Children with ADHD are likely to exhibit behavioral difficulties in the classroom that inhibit learning (Daley \& Birchwood, 2010; DuPaul \& Stoner, 2003; Fabiano et al., 2006; Friedman \& Pfiffner, 2020; Loe \& Feldman, 2007; Raggi \& Chronis, 2006; Rapport, Chung, Shore, \& Isaacs, 2001). These issues make addressing ADHD an area in need of continuous and contemporary support, particularly during early elementary school (Bitsko et al., 2022), in order to prevent the worsening, life-long issues that individuals with ADHD may confront throughout the lifespan. The present application focuses on supports and interventions for students in elementary school, as that is where initial identification and intervention typically occurs (Visser et al., 2014). With the advent of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) within school settings, a systematic approach to the delivery of universal, targeted, and indicated school mental health and educational supports may be enhanced. The most intensive tier of the MTSS (i.e., Tier 3) is currently the most under-developed. The creation of a positive behavioral support classroom through Tier 3 of the MTSS will assist teachers in improving the positive behavioral support provided to the student with ADHD. Thus, the present investigation will be situated within everyday school procedures for supporting a student with behaviors consistent with ADHD. Participants will be 288 elementary school children recruited from participating school districts within the existing school-based problem solving teams. We will work with grades kindergarten to sixth. Referred children will then all receive a lead-in, Tier 2 intervention to include a daily report card (DRC) intervention. Those who continue to need additional behavior supports in the Spring -- Tier 3 intervention -- will be allocated through random assignment to School as Usual or Academic/Behavior Competency (ACE) classroom in a Hybrid Type 1 design. The ACE classroom is an approach based on decades of research in summer treatment program classrooms (Fabiano et al., 2007; Pelham et al., 2025). Aim 1 evaluates the outcomes of the approach relative to school as usual. Aim 2 evaluates the implementation of the approach and explores components of user implementation that promote fidelity. Aim 3 explores moderators of the intervention outcomes (e.g., comorbid oppositional/aggressive behavior or learning disabilities).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
544
Children assigned to ACE will enroll in a classroom with a teacher trained to implement contingency management components throughout the school year.
This arm will include school as usual procedures for students.
Count of Child rule violations
Observation of frequency of rule violations
Time frame: Baseline, End of School year 1, Beginning of School year 2, Middle of School year 2, End of School year 2
IOWA Connors Rating Scale
Total Score on Inattentive/Overactive Factor
Time frame: Baseline, End of School year 1, Beginning of School year 2, Middle of School year 2, End of School year 2
Impairment Rating Scale
Time frame: Baseline, End of School year 1, Beginning of School year 2, Middle of School year 2, End of School year 2
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.