Description:
A structured interview is a planned conversation used to gather information from people who know the student and understand the situations in which the target behavior occurs. Interviews may include teachers, support staff, family members, the student, and other relevant individuals. Questions focus on the behavior's observable characteristics, the contexts in which it occurs, events that may precede it, typical responses, and conditions associated with more successful participation.
Within a Tier 3 FBA, structured interviews help the team develop an initial understanding of the behavior and identify patterns to explore through direct observation and additional data collection. Interviews provide important perspectives and context, but interview responses alone should not be treated as confirmation of the behavior's function.
Importance:
Structured interviews help teams build a more complete understanding of student behavior by drawing on the knowledge and experiences of multiple people. They can help identify patterns that may not be apparent in a single classroom observation, recognize student strengths and effective supports, and prioritize when and where direct data collection is most useful.
Critical Features:
- Consistent, purposeful questions: Use a common set of questions while allowing follow-up when clarification is needed.
- Observable descriptions: Ask what the student does and what occurs around the behavior, rather than relying on labels such as “defiant” or “attention-seeking.”
- Multiple perspectives: Gather input from people who know the student across relevant settings and routines.
- Student and family voice: Seek perspectives in accessible, respectful ways and consider communication, cultural, linguistic, and contextual factors.
- Strengths and successful conditions: Ask when the student is successful, what supports help, and what the student communicates or does instead.
- Follow-up with observation: Use interview information to guide direct observation and data collection.
Implementation Tips:
- Define the behavior of concern before beginning interviews so respondents are discussing the same observable actions.
- Ask about specific examples: “What happened immediately before the behavior?” and “What usually happened afterward?”
- Explore when the behavior is more likely and less likely to occur, including differences in tasks, people, settings, transitions, and levels of support.
- Ask about skills the student may need, such as communication, task completion, self-regulation, or requesting help or a break.
- Include questions about successful routines and conditions that support engagement.
- Record responses objectively, noting similarities and differences across respondents.
- Use the interview findings to select observation times and contexts; confirm or revise initial ideas using direct data.
Websites for Additional Information:
Description:
Data collection is the systematic gathering of information about a student's behavior and the conditions surrounding it. In a Tier 3 FBA, teams combine relevant existing information with direct observations to identify patterns across activities, settings, and routines. Data may include the frequency, duration, latency, or intensity of a behavior, as well as antecedent-behavior-consequence (ABC) information that documents what happens before, during, and after the behavior.
Effective data collection is guided by a clear definition of the target behavior and a specific assessment question. The team selects methods that fit the behavior and context, collects information during representative routines, and compares findings across sources. Data collection helps the team move from initial concerns or assumptions toward a testable hypothesis about the conditions associated with the behavior and its likely function.
Importance:
Systematic data collection helps teams identify patterns that may be missed through memory, anecdotal reports, or office discipline referrals alone. It supports more accurate hypothesis development, helps teams distinguish between different possible explanations, and provides a baseline for evaluating whether individualized supports are effective.
Critical Features:
- Operational definition: Describe the behavior in clear, observable, measurable terms.
- Appropriate measurement: Select frequency, duration, latency, interval recording, or another method based on the behavior and assessment question.
- Antecedent-behavior-consequence information: Record relevant context, the behavior itself, and what follows.
- Representative observations: Include meaningful routines and contexts in which the behavior is more and less likely to occur.
- Consistency and accuracy: Establish clear recording procedures and, when feasible, check agreement between observers.
- Multiple data sources: Consider interviews, records, direct observations, student and family input, and relevant academic or environmental information.
- Ethical, practical collection: Protect student privacy and ensure data collection does not unnecessarily disrupt instruction or compromise safety.
Implementation Tips:
- Define exactly what will be counted or measured and distinguish the target behavior from related behaviors.
- Select a measurement method that answers the team's question. For example, use frequency for discrete events, duration for behavior that continues over time, and latency to measure time from a cue or event to the behavior's onset.
- Use ABC recording to document the context, observable behavior, and immediate outcome. Record what actually happened rather than interpreting motives.
- Identify who will collect data, when and where observations will occur, and how information will be recorded.
- Observe across relevant conditions, including routines where the behavior occurs less often, to help identify differences in context and support.
- Summarize patterns instead of relying on isolated incidents. Examine whether the behavior is associated with particular demands, transitions, interactions, or consequences.
Websites for Additional Information
:
Description:
A hypothesis statement summarizes the team's best evidence-informed explanation of the conditions associated with a student's behavior and the outcome the behavior may produce. Developed after reviewing interview information, direct observations, and other relevant data, the statement connects the context, antecedents, observable behavior, consequences, and likely function.
A hypothesis statement is a working explanation, not a confirmed fact about a student's intentions. At Tier 3, it guides the development of individualized, function-based supports by helping the team identify what to prevent, what skills to teach, and what environmental changes or responses may improve student outcomes. The team should revisit the hypothesis when new information or intervention data do not support it.
Importance:
A clear, data-informed hypothesis helps teams move from responding to behavior after it occurs to proactively addressing the conditions that contribute to it. When the hypothesis accurately reflects observed patterns, teams are better positioned to select interventions that meet the student's needs, teach appropriate replacement skills, and monitor whether supports are working.
Critical Features:
- Grounded in evidence: Draws on interview information, direct observation, and other relevant data rather than assumptions.
- Specific context: Identifies the routines, settings, tasks, or conditions in which the behavior is more likely.
- Observable behavior: Uses the team's operational definition of the target behavior.
- Antecedents and consequences: Describes what commonly occurs before the behavior and what follows it.
- Likely function: Identifies the outcome the behavior may produce, such as attention, access to an item or activity, escape or avoidance, or automatic/sensory reinforcement.
- Relevant setting events: Includes conditions that may make the behavior more likely, when supported by data.
- Testable explanation: Can be examined as the team implements supports and reviews student response.
- Connection to intervention: Directly informs prevention strategies, replacement-skill instruction, reinforcement, and adult responses.
Implementation Tips:
- Review the structured interview results, direct observation records, ABC data, and other relevant information together.
- Look for recurring patterns across settings, people, tasks, and times of day. Consider whether academic, communication, social, environmental, or other skill needs may be contributing.
- Distinguish observable evidence from interpretations. For example, “left the assigned area after an independent writing task was presented” is more useful than “tried to avoid work.”
- Use a consistent template to summarize the pattern:
During [context], when [antecedent] occurs, the student [observable behavior], which is typically followed by [consequence]. It is hypothesized that the behavior may serve to [likely function]. The behavior is more likely when [relevant setting event or condition], if supported by the data.
- Compare the proposed explanation with all available evidence. If interviews and observations suggest different patterns, investigate the differences rather than assuming one source is correct.
- Use the hypothesis to select function-matched support strategies. For example, if data suggest the behavior helps the student escape difficult tasks, consider appropriate task adjustments, explicit help-seeking or break-request skills, and reinforcement for using those skills.
- Monitor the student's response to the resulting support plan. If the behavior does not improve despite adequate implementation, reassess the hypothesis, intervention match, and other contributing factors.
Websites for Additional Information: