Skip to main content
. 2012 Nov;130(5):e1136–e1145. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-0243

TABLE 2.

HLM Results for 3-Level Model Examining the Effect of SWPBIS on Disruptive Behaviors

Disruptive Behaviora Coefficient SE t Ratio P Value
Intercept
 Intercept 1.5811 0.0268 59.04 <.001
 School-level variables
  Mobility 0.0027 0.0028 0.94 NS
  Student/teacher ratio −0.0035 0.0058 −0.60 NS
  Faculty turnover 0.0027 0.0031 0.87 NS
  Enrollment 0.0031 0.0141 0.22 NS
 Student-level variables
  Special education status 0.1561 0.0245 6.37 <.001
  Ethnicity (black) 0.2381 0.0329 7.25 <.001
  Grade cohort −0.0944 0.0425 −2.22 NS
  FARMS 0.1177 0.0181 6.52 <.001
  Gender 0.2567 0.0147 17.42 <.001
Slope (Growth)
 Intercept 0.0237 0.0099 2.39 <.05
 School-level variables
  SWPBIS intervention −0.0202 0.0091 −2.23 <.05
  Mobility 0.0006 0.0007 0.85 NS
  Student/teacher ratio 0.0037 0.0015 2.49 <.05
  Faculty turnover 0.0011 0.0012 0.90 NS
  Enrollment −0.0080 0.0041 −1.97 NS
 Student-level variables
  Special education status −0.0012 0.0069 −0.18 NS
  Ethnicity (black) 0.0292 0.0054 5.37 <.001
  Grade cohort 0.0297 0.0137 2.17 <.05
  FARMS 0.0191 0.0051 3.76 <.001
  Gender 0.0221 0.0057 3.91 <.01
Post hoc cross-level interactions
 Grade cohort × SWPBIS −0.0205 0.0151 −1.35 NS
 Gender × SWPBIS 0.0099 0.0104 0.96 NS
 Special education status × SWPIS −0.0002 0.0118 −0.020 NS
Random Effect Variance Component χ2 P Value
Level 1 0.2918
Level 2 0.3026 45753.2 <.001
Level 3 time/slope 0.0023 220.8 <.001

Akaike information criterion = 97001.1; Bayesian information criterion = 96916.7. N = 12 344; SWPBIS was coded 1 (intervention) or 0 (comparison). FARMS indicates free or reduced-price meals status (1 = received FARMS, 0 = did not receive). Gender was coded 1 (male), 0 (female). Ethnicity was coded 1(black), 0 (all others). Grade cohort indicates the grade the youth was in when the trial began, coded 1 (kindergarten), 0 (grades 1 or 2). Special education indicates child receives special education services (coded 1 for yes, 0 for no).

a

Results presented are from the model that did not include the post hoc interactions. The intraclass correlation for disruptive behavior was 0.05.