The School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET)

By R. Horner, Anne W. Todd, T. Lewis-Palmer, L. Irvin, G. Sugai, J. B. Boland. 2004

632 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Developmental and Educational Psychology, General Health Professions

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e82ec9ecca17958023b003da47e6196e2b591812

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In General Health Professions

Citations in the corpus

A meta‐analysis of school‐wide positive behavior support: An exploratory study using single‐case synthesis (2012, background): “The two most common systems for collecting ongoing data related to SWPBS implementation include the School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET; Horner et al., 2004) and the School-Wide Information System (Educational and Community Supports, 2007).”
Differential Effects of a Tier Two Behavior Intervention Based on Function of Problem Behavior (2009, methodology): “…participating in the study had a tier one SWPBS system in place at above 80% mean implementation, measured by the School-wide Evaluation Tool (Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, Todd, & Horner, 2001), a fidelity of implementation measure with evidence of sufficient validity and reliability (Horner et al., 2004).”
Comparing a Behavioral Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) Intervention to Standard Practice in an Urban Middle School Setting Using an Experimental Group Design (2011, background): “…was implementing the primary (universal) tier of SWPBS with fidelity (i.e., they met 98% of fidelity criteria on the Schoolwide Evaluation Tool [Horner et al., 2004] the year prior to the study and 100% the year of the study), (b) the school principal requested support to implement secondary…”
Importance, Usage, and Preparedness to Implement Evidence-based Practices for Students with Emotional Disabilities: A Comparison of Knowledge and Skills of Special Education and General Education Teachers (2012, methodology): “A criterion score of 80% was chosen on the basis of research on effective implementation of multi-tiers of school-based interventions (Bradshaw, Debnam, Koth, & Leaf, 2009; Horner et al., 2004).”
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in New Hampshire (2008, neutral): “Considered the gold standard of SWPBIS implementation, schools with SET scores of 80% or better on the Average of Features and 80% or better on the Expectations Taught Feature are considered to be implementing an effective schoolwide discipline system (Horner et al., 2004).”
The Use of Reading and Behavior Screening Measures to Predict Nonresponse to School-Wide Positive Behavior Support: A Longitudinal Analysis (2006, methodology): “Further, the scale has been demonstrated to be reasonably sensitive to the effects of SWPBS implementation (Horner et al., 2004).”
Core Implementation Components (2009, background): “…measures, consumer outcomes) assess key aspects of the overall performance of the organization and provide data to support decision making to assure continuing implementation of the core intervention components over time (e.g., Horner et al., 2004; Huber et al., 2003; Khatri & Frieden, 2002).”
Individualized Supports for Students with Problem Behaviors: Designing Positive Behavior Plans (2005, background): “The reliability and validity of the SET have been examined and fodnd acceptable (Horner et al., 2004).”
Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams: Effects of Group Contingency Programs in Urban Classrooms (2011, background): “The score for universal PBS implementation for School 1 on the Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET, Horner et al., 2004) was 92%.”
Promoting Cultural Responsivity and Student Engagement Through Double Check Coaching of Classroom Teachers: An Efficacy Study (2018, methodology): “All 12 schools had been previously trained in the SW-PBIS (Sugai & Horner, 2002, 2006) model and were implementing the Tier 1 SW-PBIS supports with high fidelity according to the School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET; Horner et al., 2004).”
A Randomized, Wait-List Controlled Effectiveness Trial Assessing School-Wide Positive Behavior Support in Elementary Schools (2009, methodology): “The internal consistency of the SET has been documented with an alpha of .96, with test–retest reliability reported at .97, construct validity compared with Effective Behavior Support Self Assessment Survey r = .75, and interscorer agreement of .99 (Horner et al., 2004).”
School-Wide Positive Behavior Support and Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders: Implications for Prevention, Identification and Intervention (2010, background): “…implement fewer at the preschool and elementary level has documented an increase in educator use of effective behavioral support strategies (e.g., Horner et al., 2004) that will hopefully alter the commonly observed coercive pattern between students with EBD and their teachers in later school…”