Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorHenington, Carlen
dc.contributor.authorMedley, Meagan Boyd
dc.date2014
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-15T16:42:59Z
dc.date.available2020-09-15T16:42:59Z
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11668/20096
dc.description.abstractThis study examined teacher perceptions of an intervention including a daily behavior report (DBRC) with a measure of treatment integrity present (Experimental Group) and without a measure of treatment integrity present (Control Group) The study was conducted in an analog (i.e., vignettes) online format with teacher participants from a southeastern school district. Each participant was presented with a vignette describing a student with problem classroom behaviors, a summary functional behavior assessment, and a sample behavior intervention plan including a DBRC. Only the Experimental Group was then presented with a direct observation measure of treatment integrity correlating to the DBRC. All teacher participants then rated the intervention using the Usage Rating Profile-Intervention (URP-I). On average teachers evaluated both the DBRC intervention with and without a treatment integrity component positively (i.e., means ranged from slightly agree to agree across all measures). A t-test indicated that no statistically significant differences existed between the Experimental and Control Groups’ total scores on the URP-I. This indicated that the measure of treatment integrity did not impact teachers’ ratings of the intervention on the URP-I. A MANOVA procedure found no statistically significant differences in teachers’ ratings of the intervention using each of the four factor scores of the URP-I (i.e., Acceptability, Understanding, Feasibility, and Systems Support). A multiple regression procedure used to examine various raters’ demographic characteristics found no statistically significant predictability for URP-I scores based on race, grades taught, years experience, and teaching setting (special/gifted versus general education). Cautious generalizations should be made due to limitations including the analog nature of the study, limited geographical area and participant characteristics. Additionally, the URP-I, a direct observation treatment integrity checklist, and a behavior intervention plan with an emphasis on a DBRC were all used. Use of other variables such as different interventions, rating scales and treatment integrity measures should be investigated. Suggestions for future research include conducting similar lines of research in naturalistic settings with school teachers and children, continued research in the different ways to collect treatment integrity research, and conducting acceptability and teacher perception research for other behavior interventions, target behaviors, and with other teacher groups.
dc.publisherMississippi State University
dc.subject.othertreatment integrity
dc.subject.otherdaily behavior report card
dc.subject.otherfidelity
dc.subject.otheracceptability
dc.subject.othersocial validity
dc.subject.otherURP-I
dc.subject.otherusage
dc.subject.otherbehavior intervention plan
dc.subject.otherfunctional behavior assessment
dc.titleTeacher Ratings of a Daily Behavior Report Card with or without a Treatment Integrity Measure
dc.typeDissertation
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Counseling and Educational Psychology
dc.publisher.collegeCollege of Education
dc.date.authorbirth1982
dc.subject.degreeDoctor of Philosophy
dc.subject.majorEducational Psychology
dc.contributor.committeeElder, Anastasia D.
dc.contributor.committeeMcCleon, Tawny E.
dc.contributor.committeeJustice, Cheryl A.
dc.contributor.committeeReisener, Carmen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record