Fixed Time Reinforcement For Challenging Behaviors

When a student who has a disability’s educational placement is changed due to challenging behavior, a functional behavior assessment must be conducted. Functional behavior assessment (FBA) is used to aid in the development of behavior intervention plans (BIP’s). In a functional assessment, the type and the source of reinforcement for problem behaviors are used as a basis for intervention efforts that are designed to increase occurrence. Functional analysis can also be used to determine the specific function of a behavior, but FBA’s are more commonly used, especially in school settings. In a functional analysis (FA), antecedents and consequences that represent those in the person’s natural environment are arranged so that their effects on the problem behavior can be observed and measured. The difference between a functional analysis and functional behavior assessment is that the assessment establishes a connection between the behavior and antecedent or the consequent variables, but a functional analysis identifies informal relationships. For this reason, a functional analysis is seen to be a more valid tool for identifying the function of a behavior; however, there are limitations to using a functional analysis. This method may momentarily strengthen the problem behavior or result in the behavior acquiring new functions. Federal mandates like IDEA 2004 and school reforms such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) have played a role in the increase of the

Functional behavior assessments are important to teachers and students because I believe that all children behave a certain way for a reason. Children who have disabilities as well as children who do not have disabilities behave in inappropriate ways and a functional behavior assessment can help to determine why so that a plan can be developed to correct the behavior. Negative behavior is a reaction to something happening in a child's life or an imbalance in the child. A child with an imbalance will benefit from a functional behavior assessment because there is a

Out of school suspensions (OSS) are often enforced with the assumption that students receiving the suspension are less likely to repeat the problem behavior in the future. However, this has been proven to be false. Suspending a student for engaging in a certain behavior does not in fact serve as a deterrent from the behavior but as a deterrent from attending school instead. In actuality, receiving just a single suspension can increase the probability of a student experiencing academic failure, school dropout, and involvement in the juvenile justice system. Knowing this, some educators still believe that for many students, suspension can serve as an effective lesson. One of the greatest concerns that educators and administrators face is the matter of classroom management. It is part of their job to ensure a safe, productive and supportive classroom allowing students to learn and grow to their greatest potential. Though there are several strategies gauged towards managing a classroom, the most severe offences often lead to either in or out of school suspension. Some of the largest concerns faced with out of school suspensions is that they are often ineptly applied, used unfairly against students of color and seemingly ineffective at producing better behavior. Also known as exclusionary discipline, the majority of offenses that led to OSS have not been centered around violence but instead emphasised issues of classroom insubordination and defiance. In some rather extreme cases

Most often, school is not seen as an enjoyable place to be to begin with, and when that school environment is paired with difficulty learning, bullying, and lack of integration due to a disability, it becomes a toxic environment. Teachers have the ability to make school an enjoyable place to be. For high school students, graduating needs to be an exciting goal. When students with disabilities are expected to have a low paying job and low success whether they graduate or not, many students find that there is little ambition to graduate. Teachers have the responsibility of teaching their students that this is not the case, and that graduating is a great and powerful accomplishment. Testing that holds teachers responsible for their students test scores also has effects promoting the school-to-prison pipeline. When test scores are below acceptability, students occasionally get “pushed out”. Teachers can do something about this by advocating to their students that they are not a test score, and being supportive of their students regardless of scoring. An important aspect is that teachers use a positive behavioral approach to discipline (Coggshall, J. G., Osher, D. & Colombi, G., 2013). Through looking at the zero tolerance policy, it is evident that punishment only strengthens the pipeline. According to recent studies, most teachers are supportive of removing students with behavioral disorders from classrooms,

Studies have also found a correlation between exclusionary discipline and (1) increased school avoidance, (2) decreased academic engagement, (3) an increased rate of dropouts, (4) increased behavioral problems, and (5) increased involvement with the juvenile justice system. School administrators have the right to want to develop a safe climate for their students and teachers and remove threats from their schools. However, serious threats from students are rare. Nearly 60 percent of the suspensions and expulsions administered in HPS in 2009-2010 were administered for school policy violations—a category that includes things like insubordination, profanity, sleeping in class, and truancy—not serious safety concerns like violence against others or weapons.

Thomas is a high school student who has been suspended for getting upset in class, yelling at other students, and cursing at teachers and other staff members. Thomas is on an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) for and emotional disability. During the IEP process, Thomas’s team created a Behavior Improvement Plan (BIP) using the results from a Functional Behavioral Analysis (FBA). As the year progressed, Thomas’s cumulative days of suspension reached ten days and he therefore needed a manifestation determination meeting to determine if his behaviors were because of his identified disability.

There have been several reports on zero tolerance policy, including one from the American Psychological Association, that indicate that these policies fail to reach their goal (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). These reports have concluded that there should be a change in either how zero tolerance policies are applied or enact alternative policies for these offenses (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). The APA along with other reviews are not the only source of shift in opinion about zero tolerance policies (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). The United States Department of Education has even publically shown opposition against these policies recently (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). However, these policies are easier to rely on in the event of a school shooting, violent acts in school, or some other incident (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). It is easier to implement zero tolerance policies during these events because they are already in place and the guidelines are more simple to follow. The guidelines require all offenses result in expulsion or suspension, regardless of the offense or degree of the crime (Sheras and Bradshaw, 2016). Implementation of these policies also creates an environment of safety in the public’s eyes, which helps increase the school’s approval during the tragic event (Sheras and Bradshaw,

EBIs to reduce disruptive behavior and increase academic achievement can include trainings and implementation support at the school, class-wide, and individual student-level, and are often either academic or behavioral in nature. Overall, implementation of both universal (i.e. class-wide) and targeted (i.e. student-level) interventions have demonstrated positive impacts on decreasing disruptive behaviors and increasing student academic achievement (Flower, McKenna, Bunuan, Muething, & Vega, 2014; Vannest, Davis, Davis, Mason, & Burke, 2010).Ross, Romer, and Horner (2012) also found that teachers in schools implementing Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports with high fidelity

Many studies have shown strictly punitive forms of discipline are counter-productive. Lee asserted that research shows that troubled students are showing pain-based behavior and inflicting more pain with punishment makes the students resentful (2013). Implementation of a PBSS “advances beyond punitive, reactive responses to undesired behaviors by employing an applied method of teaching, positively reinforcing, and continually expanding an individual's behavioral repertoire.” (Caldarella et al., 2011). Behavioral matrices are integral components of a successful PBSS. My experience with the creation of such a matrix provided me with some insight. I realized the benefits of creating uniform expectations and responses. I also realized

If a student gets suspended, it teaches them to have no respect for authority, such as security guards, teachers, their own principal and even their parents. Thus, for the disrespect of authority, the student ends up getting suspended. Infractions such as pulling something on a teacher and talking back are results of the Zero-Tolerance Policy. Without the policy in place, students will be able to respect authority, learn that cops aren’t bad and realize that their education is important. Alternative education, such as the ‘Innovative Concept Academy’, are in place to teach students, such are in place to teach students with behavioral problems what they are missing from their primary education. Unfortunately, most states don’t have this and

During the past decade, school safety has been at the forefront of many school districts safety polices and plans. With recent high profile school shootings, the question school districts continue to ask is how do we keep our schools safe? Administrators face heavy scrutiny when weighing approaches to school safety and student discipline. Likewise, school employees have the right to work in safe environments devoid of life-threatening behaviors (Fenning and Bohanon, 2006; Skiba and Rausch, 2006). America’s founding fathers understood the importance of a public school education. They believed educating its citizens would allow them the opportunity to learn new skills while becoming successful and productive people in society. However, our founding fathers did not predict the severe behavior changes our schools face in educating disruptive and dangerous students. America’s school districts are charged with providing solutions for disruptive and dangerous students (Fenning and Bohanon, 2006; Skiba and Rausch, 2006). School officials must address these issues with research-based interventions and collaborative resources that provide a safe learning environment for all stakeholders (Elliott and Mihalic, 2004; Schoenwald and Hoagwood, 2001). Boards of education continue to support school efforts to rethink best practices for disciplinary alternative middle schools (DAMS). Many school districts focus on research-based interventions and resources that manage aggression and

School violence has become of the most pressing educational problems in the United States. Gang violence and high profile shootings across the nation cause concern within schools. Communities struggle to understand why these events take place and how they can be prevented. The overwhelming response to solve the issue of violence in schools is the increasing societal pressure to execute zero tolerance. Zero tolerance is driven by the educational philosophy, policies, and practices of school communities. Stakeholders expect schools to be a safe place for staff and for students. Stakeholders assume that a positive classroom environment, safe students, and school enjoyment are conditions necessary to create a positive climate where learning takes place. This assumption can be backed with research. A calm classroom environment, teachers’ management of disruptive behavior, and students’ view of school safety are factors that have been found to directly correlate with student achievement in the classroom (Ma & Willms, 2004). Safety and a feeling of not being threatened during school hours have been found to be important to students’ achievement. Failure to remove a disruptive or an unruly student from school has been found to have a negative impact on achievement and creates a great risk to school staff and students (Garbarino et al., 1992). Teachers cannot teach and students cannot learn in an

School discipline is to ensure that students and the campus staff are safe and peaceful. According to the U.S. Department of Education on Rethinking Discipline (2017), “Teachers and students deserve school environments that are safe, supportive, and conducive to teaching and learning.” The idea is to decrease bad behavior and school violence which will lead to fewer suspensions and expulsions. There are rules and limitations when it comes to student discipline; there are acts in which students can and must be disciplined. For examples, if a student quality’s for special needs some different guidelines protect them under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s (IDEA). Furthermore, the Education Code, Section 48900 was implied to discipline students who committed any wrongful doing such as attempting or threatening to physical harm another person. In the case f any wrongfulness, the student is forced to be disciplined by being suspended or expulsed from school.

A 6-week inservice program focusing on the principles of operant conditioning and positive reinforcement was implemented. The study was designed to evaluate the use of behavior management strategies in the classroom, and positive results were found in the decrease in restraints and crisis incidents. Crisis incidents were defined as a child being required to leave the classroom because of unacceptable behavior, e.g., persistent noncompliance. As the revised treatment module began to work, community special education programs began to send students for short term diagnostic placements, and a plan is in development for "transition classrooms" intended for children who no longer need intensive treatment but are not yet ready to return to the community. Applied behavior analysis provides teachers with methods for encouraging positive behaviors and coping with undesirable ones.

When implementing a discipline program, it is important that a teacher identify the difference between misbehavior and off task behavior. Misbehavior is a more serious action and should be treated accordingly. Misbehavior includes actions that are pre-meditated, habitual, unsafe, or demeaning. Off-task behavior includes actions like, talking out of turn or with other students, doing activities other than what the teacher has assigned, and lack of following instructions. While both types of behavior cause unwanted classroom distraction and should not be tolerated, there is an important difference between the two that must be identified. In the case of off-task behavior, the strategy to guide the student back on-task may require imposing a consequence as well as making an adjustment to the classroom management plan in order to re-route the student. In the case of misbehavior, imposing a consequence along with the addition of recruiting support from parents or administration may be needed to retrain the behavior.(Ross, 2009)