What Challenges Do Schools Face in Addressing Their Education Mission?
The mission of schools is to maximize opportunities for students to achieve three primary and inter-related expectations that enable participation, contributions, and success in schools and larger communities:
- Academic Skill Competence,
- Social Skill Competence, and
- Lifestyle skills competence.
Achieving these expectations, however, is hampered by many competing social and behavioral factors. Current data suggest that while extreme violence is stabilizing (and historically low) the rate of disruptive problem behavior is escalating (U.S. Surgeon General, 2000). The single most common request for assistance from teachers is related to behavior and classroom management (Elam, Rose, & Gallup, 1999).
Schools struggle with addressing problem behavior for a variety of reasons:
- Students are more different from each other than similar.
- Multiple initiatives compete and overlap.
- School climates are reactive and controlling.
- School organizational structures and processes are inefficient and ineffective.
- Public demand is high for greater academic accountability and achievement.
- Occurrences of antisocial behavior in school (e.g., aggression, substance use, dropping out, attendance, and insubordination/noncompliance) are more severe and complex.
- Limited capacity exists to educate students with disabilities.
- Media that portrays role models are violent and antisocial.
School attempts to respond to these challenges often result in an over-reliance on the use of aversive and exclusionary consequences. For example, teachers respond to student displays of chronic problem behavior by increasing their use of verbal reprimands, exclusionary consequences (e.g., in school detention and out-of-school suspensions), and loss of privileges. If student behavior does not improve, school systems increase their reactive responses by establishing zero tolerance policies, increasing surveillance, posting security personnel, and excluding students from school.
This over-reliance on reactive management practices is a predictable outcome because teachers, parents, and administrators experience immediate reductions or removals of the problem behavior when they use strong aversive consequences. Having experienced reductions and relief from student problem behavior, they are more likely to use reactive management practices when future student problem behavior occurs, which can be described from a classic negative reinforcement perspective. Unfortunately, these reductions are temporary and problem behaviors typically reoccur, sometimes at higher rates and more intensive levels. Justification for the increased use of reactive management strategies is based on the erroneous assumption that the student is "inherently bad," will "learn a ‘better way’ of behaving next time," and will "never again" engage in the problem behavior.
Although the use of aversive consequences can inhibit the occurrence of problem behavior in students who already are relatively successful at school, these procedures tend to be the least effective for students with the most severe problem behaviors. In addition, a number of negative side effects are associated with the exclusive use of reactive approaches to discipline (Shores, Jack, Gunter, Ellis, DeBriere & Wehby, 1993; Sugai & Horner, 1999; Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994; Tolan & Guerra, 1994):
- A punishing climate can be a setting event for problem behaviors (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994).
- A school climate relying on punishing consequences can provoke problem behaviors (Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994), for example, increases in antisocial behavior, breakdown of student-teacher relations, degradation of school/social climate, and/ordecreases in academic achievement.
The science of human behavior has taught us that students are not "born with bad behavior," and that they do not learn better ways of behaving when presented aversive consequences for their problem behaviors (Alberto & Troutman, 2001; Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1994; Walker et al., 1996). In addition, successfully addressing problem behavior requires an increased emphasis on proactive approaches in which expected and more socially acceptable behaviors are directly taught, regularly practiced in the natural environment and followed by frequent positive reinforcement.
What is Needed to Address These Challenges?
To shift from a reactive and aversive approach to managing problem behavior to one that is preventive and positive, schools must
- Work for and with all students, since every child entering school needs behavior support.
- Give priority to empirically validated procedures and systems that have demonstrated effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance.
- Integrate academic and behavioral success for all students.
- Emphasize prevention in establishing and maintaining safe and supportive school climates.
- Expand the use of effective practices and systems to district, county, regional, and state levels.
- Increase collaboration among multiple community support systems (i.e., education, juvenile justice, community mental health, family, and medical).
- Build a school environment where team building and problem solving skills are expected, taught, and reinforced.
What is School-wide Positive Behavior Support?
School-wide Positive behavior support (SW-PBS) is comprised of a broad range of systemic and individualized strategies for achieving important social and learning outcomes while preventing problem behavior with all students. SW-PBS is not a specific "model" but a compilation of effective practices, interventions, and systems change strategies that have a long history of empirical support and development and individually have been demonstrated to be empirically effective and efficient. In addition, SW-PBS has relevant applications to educating all students in schools, not just students with disabilities.
SW-PBS is the integration of four elements
- Operationally defined and valued outcomes,
- Behavioral and biomedical science,
- Research-validated practices, and
- Systems change to both enhance the broad quality with which all students are living/learning and reduce problem behaviors.
First, SW-PBS emphasizes operationally defined and valued outcomes for all students. Specified academic and social behavior outcome indicators are linked to annual school improvement objectives, local and state initiative priorities, and individual academic goals and objectives. Data are used to describe, choose, and evaluate goals/outcomes. Valued outcomes include increases in quality of life as defined by a school’s and/or individual student's unique preferences and needs and by positive lifestyle changes that increase social belonging.
Second, SW-PBS is based on a clearly established behavioral and biomedical sciences that can be applied to address problem behavior in schools. The approach is based on conceptual principles from behavioral and biomedical research.
- Behavior is learned and can be taught.
- Behavior is lawful and predictable.
- Behavior occurrences are affected by environmental factors that interact with biophysical characteristics of the individual.
- Understanding the relation between physiology factors and environmental variables is a critical feature when supporting students with behavioral, social, emotional, and mental health issues.
- Assessing and manipulating environmental factors can predictably affect occurrences of behavior.
- Data collection and use for active decision-making are important for continuous intervention, program, and system improvement.
Third, SW-PBS emphasizes research-validated practices, interventions, strategies, curriculum, etc. to achieve goals and outcomes. Data are used to guide which practices should be selected and/or adapted to achieve goals/outcomes. The selection and use of evidence-based practices are given priority.
Fourth, SW-PBS gives priority to systems change considerations that support the effective and efficient selection and implementation of practices by school personnel (e.g., teachers, school psychologists, administrators). These organizational working considerations operationalize policies and guiding principles, operating routines, resource supports, and administrative leadership. Internal behavioral expertise and capacity are developed, and data-based decision making is emphasized to improve the selection, adoption, outcomes, and durability of practices.
Together these four elements provide schools with the opportunity to efficiently organize scarce resources and support the adoption of effective practices. Implementation of a school-wide approach to SW-PBS requires investments in the features represented in the following figure:
Why Develop This Blueprint on School-wide Positive Behavior Support?
Conceptually, SW-PBS is appealing, and a growing research base supports SW-PBS application at the individual student and school-wide levels. The first real task is identifying what is required to enable schools to develop, expand, and sustain their SW-PBS efforts.
This blueprint is intended to serve as a catalyst for prompting and promoting the durable and expanded use of SWPBS for all students at the individual student, classroom, school-wide, district, regional, county, and state levels. In particular, this blueprint has been designed to address seven important assumptions and solutions about "going-to-scale" with SW-PBS:
- Effective SWPBS must be implemented with high accuracy if maximum effects are to be realized.
- Effective SW-PBS practices and systems must be durable if meaningful change and improvement are to be realized.
- Effective practices and systems of SW-PBS must be sustained (i.e., in place for 5-10 years) if schools are to expand their efforts and maximize their effectiveness.
- Implementation must be delivered by "typical intervention agents."
- Data on child outcomes must be used to make decisions for continued adaptation and sustained implementation.
- Implementation of effective practices at the local level will require modification of procedures to "fit" the culture, structure, and needs of the local setting; the same practices will look slightly different in different schools and communities.
- Establish "systems" that support functional, doable, and durable implementation of effective practices.
What is a Systems Approach to the Implementation of School-wide Positive Behavior Support?
Commonly, when schools encounter a problem that cannot be solved by existing strategies and resources, an expert, typically from the "outside," is approached to provide technical assistance and training. An event is created to allow the expert to share and teach about ways to address the problem. The expert leaves, and the school is expected to implement the strategy. Borrowing a concept from Stokes and Baer (1977), this approach basically relies on a "train-and-hope" perspective:
- Difficult-to-solve problem is encountered.
- Expert is identified to provide a solution.
- Expert provides or trains the solution.
- Expert leaves and expects school to implement the solution.
- Lacking supports and capacity, solution is not implemented effectively.
- School waits for next problem to occur ("expert model" reinforced).
This approach to problem solving is likely to fail because attention is not focused on what system supports (e.g., resources, training, policies) are needed to enable the initial accurate use of the practice, continued use of the practice over time, expanded use of the practice to other contexts, and modification of the practice to maximize outcomes and increase efficiency.
A systems approach considers the school as the basic "unit of analysis" or "point of influence or action" and how the collective actions of individuals within the school contribute to how the school is characterized. Although important, individual students, parents, or adults are not the primary context for systems change. Horner (2003) indicates that
- The organization does not behave, individuals within the organization engage in behaviors.
- An organization is a group of individuals who behave together to achieve a common goal.
- Systems are needed to support the collective use of best practices by individuals within the organization.
Thus, the SW-PBS approach gives priority to the establishment of systems that support the adoption and durable implementation of evidence-based practices and procedures, and fit with and be part of on-going school reform efforts. This approach focuses on the interactive and self-checking process of organizational correction and improvement around four key elements:
- Outcomes: academic and behavior targets that are endorsed and emphasized by students, families, and educators.
- Practices: interventions and strategies that are evidence based.
- Data: information that is used to identify status, need for change, and effects of interventions.
- Systems: supports that are needed to enable the accurate and durable implementation of the practices of PBS.
A systems approach to SW-PBS considers multiple points of support:
- Individual Student: intensive and individualized behavior intervention planning based on function-based behavior assessments and implementation for students who are unresponsive to school-wide (primary) interventions.
- Classroom: expectations, routines, structures, and practices for presenting curriculum, designing instruction, and managing social climate of classroom environments that serves as the basis for individual student behavior support planning.
- School-wide: behavioral expectations and supports (i.e., proactive discipline) for all students and staff, across all school settings that together serve as the foundation for classroom and individual student behavior support.
- District: specialized behavioral supports, organizational leadership, and implementation resources that as a unity serves as the foundation for effective implementation.
- Community: collaborative intervention and support efforts for students and families that involve mental health, public health, juvenile justice, and other community agencies and resources.
- State: behavior support policy, organizational leadership, and resource management that collectively serve as the foundation for district and school-wide implementation of PBS.
At all levels of implementation of SW-PBS, four perspectives are emphasized:
- Three-tiered Approach to Prevention (Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Sugai et al., 2000; Walker et al., 1996).
- Primary prevention focuses on preventing the development of new cases of problem behaviors by focusing on all students and staff, across all settings (i.e., school-wide, classroom, and nonclassroom/noninstructional settings).
- Secondary prevention focuses on reducing the number of existing cases of problem behaviors by establishing efficient and rapid responses to problem behavior.
- Tertiary prevention focuses on reducing the intensity and/or complexity of existing cases of problem behavior that are resistant to primary and secondary prevention efforts.
A preventive approach focuses on
- Removing antecedent or preceding factors that prompt, trigger, or occasion problem behavior in children and undesirable intervention practices.
- Adding antecedent or preceding factors that prompt, trigger, or occasion appropriate behavior and desirable intervention practices.
- Removing consequence or following factors that maintain and strengthen occurrences of problem behavior and undesirable intervention practices.
- Adding consequence or following factors that maintain and strengthen occurrences of appropriate behaviors and desirable intervention practices.
- Arranging environments so opportunities are maximized to teach and practice appropriate behavior and desirable intervention practices.
- Teaching social skills and adopting intervention strategies that are more effective, efficient, and relevant than problem behaviors and undesirable intervention practices.
- Removing consequence or following factors that inhibit or prevent occurrences of appropriate behaviors and use of desirable intervention practices.
- Instructional Emphasis (Colvin, Sugai, & Patching, 1993; Kame’enui & Darch, 2004; Kerr & Nelson, 2002; Sugai, 1992) in which social skills are taught in the same way as academic skills, and the reduction of problem behaviors is addressed by teaching functional replacement behaviors.
- At the school-wide level, schools focus on defining, teaching, and encouraging school-wide expectations.
- For students who are at-risk of social failure, instruction is active and focused on "core" skills, often within pre-defined curricula.
- For students who are high risk for social failure, specific social skills are taught based on functional behavioral assessment of problem behaviors.
- Functional Perspective (Horner, 1994; O’Neill et al., 1997; Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, & Hagan-Burke, 1999-2000) in which the factors that maintain observed problem behaviors (positive and negative reinforcement) are used directly and primarily to build effective, efficient, and relevant behavior intervention plans.
A function-based approach has the following features:
- Foundations in behavioral theory, applied behavior analysis, and positive behavior support.
- Attention to environmental context.
- Emphasis on "purpose" or function of behavior.
- Focus on teaching behaviors.
- Attention to implementers (adult behaviors) & redesign of teaching & learning environments.
The notion of "function" is based on the behavioral principle of "reinforcement," specifically, positive and negative reinforcement (Crone & Horner, 2003; O’Neill et al., 1997). Positive reinforcement is defined as the increased probability of a behavioral occurrence that is associated with the contingent presentation of a consequence stimulus (reinforcing). Negative reinforcement is defined as the increased probability of a behavioral occurrence that is associated with the contingent removal or withholding of a consequence stimulus (aversive). The following flowchart depicts how these two behavioral principles are operationalized from a function-based perspective:
A function-based approach is incorporated into behavioral intervention planning at the individual student level (Crone & Horner, 2003). The steps and elements that comprise this approach are illustrated in the following figure:
- Sustainability Priority (Latham, 1988; Sugai et al., 2000; Zins & Ponte, 1990) which emphasizes
- Practical applications in which implementation is based on the smallest change that will result in the largest impact.
- Multiple approaches to ensure the correct approach for the defined problem.
- On-going collection and use of data because conditions continuously change and affect the status and best use of resources.
The outcome of an effective systems approach is an organization (school, district, state education agency) that has three basic features (Gilbert, 1978; Horner, 2003):
- A Common Vision: The organization has a mission, purpose, or goal that is embraced by the majority of members of the organization and serves as the basis for decision making and action planning.
- A Common Language: The organization establishes a means of describing its vision, actions, and operations so that communications are informative, efficient, effective, and relevant to members of the organization.
- A Common Experience: The organization is defined by a set of actions, routines, procedures, or operations that is universally practiced and experienced by all members of the organization and that also includes a data feedback system to link activities to outcomes.
Thus, instead of engaging in "train-n-hope" efforts, the SW-PBS approach gives priority to problem solving and action planning that emphasizes accurate, durable, and expanded implementation:
- Establish a visible, effective, efficient, and functional leadership team.
- Review existing information/data.
- Analyze, describe, and prioritize issue within context.
- Specify measurable outcome that is related directly to issue and context.
- Select evidence-based practice to achieve specified outcome.
- Provide supports for accurate sustained adoption and implementation of practice.
- Monitor practice implementation and progress toward outcome.
- Modify practice implementation based on analysis of progress data.
The following figure illustrates the working or operational relationship among these implementation elements: