School-Wide Positive Behavioral Support: A Continuum of Proactive Strategies for All Students

School-Wide Positive Behavioral Support:

A Continuum of Proactive Strategies for All Students

by Kristy B. Ausdemore, Ronald C. Martella, Nancy E. Marchand-Martella

Disruptive behaviors have become a primary concern for most educators (Martella, Nelson, & Marchand-Martella, 2003; Nelson, 1998). Inappropriate behaviors exhibited by only a few students can disrupt and jeopardize effective instruction for all students. A possible reason for behavior problems undermining instruction is reduced learning opportunities via disciplinary removal from learning environments (S. Gest & J. Gest, 2005). If students who already have academic deficits are excluded from instruction, it may contribute to even greater academic deficits. In turn these deficits can increase frustration with learning tasks and increase the possibilities for additional behavior problems and further exclusion from instruction. Thus, an escalating cycle of academic and social failure occurs (Scott, Nelson, & Liaupsin, 2001). In fact, academic problems often exacerbate behavior problems by increasing student's time off task and therefore opportunities to misbehave (S. Gest & J. Gest, 2005; Scott et al., 2001).

Additionally, the classroom may serve as an adverse situation for students who experience academic or behavior difficulties rather than as an opportunity to learn. Thus, students may begin to respond to the classroom as if it were an adverse situation and are likely to exhibit frustration-caused behaviors (Kerr & Nelson, 1998; Martella et al., 2003; Nelson, 1998; Scott et al., 2001). Therefore, it is imperative for classrooms to experience high levels of academic achievement to decrease the likelihood of behavior difficulties. With this in mind, it is vital for educators and administrators to implement an effective school-wide discipline model. Such a model should contain effective instructional practices to minimize behavior problems and maximize student learning.

Past school discipline procedures have focused primarily on reacting to the undesirable behaviors students exhibit with punishment-based strategies. Research has shown that the inconsistent use of punishment in the absence of positive strategies is ineffective (Office of Special Education Programs [OSEP], 2005; Skiba & Peterson, 2000). Unfortunately, in the past there was an assumption that a single intervention or approach would meet all the behavioral needs within a school (Sugai, Sprague, Horner, & Walker, 2000). This approach called for the reduction of violence in public schools by simply focusing on the removal of physical injury weapons. It failed to examine intimidation, anxiety, fear, and a variety of associated incidents that do not involve weapons or injury (Scott et al., 2001). The rise of zero tolerance for both serious and non-serious offenses in today's schools serves as a further example of the growth of this punitive approach to misconduct (Leone et al., 2003). Interventions based on this approach continue even though their effectiveness is questionable. In general, schools that implement such interventions continue to have a less safe environment than schools that implement fewer zero tolerance policies (Leone et al., 2003; Skiba & Peterson, 2000).

Unlike past models that relied heavily on punitive consequence, School Wide Positive Behavior Supports (SW-PBS) uses proactive techniques to manage unwanted behaviors and increase students' active engagement in learning (Zuna & McDougall, 2004). SW-PBS is a proactive approach to discipline that contains both individualized and systematic strategies that use positive behavior interventions for achieving important social and learning outcomes while preventing and changing problem behavior (Sugai, Horner, et al., 2000; Turnbull et al., 2002). This achievement is realized by addressing school-wide, classroom, and individual academic success and problem behavior through working policies, structures, and routines that emphasize the identification, adoption, and sustained use of research-validated practices. The foundation of the approach is the science of human behavior that assumes that behavior is learned through interactions with the environment and can be changed. A major goal of SW-PBS is to eliminate problem behaviors by making them less effective, efficient, and relevant, and in turn making desired behavior more functional.

SW-PBS utilizes a three-tier model that includes primary (school-wide), secondary (classroom), and tertiary (individual) prevention levels (Martella et al., 2003; Sugai, Horner, et al., 2000; Sugai, Sprague, et al., 2000). These intervention levels are distinguished by two changing variables--the number of students involved and intensity of support (Turnbull et al., 2002). According to Gresham (2004), an important key to effective behavioral interventions is to match the intensity of an intervention to the severity of the behavior problem being exhibited. The three-tier approach to interventions allows that match to occur by having the universal level which is the least intense and two additional levels (secondary and tertiary) that increase the intensity of support provided as needed.

Universal interventions at the primary prevention level include the district-wide, school-wide, and classroom systems. The purpose of this level is to reduce the number of new cases of problem behavior and academic difficulties while increasing as many appropriate behaviors as possible. Universal interventions are effective for students without serious problem behavior. These students account for an estimated 80% to 90% of a school's population (OSEP, 2005; Sugai, Horner, et al. 2000; Sugai, Sprague, et al., 2000). According to Gresham (2004), universal interventions are implemented identically to every student either daily or weekly. Universal prevention techniques include school-wide discipline plans, district-wide bully prevention programs, effective curricular materials, creation of effective classroom rules and routines, and social skills training curricula (Gresham, 2004; Martella & Nelson, 2003).

The secondary level targets students who are considered at-risk for problem behavior and/or academic skill deficits who are not responding to primary level prevention efforts. This group of students consists of 5% to 15% of a school's population (OSEP, 2005; Sugai, Horner, et al., 2000; Sugai, Sprague, et al. 2000). The purpose of the secondary level is to reduce current cases of problem behavior and academic failure by using specialized group interventions that provide more support. Common secondary prevention practices include behavioral contracts, conflict resolution training, precorrection strategies, self-management strategies, and remedial academic programs (Gresham, 2004; Martella & Nelson, 2003). While universal and secondary level interventions successfully address the needs of approximately 93% to 99% of a school's population, 1% to 7% still needs a more intense intervention (Martella & Nelson, 2003).

The tertiary level of prevention is the most individualized and intense level. Interventions are designed for individual students who display chronic academic and/or behavioral difficulties. These behaviors impede learning, are dangerous or disruptive behavior, and/or result in social or educational exclusion. According to Gresham (2004), even though the group of students who need tertiary level supports include only 1% to 7% of a school's population, these students account for 40% to 50% of behavioral disruptions. The goal of tertiary level prevention is not only to identify and diminish the frequency and intensity of such behavior but also to increase the student's adaptive skills. The tertiary preventive measures involve conducting a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) and creating a behavior support plan for the individual student (Martella et al., 2003).

Schools that implement SW-PBS are making the shift from a reactive and aversive approach of managing problem behavior to one that is preventive and positive. According to Horner and Sugai (2004), every child entering school needs behavior support. Therefore, schools must use empirically validated procedures and systems that have demonstrated effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance. SW-PBS is an approach that allows schools to facilitate academic and behavioral success for all students.

References

Gest, S., & Gest, J. (2005). Reading tutoring for students at academic and behavioral risk: Effects on time-on-task in the classroom [Electronic version]. Education & Treatment of Children, 28, 25-48.

Gresham, F. M. (2004). Current status and future directions of school-based behavioral interventions. School Psychology Review, 33, 326-343.

Horner, R. & Sugai, G. (2004). School-wide positive behavior support. Implementers' blueprint and self-assessment. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, OSEP Center on Positive Behavior Support.

Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (1998). Strategies for managing behavior problems in the classroom (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Leone, P. E., Christle, C. A., Nelson, C. M, Skiba, R., Frey, A., & Jolivette, K. (2003, October). School failure, and disability: Promoting positive outcomes, decreasing vulnerability for involvement with the juvenile delinquency system. Retrieved May 30, 2005, from The National Center on Education, Disability, and Juvenile Justice Web site: http://www.edjj.org/Publications/list/leone_et_al-2003.pdf

Martella, R. C., & Nelson, J. R. (2003). Managing classroom behavior. Journal of Direct Instruction, 3, 139-165.

Martella R. C., Nelson, J. R., & Marchand-Martella, N. E. (2003). Managing disruptive behaviors in the schools: A schoolwide, classroom, and individualized social learning approach. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Nelson, J. R. (1998). Designing schools to enhance the academic and social outcomes of all students [Electronic version]. College of Education, Tempe, AZ. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education (ED 410 516).

Office of Special Education Programs: Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. (2005). School-Wide PBS. Retrieved March 5, 2005, from http://www.pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

Scott, T. M., Nelson, C. M., & Liaupsin C. J. (2001). Effective instruction: The forgotten component in preventing school violence [Electronic version]. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 309-322.

Skiba, R. J., & Peterson, R. L. (2000). School discipline at a crossroads: From zero tolerance to early response [Electronic version]. Exceptional Children, 66, 335-344.

Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T., Neslon, C. M., Scott, T., Liauspin, C., Sailor, W., Turnbull, A. P., Turnbull III, H. R., Wickham, D., Wilcox, B., & Ruef, M. (2000). Applying positive behavior support and functional behavioral assessment in schools [Electronic version]. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 131-143.

Sugai, G., Sprague, J. R., Horner, R. H., & Walker, H. M. (2000). Preventing school violence: The use of office discipline referrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions [Electronic version]. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 94-101.

Turnbull, A., Edmonson, H., Griggs, P., Wickham, D., Sailor, W., Freeman, R., Guess, D., Lassen, S., McCart, A., Park, J., Riffel, L., Turnbull, R., & Warren, J. (2002). A blueprint for schoolwide positive behavior support: Implementation of three components [Electronic version]. Exceptional Children, 68, 377-402.

Zuna, N., & McDougall, D. (2004). Using positive behavioral support to manage avoidance of academic tasks [Electronic version]. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37, 18-24.

About the authors

Kristy Ausdemore is a graduate student in special education at Eastern Washington University. Her specific academic interest is in effective instructional techniques for students with severe disabilities. You can reach her at ausdemore@hotmail.com.

Drs. Nancy Marchand-Martella and Ronald Martella are professors in the Department of Counseling, Educational, and Developmental Psychology (CEDP) http://www.ewu.edu/x3360.xml at Eastern Washington University. Both teach in the graduate program in special education. Dr. Marchand-Martella's research interest is in the area of effective instruction for students with disabilities with particular emphasis in reading. Dr. Martella's research interest is in behavior management for students with disabilities and schoolwide behavior support systems. You can reach them at the Department of CEDP, Martin Hall 135, Eastern Washington University, Cheney WA 99004 or email them at nmartella@ewu.ed and rmartella@ewu.edu.