The treatment of severe behavior problems in school settings using a technical assistance model.

Rojahn et al. (1994) asked if school teams could run their own functional analyses and reinforcement plans. They coached teachers, aides, and counselors in several schools. The team visited each site a few times, then stepped back.

Over 18 months the schools kept data on severe problem behavior. No one from the research team was there every day.

Problem behavior dropped and stayed low. The school teams kept using the plans long after the coaches left.

The study showed that brief, on-site technical help is enough for staff to run solid FBA and reinforcement with good fidelity.

Carr et al. (1985) first showed that teaching kids to ask for what they want cuts aggression and self-injury. Rojahn et al. (1994) moved that same logic into public schools.

Slaton et al. (2024) now shows even bigger, longer-lasting effects. They used the same FBA-plus-FCT package and hit near-zero behavior a full year later. The 2024 study sharpens the 1994 model by adding systematic schedule thinning.

Taylor et al. (2018) extends the idea to students with autism. One middle-schooler returned to general ed after a school-wide FCT plan, proving the model works for kids with developmental disabilities too.

You do not need to hover in the classroom forever. Give the team a concise FBA, teach them to reinforce replacement behavior, then check in monthly. The 1994 paper proves this light-touch model still works 18 months later. Pair it with later schedule-thinning tactics and you get even stronger, lasting change.