English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Second-generation intervention research requires methods for overcoming challenges to understanding complex learning ecologies and interactions of students. Eco-behavioral assessments (EBAs) are one solution to past intervention research challenges. EBAs record the effects of ecological variables in students' behavior and daily interactions. The utility of EBAs in second-generation research has increased substantially. Numerous EBAs now exist for use with all ages of learners and provide a valid, reliable, and cost effective method for intervention research. This paper examines 18 EBAs as well as software systems designed to support and enhance the use of EBAs. The examination serves as a comprehensive resource to better understand how EBAs can be used in answering complex questions about students' learning and for advancing second-generation research. Keywords: Eco-behavioral assessment, Observational systems  The behaviors of students and the environments in which they participate are composed of highly complex events and interactions. Early research sought to answer broad questions regarding the efficacy of intervention efforts on global outcomes (e.g., Does early intervention lead to improved developmental outcomes? Does a particular instructional approach increase math productivity and accuracy?). In essence, the focus of first-generation intervention research in special education was on whether behavior or performance of students changed when an intervention was implemented. The input-output orientation of this collective body of knowledge has provided the field with a wealth of information regarding salient features of instruction (e.g., materials, engagement, and reinforcement) and its impact on student behavior and/or performance (Greenwood & Carta, 1987; Greenwood, Terry, & Walker, 1994). In fact, because of this research, we can identify empirically based practices that improve the outcomes of students with disabilities (e.g., Cook & Schirmer, 2003; Forness, Kavale, Blum, & Lloyd, 1997). Although first-generation research has identified effective practices, widespread implementation of those practices continues to present challenges to the field (e.g., Carnine, 1997; Cook & Schirmer, 2003; Espin & Deno, 2000; Stone, 1998). The resulting research-to-practice gap has been the topic of discussion at federal, state, and local levels (e.g., No Child Left Behind Act) and reasons for it have been examined (e.g., Gersten & Dimino, 2001; Greenwood 2001). One consistent theme from the literature on implementing research-based practices for students with disabilities is the necessity to adapt interventions to address the individual needs, teaching strengths, and available resources within various learning environments (e.g., Abbott, Walton, Tapia, & Greenwood, 1999; Boudah, Logan, & Greenwood, 2001; Gersten & Dimino, 2001; Gersten, Vaughn, Deshler, & Schiller, 1997). In other words, practitioners are not implementing particular practices because they do not always fit into their day-to-day routine and researchers are not consistently making it clear how the practices can be implemented. Second-generation research has expanded its focus and aims to not only understand the outcomes related to intervention, but also to understand the features or elements of complex events and interactions as they occur within the context of the learning environment. By investigating the dynamic aspects and events surrounding interventions, the relationships among environmental variables and student behavior and performance can be assessed (Odom, Favazza, Brown, & Horn, 2000). Such assessments can help determine which elements of particular interventions are most effective and how elements may affect different students under different circumstances (e.g., Guralnick, 1997; NAEYC and NAECS/SDE, 2003). Learning environments are multifaceted, vibrant settings where various and interrelated features may affect students' opportunities to engage and learn. …

Examination of eco-behavioral assessments designed for understanding complex behaviors and environments.