Why Do High Schools Use PBIS?

One of his notable contributions to psychological research was the Woodlawn study which was where the discovery of longitudinal study. Biglan concluded that The Good Behavior Game saves lives because it cultivates positive life choices and has been shown to decrease substance abuse which usually leads to early death. Education researchers Horner and Sugai created the Positive Behavioral Intervention and Support (PBIS) system that uses prevention science to foster positive and nurturing school environments by studying the main consequences of problem behavior. Multiple randomized trials have shown that PBIS is effective in reducing harassment and bullying in schools. Unfortunately it is, more often than not, a challenge for change to occur and many schools are resistant to implementing PBIS into their schools. The chapter goes on to talk about evidence-based and discovery teaching, noting consilience in reference to achieving effective reform in schools.

I agree with you that all teachers and administration must be on board with PBIS. The idea of teachers emphasizing prevention and positive management. I could not agree with the article that good classroom management is important so that students understand what is expected of them and the consequences involved. I agree with you I think that students, especially at the older levels, like to be able to purchase something with their dollars like food or snow cones like you pointed out. Yes, I can see how the cash idea could go south if teachers were not holding up their end of the bargain. That is why it is important to explain to the staff the entire program and the consequences if they do not buy into the reward part of the program. It

One of the main strategies to meet this goal is the PBIS implementation. According to the PBIS committee leader at Flat Rock Middle School, PBIS stands for Positive Behavior Intervention and Support. It is a proactive and social culture strategy and needed for all students in a school to achieve social, emotional, and academic success. Attention is focused on creating and sustaining primary, secondary, and tertiary systems of support that improve the lifestyle results (personal health, social, family, work, recreation) for all youth by making targeted misbehavior less effective, efficient, relevant, and desired behavior more functional. Even though, PBIS has made a positive impact on the percentage of disciplinary incidents within the school.

PBIS is a school-wide approach to managing behavior in positive manners. The school that I currently teach at as implementing this approach for this school year. My experience with this approach is extremely limited. We were trained briefly at the beginning of the school year but the introduction was not enough for most of the teachers at my school. We have what we call bulldog time which is used for remediation of students in small groups. These small groups are formed based on MSTAR scores from the beginning of the year. The group that I was assigned are the 11th graders preparing for the ACT. I am responsible only for strategies to improve their scores in the science section of this test. I get a different group each day and if

The fundamental principles guiding Positive Behavioral Support Systems remain the same no matter what grade level is taught. While maintaining the overall concept of teaching appropriate behaviors and providing accountability for inappropriate behaviors is stagnant among each grade level, the actual appearance or observation of the PBSS implementation will drastically change based on the education level being taught.

PBIS was added to the list of behavioral intervention strategies for students in alternative setting in Flower et al.’s (2011) article A Literature Review Of Research Quality and Effective Practices In Alternative Settings. PBIS incorporates most of Tobin and Sprauge’s (2000) effective behavioral interventions within the structure of the system. The article describes PBIS as “a three-tiered (universal, secondary, and tertiary tiers) framework for preventing and responding to challenging behavior by building an environment where there is a predictable structure and routine with reinforcement delivered contingent on student performance of desired behavior” (Flower et al., 2011 p.493-493).  Flower et al. (2011) goes on to describe the three tiers in the following manner:

RtI also helps implement behavioral interventions in the classroom through a similar process called Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). PBIS is based on a problem-solving model and aims to prevent inappropriate behavior through teaching and reinforcing appropriate behaviors (Sandomierski, Kincaid & Algozzine, 2007). Both RtI and PBIS are grounded in differentiated instruction; a type of instruction that is beneficial to all types of students with

The well research Positive Behavior Intervention and Support system has been widely implemented throughout the United States because school feel it is a great alternative to the zero tolerance. Much of PBIS has been implemented in elementary schools and it has shown the younger children react more positively to the system. In fact, Bradshaw estimated there is about 22,000 schools who have taken in this policy (Bradshaw, et al.). This is a large amount of school in the United State who have implemented this policy. School have begun to realize the poorly implemented zero tolerance policy is unacceptable and have shifted to a more proactive plan. Resultantly, it seems to be a common theme throughout the school who have carried out this policy

Ann feels like this needs to be better defined with our PBIS and feels that this is an area that as a school we need to improve on. Scott discussed that at the end of each school year staff completes a Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) survey to see how we are doing in this area. The PBIS team completes the survey first and then staff. After the survey is completed administration looks at the the survey to determine outcomes for each year. One that he would like to see is staff accountability.

The School-Wide Positive Behavior Support or SW-PBIS program is designed to teach behavior expectations in the same manner as any core curriculum subject. The main idea for the SW-PBIS program is for the school to focus on three to five positive behavior expectations rather than telling the students what not to do in the school atmosphere. The expectations and routines are enforced school-wide in each classroom and in non-classroom areas with the matrices posted throughout the school. These expectations and routines are taught through lesson plans at the beginning of the year in setting specific locations, such as lining up properly in the hallway using a hula hoop to demonstrate proper body space distance. The program also emphasizes positive behaviors through a recognition system of praise. Instead of always concentrating on misbehavior staff rewards appropriate behaviors with some kind of incentive. The Carl Junction School district uses this program by implementing the bark bonus program when staff notices appropriate behaviors at specials, in hallways, in the lunchroom, etc. A staff member gives a student or the whole a class bark bonus, eventually when each class receives a specified amount that classroom is rewarded. As a whole, the classroom votes on which reward they want, such as a movie, bring stuffed animal/blanket, wear pajamas, or play electronics during class.

PBIS encourages staff to look at students in a positive way. Teachers and staff teach students social skills needed to become successful in the real world. Programs like the Chain Reaction Club give students leadership and a voice in their education. The goal is to maintain positive relationships between students and staff. They aim to improve the school climate by using positive reinforcement and community/parent involvement. Students say they feel respected within the

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

Non effective RTI models in middle schools may have to do with poor leadership. Isbell & Szabo (2014) and Little et al (2014) suggests in order for RTI to be successful, leadership at the building level is essential. Johnson et al (2011) further add overcoming implementation challenges cannot happen without strong leadership efforts. Leadership should provide teachers with training sessions for effective RTI implementation in middle schools. This also gives the time to collaborate with other educators in the school. Middle schools have to think about various extra-curricular activities, monthly assemblies, field trips, suspensions, and absences. Being aware of these barriers allows middle schools to devise plans to counter attack them before they arise. Little & Marrs (2014) suggests lack of leadership hinders an effective RTI framework while further indicating leadership that clarifies the particular RTI model being used by the middle school would be beneficial. Albrecht et al. (2015) and Averill et al. (2014) suggests allotting adequate time to record, analyze, and train staff on the RTI model is a barrier. Little et al. (2014) suggests implementing RTI is hard because educators have to find the time in the students schedule to complete the intervention. However, to combat the time constraint, Averill et al. (2014) recommends devising an intervention block as an option to increase the efficiency, effectiveness, and high quality of intervention delivery. Other barriers include the lack of professional development, lack of teacher preparation, a lack of staff to implement the intervention, and questionable, quality interventions are barriers that may hinder implementing an effective RTI model in middle schools. Lack of RTI training is another challenge that hinders effective implementation in middle schools. And more than likely this will lead to

An important piece of school improvement is the gathering and analysis of student achievement data from multiple, reliable sources to improve learning for all students. This is a message I consistently communicate when facilitating professional development. As an educational leader, I design professional learning opportunities that effectively promote and support high quality instruction through the use of data that accurately depict the status of students, instructional staff, and school performance.

The research attempts to answer the question of what factors impact the successful implementation of PBIS in a Midwest suburban school district. The mixed methods approach is appropriate in this regard because it utilizes both quantitative survey data and qualitative focus group data to identify the needs and factors that go into successful implementation. The focus group data allowed the identified PBIS team to relate its experience, as well as a team of individuals, who are not on the PBIS team to extrapolate on their experience. The two focus groups provided unique perspectives. The PBIS team attended two day training and the school team did not. The PBIS team is expected to relay the information effectively to staff and eventually to the student population for implementation. The data described and compared the similarities and differences among the trained PBIS team and a representation of staff members who did not attend the training. The opportunity to get the perspectives of both groups provides the researcher with data that were used to identify needs of school districts prior to the implementation and raise the current 50% implementation with fidelity result in the state. The reason for the mixed methods approach was to provide a richer viewpoint of the perception among staff and increase the validation of the research through a comparison and triangulation of data.