Search results

All educators will inevitably face unwanted student behavior that they need to address. A ubiquitous response to unwanted behavior is exclusionary discipline practices, including time-out, office discipline referrals, and suspensions. However, extensive research has demonstrated that these practices are associated with negative outcomes, including increased likelihood of further unwanted behavior, decreased achievement, and racial/ethnic discipline disparities. In this chapter, we provide a preventative alternative to exclusionary practices, school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS). SWPBIS is an evidence-based framework for implementing systems to reduce unwanted behavior and increase prosocial behavior, decreasing the need for exclusionary practices.

In this chapter, we review four methods for identifying function and addressing function in intervention. These include functional analysis, the Functional-Assessment-Based Intervention (FABI) Model, the Competing Pathways Model, and the Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model. For each, we describe the methods and procedures used to identify function and design intervention support, briefly review supporting evidence, and identify the advantages and limitations associated with each approach.

Multitiered systems of support (MTSS) is widely advocated as an approach to improving education for all students, including students with disabilities. A hope for MTSS is that it can solve or mitigate many problems associated with providing special education to students with disabilities. While MTSS shows some promise for better addressing these problems, enthusiasm for MTSS and unsound thinking about what MTSS can do, cannot do, and has not done can veil lack of progress toward improving special education, as well as obscure what improving special education requires. We suggest that for both MTSS and special education to make more progress toward achieving their promises, several reality checks are urgently needed.

Tier 2 intervention is defined by the application of brief, efficient, and accessible supports for students who are at risk for social-emotional and behavioral concerns. Historically, Tier 2 interventions have been delivered in accordance with a standard protocol, with each student receiving the same general strategy in an undifferentiated manner. Yet, research has suggested the potential value of an adaptive Tier 2 approach, wherein brief assessments are conducted to determine which intervention (or adapted version of one particular intervention) is best suited to a student's individual needs. Within this chapter, we provide an overview of procedures related to adaptive Tier 2 intervention and discuss different approaches one might take to this practice. We conclude with a discussion of directions for future research in this area if adaptive Tier 2 intervention is to be widely adopted, implemented, and sustained within schools.

Many instances of maladaptive behaviors are due at least in part to a lack of social skills. Although there are effective interventions for teaching social skills, generalization of trained social skills remains a challenge. One promising way to enhance generalization may be to use functional behavior assessments to select social skills to teach that can meet individuals’ specific needs. This chapter describes a process for embedding function-based support into social skills interventions that may generalize to untrained settings. The chapter concludes with a case study demonstrating generalization of positive peer interaction from recess to a classroom setting for a grade two student. Results indicated that the student’s behavior during recess and during classroom instruction both changed upon implementation of the recess intervention, and these behaviors maintained over three months after the intervention was withdrawn.

There are few challenges as daunting as achieving positive outcomes for students with emotional disabilities. A major obstacle is the generally poor quality of classroom instruction. Too few general education teachers or special education teachers possess the knowledge and skills to adequately serve this population of learners. Various factors account for the inadequate level of teacher preparation, including licensure requirements that emphasize quantity over quality, the research-to-practice gap, a train-and-hope rather than a train-and-coach approach to teacher preparation, and the absence of an infrastructure to support sustained use of evidence-based practices. I discuss each of these factors and offer some recommendations for improving the quality of teacher preparation and, in turn, the potential for more positive student outcomes.

Alternative Education Placements (AEPs) are unique and complex settings that serve students with varieties of needs and strengths, though in practice such settings may be used most frequently to serve students with serious challenging behavior. Although research supports a number of individual interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD), including intensive, individualized interventions, less is known about adapting such interventions for AEPs, and especially about the potential for AEPs to adopt a flexible, positive, multitiered framework for behavior and school climate. Emerging evidence suggests that Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) can be integrated into alternative education settings with careful planning. This chapter provides (1) an overview of AEPs, (2) a description of six steps recommended for integrating PBIS into AEPs, and (3) a brief overview of recent literature regarding PBIS in AEPs.

In a multicase qualitative study, inclusive school leaders attempted to move their schools from the excessive use of suspension; they employed positive behavioral intervention and support (PBIS) as an alternative they thought would be therapeutic rather than punitive. However, the PBIS system traded a disciplinary system of control for a medicalized system of restoring order. Unwanted behavior came to be defined as evidence of possible behavioral disability. Hence, the PBIS system exchanged one deficit identity of “disorderly” student for another of “disordered” student, subsuming other considerations of race, class, and gender identity. Following the study’s findings, this chapter proposes more liberatory practices for PBIS that interrupt dominant culture discourses of normal behavior and power, and hold promise for establishing justice, rather than simply reinstating order.

Using data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2), this study compared the post-high school outcomes of young adults with learning disabilities (LD) or emotional/behavioral disorders (EBD) in 1990 and 2005. These cohort comparisons reveal how the results of special education have changed over that time period as evidenced in the post-high school outcomes of nationally representative samples of youth. The extended data collection time period of NLTS2 (2001–2009) also enabled an assessment of the evolution in the post-high school outcomes of young adults with LD or EBD who had been out of high school up to 8 years. The post-high school outcomes considered included high school completion, postsecondary education enrollment and completion, employment status and wages, and community integration as illustrated by living arrangements and criminal justice system involvement. Findings for both the NLTS/NLTS2 cohort comparisons and the longitudinal analyses from NLTS2 indicate progress in efforts to improve outcomes for youth and young adults with LD or EBD but also underscore the work ahead in setting these groups on a path to successful adulthood. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

Functional assessment-based interventions are a tertiary support that have been incorporated in many three-tiered models of prevention to support students who do not respond to more global prevention efforts. Although endorsed by host of reputable organizations (e.g., National Association of School Psychologists) and mandated in Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997, 2004), concerns have been raised that this mandate may not be warranted if functional assessment-based interventions do not meet minimum criteria to establish this as an evidence-based practice. One issue contributing to this concern is variability in the functional assessment process. John Umbreit and colleagues (2007) have attempted to address this concern by introducing a systematic approach that includes (a) a Function Matrix to analyze functional assessment data and identify the hypothesized function(s) of the target behavior and (b) a Function-Based Intervention Decision Model to guide intervention planning. In this chapter, we applied the core quality indicators for single-case research developed by Horner, Carr, Halle, McGee, Odom, and Wolery (2005) to studies conducted using this practice to determine the extent to which this systematic approach to functional assessment-based interventions met the standards for evidence-based practices for use in educational settings across the K-12 continuum for students with or at-risk for high incidence disabilities. If this practice is deemed to meet criteria, then this systematic approach may be particularly useful in meeting the mandate established in IDEA. Results suggest that it may be appropriate to establish this systematic method as a promising practice.