EVALUATION OF THE CLASS PASS INTERVENTION FOR TYPICALLY DEVELOPING STUDENTS WITH HYPOTHESIZED ESCAPE‐MOTIVATED DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the Class Pass Intervention (CPI) as a secondary intervention for typically developing students with escape‐motivated disruptive classroom behavior. The CPI consists of providing students with passes that they can use to appropriately request a break from an academic task to engage in a preferred activity for preset amount of time. In addition, students are incentivized to not use the class passes by continuing to engage in the academic task and instead exchanging them for a preferred item or activity. Using an experimental single‐case withdrawal design with replication through a concurrent multiple‐baseline across‐participants design, the CPI was shown to reduce disruptive behavior and increase academic engagement in three students who engaged in hypothesized escape‐motivated behavior. Results also revealed that the effects of the CPI were maintained at a two‐week follow‐up probe and consumers found it to be acceptable. The limitations and implications of the findings for future research on effective classroom‐based interventions are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".