1) The document discusses different types of incentive/intervention processes including incentive programs, peer roles, and educative time-out processes. 2) Within educative time-out processes, there are inclusion, exclusion, seclusion, and restraint time-out options with varying levels of removal from classroom activities and stimuli. 3) Research shows that time-out can effectively decrease unwanted behaviors when implemented consistently and as an educative rather than punitive approach, though some argue it risks being misused or overused without proper training.

1. Explaining an Incentive or
Intervention Process
Jennifer Gawla

2. Types of Incentive/Intervention Process
Incentive program- using a rewards/consequences system individually or as a group
contingency
Peer roles in intervention programs- the roles peers play in reducing inappropriate behavior of
students
Educative time-out process- removing the student from negative trigger that is evoking the
unwanted behavior

3. Educative Time-Out
Process
 Inclusion time-out: This least restrictive option (the
student is allowed to stay in the setting but has a
“time-out” of the activity, use of manipulatives, or
must earn the agreed upon expectation.
 Exclusion time-out: The student is removed from the
classroom instruction or the classroom in totality.
 Seclusion time-out: The student is completely
removed from the setting and isolated for a certain
period of time while supervised.
 Restrained time-out: This most restrictive option
requires trained staff to physically “time-out” the
student from the stimuli until it is safe for the student
to rejoin.
This process has an intention of
removing the student “from the given
stimuli that may be increasing the issue
in the learning environment” (Hamlett,
2018, module 4, slide 3).

4. What does research say about this
process?
 Research shows that “consistently and systemically reinforcing a desirable behavior
maintains or increases it” (Ryan, Sanders, Katsiyannis, & Yell, 2007, p. 60).
 As educators, we know this does not always work. When needing to decrease
unwanted/challenging behaviors, “time-out has been used by teachers to address a
broad range of maladaptive behaviors across a variety of educational placements”
(Ryan, Sanders, Katsiyannis, & Yell, 2007, p. 60).
 According to Hamlett, “For time-out interventions to be effective, the target behavior
must first be acknowledged by both the student and the teacher. The teacher then needs
to reduce the student’s access to the stimuli for a period of time” (2018, module 4, slide 3).

5. Inclusion time-out
 Planned ignoring- “systemic withdrawal of social attention for a predetermined time period upon the onset of mild levels of
problem behavior” (Ryan, Sanders, Katsiyannis, & Yell, 2007, p. 61).
1. praising the appropriate behavior and ignoring the negative
2. student is still able to receive instruction in the classroom setting
 Withdrawal of materials- items removed from student while inappropriate behavior is being displayed
1. Removal of items for a predetermined amount of time
2. Removal of adult/teacher attention
 Contingent observation- the student displaying inappropriate behavior is required to “move to another location in the class
without participating or interacting in any way for a predetermined period of time” (Ryan et al., 2007, p. 61).
1. Student can observe classroom and instruction
2. Student can observe reinforcements happening in the classroom
 Time-out ribbon- form of inclusion- The student wears a ribbon while the appropriate behavior is being displayed. If unwanted
behavior is exhibited, the ribbon, and the access to reinforcement is removed as well for a period of time.
1. No removal from instruction
2. Student can observe peers acting appropriately
3. Teacher can view who is eligible for reinforcement
4. Ribbon allows for students to see when they are eligible for reinforcement or when they are in the time-out process

6. Exclusion time-out
 The teacher removes the student from the reinforcement, generally the classroom setting.
 Repositioned away from his/her peers
 Four characteristics of exclusion time-out according to Ryan et al. :
1. Requires student removal from instructional activities
2. No requirement of student observation towards others
3. Does not require the student to sit in a designated time-out room
4. Student is in the classroom but facing the wall, partitioned from the class or in another
class

7. Seclusion (isolation) time-out
 Student is removed from the stimuli reinforcement completely and brought to a different
room for a “cool down” until the time-out period is served.
 The student is supervised but completely away from peers and others.
 Examples of areas might be office, counselor’s office, gymnasium, or empty teacher’s
classroom.

8. Restraint time-out
 Most restrictive
 Trained personnel physically restrain the student who is posing immediate harm to
themselves or someone around them.
 It is important to have into place by the school for professionals who are trained,
especially so it is not overused. This notion comes from Freeman and Sugai (2013) “In
general and across states, concern about student safety has increased, and schools are
expected to reduce or eliminate the use of seclusion and restraint procedures, except as
a last resort, emergency procedure.

9. Ineffective Strategies?
Arguments
 Behaviorists theorize that time-out processes
are “behavior reduction procedures or
forms of punishments” where students are
“denied access to all opportunities for
reinforcement contingent upon their
displaying appropriate behavior” ((Ryan,
Sanders, Katsiyannis, & Yell, 2007, p. 60).
 Hamlett suggests that teachers do not how
to effectively utilize time-out processes but
rather “using a punishment approach to
time-out rather than an educative
approach” (2018, module 4, slide 3).
Arguments cont.
 Less effective processes if the student does not
want to participate in classroom activities to
begin with.
 (Exclusion) Being inadvertently reinforcements by
the time-outs within the classroom.
 New research has shown “Disabled students in
wealthy, less diverse districts are twice as likely as
their low-income peers to be restrained or placed
in isolation in school” (DeNisco, 2014, p.34).
 This shows that teachers in affluent districts are
more readily to remove behavioral problem
students from their classrooms.

10. Summary of Colleague Feedback
Pros
 When used effectively and consistently, it
can decrease unwanted behaviors and
increase appropriate behaviors
 Does not seem difficult
 Team is willing to learn how to develop
and implement it
Cons
 Lack of training on how to implement it
effectively
 Need a system of accountability
 Currently overused by some grade level
teams

11. Why use it?
 As stated, research has proven that this
method can significantly decrease
unwanted behaviors while increasing
appropriate behaviors.
 Grade level teams should implement
together as Hamlett taught consistency is
imperative to reaching an effective time-
out process (2018, module 4, slide 3).
 Students will be familiar with the process.
 Could positively effect the behavior of
students who have not responded to
other protocols such as incentive or
contingency plans.

12. Blog Series
 Module 4 Blog, entitled “Utilizing an Educative Time-Out Intervention” available at:
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7757438770840190627#allposts

13. References
 Freeman, J., & Sugai, G. (2013). Recent changes in state policies and legislation regarding
restraint or seclusion. Exceptional Children, 79(4), 427-438.
 DeNisco, A. (2014). Wealthy schools restrain, isolate more students. District Administration,
50(3), 34-35.
 Hamlett, T. (2018). Incentives, peers, and the educative time-out process: Module 4
(slides1-3) American College of Education. Retrieved from
http://ace.instructure.com/course/1580955/files/8885012?module item id=20336187
 Ryan, J. B., Sanders, S., Katsiyannis, A., & Yell, M. L. (2007). Using time-out effectively in the
classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(4), 60-67.