.  Response to Intervention: Examining Classroom Behavior Support in Second Grade , 2007 .

[29]  K. Jolivette,et al.  The Effects of Tier II Check-in/Check-out Including Adaptation for Non-Responders on the Off-Task Behavior of Elementary Students in a Residential Setting , 2013 .

[30]  Lisa P. Barrett,et al.  Systematic Review of the Check-in, Check-out Intervention for Students At Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders , 2014 .