Research

=Research:=

**Comparing Individual Behavior Plans From Schools With and Without Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support: A Preliminary Study** Mrs. Lisa Tuttle In this preliminary case study, nine middle schools from a disadvantaged urban district implemented School-Wide Positive Behavior Supports (SWPBS), in hopes of establishing “[a conducive learning environment that] fostered pro-social behavior, [as well as] attempted to systematically deter problem behaviors before they [occurred.]” (Medley, N.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A., 2007, p. 93) The study investigated how traditional and progressive approaches differed and whether these factors influenced the effectiveness and creation of successful SWPBS. Each school chosen for a SWPBS school implemented SWPBS and formed two teams: a Behavior Team (BT) and a Student Study Team (SST), while the non-SWPBS schools created behavior plans without prior training. The purpose of these teams was to provide training to members within the BT and SST, as well as to “ submit sample [Behavior Support Plans] (BSPs) for critique and feedback.” (Medley, N.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A., 2007, p. 96) For scoring purposes, a rubric was created and utilized to effectively evaluate the formulate BSPs, as well as to “indicate the quality of the BSP plan.” (Medley, N.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A., 2007, p. 96) Data was collected from all schools based upon the Mixed Methodology of Research utilizing the Behavior Support Plan-Quality Evaluation (BSP-QE); a rubric [that was utilized] to establish whether the BSP developed by [each] team aligns with the principles of behavioral change found in applied behavior analysis.” (Medley, N.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A., 2007, p. 97) Results indicated that the schools that were given additional training, prior to the creation of SWPBS were more effective in creating support plans when compared to the non-SWPBS schools. Research then indicates that districts that utilize and focus upon progressive approaches, such as School-Wide Positive Behavior Supports are more effective than those who implement traditional approaches (i.e., non-SWPBS).

References

Medley, N.S., Little, S.G., & Akin-Little, A. (2007). Comparing Individual Behavior Plans from Schools With and Without Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support: A Preliminary Study. //Journal of Behavior Education, 17,// 93-110.

** Token Economy Plus Self-Monitoring to Reduce Disruptive Behaviors ** Kristy Bell This article summarizes a case study that was done to examine the effectiveness of a token economy and self-monitoring to reduce aggressive and disruptive behavior in the classroom. A baseline was established by collecting data at five points in the student’s day. He was monitored at home as well as in school. In the case study, the teacher used a point system. The teacher divided the student’s day into 15 minute intervals, and awarded points based on his behavior at the end of each interval. The student was allowed to exchange his points every 2 hours. In addition the teacher trained the student to self-monitor his behavior at each interval. The teacher and the student then compared notes and was given bonus points if he correctly self-monitored his behavior. The student did not lose points for misbehavior or incorrect self-monitoring, he simply did not earn the points he worked for. The study showed significant growth in the student’s behavior when the two interventions were used together. The student’s target behaviors significantly declined. Through reinforcement of positive and appropriate behaviors, the occurrence of disruptive behaviors decreases.

Reference:

Zlomke, K., & Zlomke, L. (2003). Token economy plus self -monitoring to reduce disruptive classroom behaviors. //Behavior Analyst Today//, 4(2), 177-182. Retrieved from EBSCO//host//.

**Positive Behavior Support** Kristy Bell

This article emphasizes the importance of a proactive approach rather than a reactive approach in schools across the country. An overview of Positive Behavior Support (PBS) is also provided with an emphasis on the inclusion of teachers, families, students, and community members in the process. The article gives specific ways to implement and teach PBS in the classroom as well as the students’ environments outside of school. A sample lesson plan is provided to help the reader understand exactly how to explicitly implement the system in the classroom. Information is given as to how a specific school implemented PBS as well as the results from the study. This article gives very explicit instructions as to how the system can easily be implemented as well as tools that may be beneficial when first starting school-wide positive behavior supports.

Reference:

Morrissey, K. L., Bohanon, H., & Fenning, P. (2010). Positive behavior support. //Teaching Exceptional Children//, 42(5), 26-35. Retrieved from EBSCO//host//.

//** The Effects of a Targeted Intervention to Reduce Problem Behaviors: Elementary School Implementation of Check In-Check-Out **// // LaSheba Woodall //

This article is about the behavior support ** in ** schools, and how is the ** Check ** ** In ****-**** Check ** ** Out ** intervention (CICO) is becoming a recognized targeted intervention. The article displays a study that examines if there is a functional relation between the implementation of CICO and a reduction ** in ** problem behaviors. The results indicate that implementation of CICO with four elementary school-age boys was functionally related to a reduction ** in **problem behavior. Behavior support in schools is increasingly viewed as a three-tier prevention effort in which universal interventions are used for primary prevention, targeted interventions are used for secondary prevention, and intensive interventions are used for tertiary prevention. The article gives specific ways to implement the CICO program in the classroom as well as the students’ home. This article gives very clear information as to how the intervention be used at school and at home. This article breaks down different factors to help school with the process of CICO program. One thing that was brought to my attention is that everyone has to be included in the plan in order for it to be successful, and it must be consistent.

Reference:

//The Effects of a Targeted Intervention to Reduce Problem Behaviors: Elementary School Implementation of Check In-Check-Out, // Todd, Anne W., Campbell, Amy L., Meyer, Gwen G., Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, v.10 n1, pgs. 46-55, 2008. Retrieved from EBSCO//host.//

**Exploring the Relationship Between Increased Opportunities to Respond to Academic Requests and the Academic and Behavioral Outcomes of Students with EBD**

Robert Cowan



The value in this article relates to increased levels of academic performance and decreased levels of behavioral disruptions including off-task behavior. The authors reviewed five studies comparing increased responses and noted an inverse relationship between the two variables (ie., high rates of problem behavior equal low rates of instruction) (Sutherland, K., & Wehby, J., 2001). Conversely, when high rates of instruction did occur, low rates of disruption were measured. All five studies used children diagnosed with EBD or students exhibiting EBD behaviors. They also noted that the most disruptive, highly aggressive students were typically given the smallest amount of academic instruction. The studies found that very high rates of response questioning improved behaviors dramatically. Most studies used response rates of 5-20 seconds per question. These drills were performed using two to five students per group. Although the sample group used students with extreme behavior problems, the authors suggest that this method could benefit all students in a classroom. This is another PBS tool that could be incorporated during many subjects for short bursts to help measure effectiveness of instruction and reduce unwanted behaviors.

Sutherland, K.S., & Wehby, J.H. (2001). Exploring the relationship between increased opportunities to respond to academic requests and the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with emotional behavioral disorders: A review. //Remedial and Special Education//, 22, 113-121.



Praise-and-Ignore Approach Zakiyyah Watts

Back to Basics: Rules, Praise, Ignoring, and Reprimands Revisited Robert A. Gable, Peggy H. Hester, Marcia L. Rock, and Kimberly G. Hughes Intervention in School and Clinic, Vol. 44, Number 4, March 2009, 195-205

Academic Search Complete []

Maintaining good classroom management skills is a prerequisite for creating an environment where learning can take place. In the past, teachers had many rules for students to follow; however, teachers are now encouraged to have fewer rules (Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes, 2009). At times, students may feel overwhelmed with a large number of rules. Likewise, is likely that many of the rules will not be followed. Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes suggest that there are ways to teach students appropriate and inappropriate ways of behaving through teacher modeling (2009). However, this form of teaching will probably be most effective if the students respect the teacher.

Praise can also be used to elicit desired student behaviors and build good rapport between the teacher and the student (Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes, 2009). To secure such a relationship, it is important that teachers give praise selectively to specific behaviors or achievements that are worthwhile. On the other hand, some students will misbehave in order to get the teacher’s attention although the attention is negative.

Another way to promote positive behavior is to afford students the opportunity to provide accurate responses to questions (Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes, 2009). This process builds self esteem and promotes learning. A final way to increase positive behavior and decrease negative ones is through the use of planned ignoring. This technique is a form of extinction as it sends a message to the student that misbehavior will not welcome teacher attention as desired (Gamble, Hester, Tock, & Hughes, 2009). This method is effective for students who seek to attain teacher attention. On the other hand, it is ineffective for students who seek recognition from peers by disrupting class will be unconcerned by the lack of teacher attention (Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes, 2009). Finally, it is important for skilled teachers to understand when and with whom to use the ignoring model.

Reference:

Gable, R., Hester, P., Rock, M., & Hughes, K. (2009). Back to basics: Rules, praise, ignoring,

and reprimands revisited. //Intervention in School and Clinic//, 44(4), 195-205.

Alpha and Content-Embedded Request

Zakiyyah Watts

Sound-Field Amplification to Increase Compliance to Directions in Students With ADHD John Magg and Jean Anderson August 2007 Behavioral Disorders, 32(4), 238-253. Academic Search Complete []

Magg and Anderson conducted a study to determine which form of communication was more effective for students with ADHD, alpha or beta. The researchers stated that Alpha commands were direct and told students exactly what to do whereas beta commands contain emotions not relevant to the request (2007). Such students have a difficult time with attention; therefore, it is not a good idea to give them too much information at one time. The study involved three students during three of their classes. The study revealed that the students demonstrated a higher rate of compliance and correct responses with teacher requests that were clear and concise as with the alpha command (Magg & Anderson, 2007). The interactions between parent and students were also successful when the alpha commands were used. However, the beta commands were too lengthy and required students to decipher between what information was necessary and what was not (Magg & Anderson, 2007). Based on these findings, the alpha approach is the most appropriate means of communication with all students and should be used to promote positive student behavior.

Reference:

Magg, J., & Anderson, J. (2007). Sound-field amplification to increase compliance to

Directions in students with ADHD. //Behavioral Disorders//, 32(4), 238-253.