Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Check-in/Check-out Implementation in Schools: a Meta-Analysis of Group Design Studies

  • Review
  • Published:
Education and Treatment of Children Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

This meta-analysis study synthesized the intervention effects of Check-in/Check-out (CICO), the most common Tier 2 behavior intervention used in schools. Systematic review procedures were employed to examine six CICO studies that were evaluated using a group research design and that involved 146 students. Studies were coded to examine their characteristics as well as quality indicators concerning their design features. The results indicated that in group design studies, the overall effect size of CICO across student outcomes (problem behavior, appropriate behavior, social skills, and academic performance) was medium (g = 0.42). No differences in effects were found for outcome domains, Tier 1 fidelity, and implementation fidelity, but grade level was associated with statistically significant differences in effect sizes (Q = 3.95, p < .05). Elementary school students (g = 0.70) showed greater improvements than middle school students (g = 0.27). Further research is needed to examine the intervention features impacting the effects of CICO.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Studies prefixed with an asterisk (*) were included in the meta-analysis

  • Algozzine, R. F., Barrett, S., Eber, L., George, H., Horner, R. H., Lewis, T. J., Putnam, B., Swain-Bradway, J., McIntosh, K., & Sugai, G. (2019). SWPBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. Eugene, OR: OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Available from http://www.pbis.org.

  • Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics, 50, 1088–1101. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533446.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2013). Comprehensive Meta-analysis version 3. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman-Perrott, L., Burke, M. D., Zaini, S., Zhang, N., & Vannest, K. (2016). Promoting positive behavior using the good behavior game: A meta-analysis of single-case research. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18, 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715592355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. J., & Anderson, C. M. (2013). Breaks are better: A tier II social behavior intervention. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22, 348–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-013-9184-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., & Leaf, P. J. (2012). Effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems. Pediatrics, 130, e1136–e1145. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0243.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn, A. L., & Hirsch, S. E. (2017). From good intentions to great implementation. Report on Emotional & Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 17, 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn, A. L., Lane, K. L., & Hirsch, S. E. (2014). A review of tier 2 interventions conducted within multitiered models of behavioral prevention. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 22, 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426613476092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn, A. L., McDaniel, S. C., Rila, A., & Estrapala, S. (2018). A step-by-step guide to tier 2 behavioral progress monitoring. Beyond Behavior, 27, 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295618756984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., & Anderson, C. M. (2011). Check-in/check-out: A systematic evaluation and component analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-315.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Rodriguez, B. J., Anderson, C., & Barnes, A. (2013). Effects of a tier 2 intervention on classroom disruptive behavior and academic engagement. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 7, 32–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Cheney, D. A., Stage, S. A., Hawken, L. S., Lynass, L., Mielenz, C., & Waugh, M. (2009). A 2-year outcome study of the check, connect, and expect intervention for students at risk for severe behavior problems. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17, 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426609339186.

  • Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., & George, H. P. (2010). A model for statewide evaluation of a universal positive behavior support initiative. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300709340699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R., Kincaid, D., & Childs, K. E. (2007). Measuring schoolwide positive behavior support implementation: Development and validation of the benchmarks of quality. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007070090040301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crone, D. A., Hawken, L. S., & Horner, R. H. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The behavior education program. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drevon, D. D., Hixson, M. D., Wyse, R. D., & Rigney, A. M. (2019). A meta-analytic review of the evidence for check-in check-out. Psychology in the Schools, 56, 393–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuPaul, G. J., Eckert, T. L., & Vilardo, B. (2012). The effects of school-based interventions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis 1996-2010. School Psychology Review, 41, 387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eldevik, S., Hastings, R. P., Jahr, E., & Hughes, J. C. (2012). Outcomes of behavioral intervention for children with autism in mainstream pre-school settings. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42, 210–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1234-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. P., Jolivette, K., Swoszowski, N. C., & Johnson, M. L. (2012). Secondary prevention efforts at a residential facility for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: Function-based check-in, check-out. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 29, 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886571X.2012.669250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, C. R., Kwang-Sun, C. B., & George, H. P. (2016). An evaluation of group contingency interventions: The role of teacher preference. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18, 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715577663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., & Weiss, S. L. (2014). Teachers working together: How to communicate, collaborate, and facilitate positive behavior in inclusive classrooms. Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 15, 142–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Filter, K. J., McKenna, M. K., Benedict, E. A., Horner, R. H., Todd, A., & Watson, J. (2007). Check in/check out: A post-hoc evaluation of an efficient, secondary-level targeted intervention for reducing problem behaviors in schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 30, 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2007.0000.

  • Flannery, K. B., Fenning, P., Kato, M. M., & McIntosh, K. (2014). Effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports and fidelity of implementation on problem behavior in high schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 29, 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gresham, F. M., Van, M. B., & Cook, C. R. (2006). Social skills training for teaching replacement behaviors: Remediating acquisition deficits in at-risk students. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290603100402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hawken, L. S. (2006). School psychologists as leaders in the implementation of a targeted intervention: The Behavior Education Program. School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.2006.21.1.91.

  • Hawken, L. S., & Horner, R. H. (2003). Evaluation of a targeted intervention within a schoolwide system of behavior support. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 225–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawken, L. S., Sandra MacLeod, K., & Rawlings, L. (2007). Effects of the behavior education program (BEP) on office discipline referrals of elementary school students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007070090020601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hawken, L. S., O'Neill, R. E., & MacLeod, K. S. (2011). An investigation of the impact of function of problem behavior on effectiveness of the behavior education program (BEP). Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 551–574. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2011.0031.

  • Hawken, L. S., Bundock, K., Kladis, K., O'Keeffe, B., & Barrett, C. A. (2014). Systematic review of the check-in, check-out intervention for students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 635–658. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2014.0030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawken, L. S., Bundock, K., Barrett, C. A., Eber, L., Breen, K., & Phillips, D. (2015). Large-scale implementation of check-in, check-out: A descriptive study. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 30, 304–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573515601005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21, 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A. W., & Esparanza, J. (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, C. G., Marshall, K. J., & Yell, M. L. (2011). Positive behavior supports: Tier 2 interventions in middle schools. Preventing School Failure, 55, 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2010.503975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. (1995). Development of a new outlier statistic for meta-analytic data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.2.327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huizenga, H. M., Visser, I., & Dolan, C. V. (2011). Testing overall and moderator effects in random effects meta-regression. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 64, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711010X522687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgus, S. P., Fallon, L. M., & Feinberg, A. B. (2016). Function-based modification of check-in/check-out to influence escape-maintained behavior. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 32, 24–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2015.1084965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klingbeil, D. A., Dart, E. H., & Schramm, A. L. (2019). A systematic review of function-modified check-in/check-out. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21, 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300718778032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maggin, D. M., Zurheide, J., Pickett, K. C., & Baillie, S. J. (2015). A systematic evidence review of the check-in/check-out program for reducing student challenging behaviors. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715573630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maggin, D. M., Pustejovsky, J. E., & Johnson, A. H. (2017). A meta-analysis of school-based group contingency interventions for students with challenging behavior: An update. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517716900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *March, R. E., & Horner, R. H. (2002). Feasibility and contributions of functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 158–170.

  • Martens, K., & Andreen, K. (2013). School counselors’ involvement with a school-wide positive behavior support intervention: Addressing student behavior issues in a proactive and positive manner. Professional School Counseling, 16, 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X1201600504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, S. C., Houchins, D. E., & Robinson, C. (2016). The effects of check, connect, and expect on behavioral and academic growth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 24, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426615573262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *McIntosh, K., Campbell, A. L., Carter, D. R., & Rossetto Dickey, C. (2009). Differential effects of a tier two behavior intervention based on function of problem behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708319127.

  • Miller, L. M., Dufrene, B. A., Olmi, D. J., Tingstrom, D., & Filce, H. (2015a). Self-monitoring as a viable fading option in check-in/check-out. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2014.12.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, L. M., Dufrene, B. A., Sterling, H. E., Olmi, D. J., & Bachmayer, E. (2015b). The effects of check-in/check-out on problem behavior and academic engagement in elementary school students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300713517141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, B. S., Stormont, M., & Gage, N. A. (2011). Tier two interventions implemented within the context of a tiered prevention framework. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291103600404\.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, B. S., Adamson, R., & McKenna, J. W. (2017). Curbing our enthusiasm: An analysis of the check-in/check-out literature using the council for exceptional children’s evidence-based practice standards. Behavior Modification, 41, 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445516675273.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mong, M. D., Johnson, K. N., & Mong, K. W. (2011). Effects of check-in/check-out on behavioral indices and mathematics generalization. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 225–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, C., & Kamphaus, R. (2004). Behavior assessment system for children-second edition (BASC-2). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, B. J., Campbell, A., Fairbanks Falcon, S., & Borgmeier, C. (2015). Examination of critical features and lessons learned for implementation of a tier 2 intervention system for social behavior. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25, 224–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2014.929953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, M. I., Smith, T. N., Naquin, G. M., Morgan-D’atrio, C., & Dellinger, A. B. (2014). Assessing the implementation fidelity of check-in check-out behavioral interventions in elementary and middle schools. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 58, 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2012.755667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, T. M., Alter, P. J., Rosenberg, M., & Borgmeier, C. (2010). Decision-making in secondary and tertiary interventions of school-wide systems of positive behavior support. Education and Treatment of Children, 33, 513–535. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2010.0003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Simonsen, B., Myers, D., & Briere III, D. E. (2011). Comparing a behavioral check-in/check-out (CICO) intervention to standard practice in an urban middle school setting using an experimental group design. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13, 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300709359026.

  • Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., & Todd, A. W. (2000). PBIS SelfAssessment survey 2.0. Eugene, OR: Educational and Community Supports Available from http://www.pbisapps.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugai, G., Lewis-Palmer, T. L., Todd, A. W., & Horner, R. H. (2001). School-wide evaluation tool (SET). Eugene, OR: Educational and community supports. Available from http://www.pbis.org.

  • Sugai, G., Horner, R., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Rossetto Dickey, C. (2014a). PBIS team implementation checklist (TIC 3.1). Eugene, OR: Educational and Community Supports Available from http://www.pbisapps.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugai, G., Simonsen, B., Bradshaw, C., Horner, R., & Lewis, T. J. (2014b). Delivering high quality school-wide positive behavior support. In J. McLeskey, N. L. Waldron, F. Spooner, & B. Algozzine (Eds.), Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice (pp. 306–321). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swoszowski, N. C., McDaniel, S. C., Jolivette, K., & Melius, P. (2013). 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. Education and Treatment of Children, 36, 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swoszowski, N. C., Evanovich, L. L., Ennis, R. P., & Jolivette, K. (2017). Evaluating implementation of check in/check out in alternative educational settings: Stakeholder perspectives. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 34, 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886571X.2017.1283283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2012). Bullying prevention programs: The importance of peer intervention, disciplinary methods and age variations. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 8, 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-012-9161-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virués-Ortega, J. (2010). Applied behavior analytic intervention for autism in early childhood: Meta-analysis, meta-regression and dose–response meta-analysis of multiple outcomes. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.01.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, H. M., Kavanagh, K., Stiller, B., Golly, A., Severson, H. H., & Feil, E. G. (1998). First step to success: An early intervention approach for preventing school antisocial behavior. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 6, 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/106342669800600201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, V. L., Chung, Y. C., & Bonnet, L. K. (2018). Function-based intervention in inclusive school settings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20, 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300717718350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. A., Rich, S. E., Gann, C. J., Duhon, G. J., & Kellen, S. S. (2019). Can less be more for students at-risk for emotional and behavioral disorders: Evaluating components of check-in/check-out. Education and Treatment of Children, 42, 469–488. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2019.0022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • What Works Clearinghouse. (2020). Standards handbook (version 4.01). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.

  • White, W. A. (1988). A meta-analysis of the effects of direct instruction in special education. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 364–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, K., Pyle, D., Charlton, C. T., Sabey, C. V., Lund, E. M., & Ross, S. W. (2016). A systematic review of the empirical support for check-in check-out. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18, 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715595957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Secondary Special Education, College of Education, Jeonju University, 303 Cheonjam-ro, Jeonbuk, Wansan-gu, 55069, South Korea

    Eun-Young Park

  2. Department of Child and Family Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA

    Kwang-Sun Cho Blair

Authors
  1. Eun-Young Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kwang-Sun Cho Blair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eun-Young Park.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, EY., Blair, KS.C. Check-in/Check-out Implementation in Schools: a Meta-Analysis of Group Design Studies. Educ. Treat. Child. 43, 361–375 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-020-00030-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-020-00030-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation