Implementation of the Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model for Elementary School Students Needing Intensive Behavior Intervention.

Three school teams tried the Prevent-Teach-Reinforce (PTR) plan with elementary students who had big behavior needs. Each team had a teacher, a counselor, and a parent. They met weekly, filled out PTR worksheets, and used the steps in class.

The researchers watched each student during reading and math. They counted disruptive acts and on-task moments. The design was a multiple baseline across kids, so teams started PTR at different times.

Disruptive behavior dropped for every student once PTR began. On-task behavior rose at the same time. The gains held when the team later watched the students in a new setting.

Parents and teachers said the plan was easy to follow and fit the school day.

The results extend Kang et al. (2021), who showed the same kind of PBIS package works for an older student with intellectual disabilities. Now we know the model also helps younger kids with mixed needs.

Reiss et al. (1993) was an early proof that teachers can run FBA and FCT alone. PTR wraps those same pieces into one team form, so it builds on that foundation rather than replaces it.

Cervi et al. (2024) used a single-case IISCA-driven plan for an adolescent with autism. Both studies put FCT in class and train staff with BST, showing the method works across ages and designs.

You can hand the PTR worksheet to any school team and get the same tidy results. No extra funding or PhD needed. Try starting with one tough student, run the one-page FBA, pick a teach and a reinforce step, then meet for ten minutes each week. If it works for these three kids, it can work for yours.