Building positive behavior support systems in schools : functional behavioral assessment [Second ed.] 9781462519729, 1462519725, 9781462519736, 1462519733, 9781572308183, 1572308184

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
About the Authors
Contributing Authors
Acknowledgments
Preface
Contents
Part I. Using Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools Context and Framework
Chapter 1. Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools: Historical Background and the Current Context
Introduction
Historical Perspectives on FBA
Basic Components of the FBA Process
FBA Procedures in School Settings
Best‑Practice Recommendations
Summary and Conclusions
Chapter 2. Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools: Thinking Functionally across All Tiers of Behavior Support
The Current Context Regarding Problem Behavior in Schools
Overview of SWPBS
Thinking Functionally about Problem Behavior
Tier 1 and FBA
Tier 2 and FBA
Tier 3 and FBA
Intervention: What Steps Are Involved in Evaluating and Modifying a BSP?
Supplementary Section
Part II. Embedding Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems: Case Examples
Chapter 3. Conducting a Functional Behavioral Assessment
Introduction
The Assessment Process
Supplementary Section
Chapter 4. Designing a Behavior Support Plan
Introduction
Competing Behaviors
Contextual Fit
Individualizing the BSP
Documenting a BSP
Supplementary Section
Chapter 5. Evaluating and Modifying the Behavior Support Plan
Introduction
Rationale
Critical Elements
Data‑Based Decisions
Maintenance Plan
Part III. Using Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems: Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacity
Chapter 6. Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team and How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team?
Introduction
Behavior Support Team Structure
Behavior Support Team: Core Team Membership
Core Behavior Support Team Roles and Responsibilities
How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team?
Supplementary Section
Chapter 7. How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for Functional Behavioral Assessment on the Behavior Support Team?
Introduction
Requirements and Commitments
A Model for Generating within‑Building Capacity
Leadership Models
Supplementary Section
Chapter 8. Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support
Introduction
The Challenge
Basic versus Complex Assessment and Behavior Support
Organizing a District to Deliver Basic Behavior Support
Establishing a Context to Deliver Individualized Behavior Supports
Building Capacity: Investing in Training School‑Based Personnel
Training School‑Based Personnel to Implement Basic Behavior Support
The Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum
Basic FBA to BSP Training Format
Empirical Support for Basic FBA‑BSP
Implementing Basic FBA‑BSP within Tiered Systems of Behavior Support
Part IV. Functional Behavioral Assessment as Applied to Specific Problems or Specific Populations
Chapter 9. Functional Behavioral Assessment for Academic Concerns
Introduction
The FBA Process and an Examination of Academic Performance
Gather Data for Referral
Develop a Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior
Develop Initial Supports for Individual Intervention
Implement Supports and Monitor Change
Case Examples
Conclusion
Chapter 10. Functional Behavioral Assessment with Preschool‑Age Children
Introduction
Is the FBA‑BSP Process Warranted in Early Childhood Education?
Multi‑Tiered SWPBS and ECE
Problem Behavior in Young Children
Functions of Problem Behavior in Young Children
Can FBA‑BSP Be Implemented in Typical ECE Settings with ECE Professionals?
What Does FBA in ECE Look Like?
What Is Unique about This Population That Needs to Be Considered for Both Assessment and Intervention?
Case Example
Conclusion
Chapter 11. Technology Trends in Functional Behavioral Assessment and Intervention
Introduction
Locating an App for Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior
FBA Observational Data Collection Apps/Technology Resources
Intervention Apps/Technology Resources
Next Steps
Web‑Based Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Technology: ISIS‑SWIS
Conclusion
Appendices
Appendix A. Request for Assistance Form
Appendix B. Functional Behavioral Assessment–Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol)
Appendix C. Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS)
Appendix D. Student-Guided Functional Assessment Interview (Primary)
Appendix E. Assessing Activity Routines Form
Appendix F. Brief Functional Assessment Interview Form
Appendix H. A Checklist for Assessing the Quality of Behavior Support Planning: Does the Plan (or Planning Process) Have These Features?
References
Index

Citation preview

ebook THE GUILFORD PRESS

Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools

Also from the Authors Books

Handbook of Developmental Disabilities Edited by Samuel L. Odom, Robert H. Horner, Martha E. Snell, and Jan B. Blacher

Helping Students Overcome Substance Abuse: Effective Practices for Prevention and Intervention Jason J. Burrow-­Sanchez and Leanne S. Hawken

Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools, Second Edition: The Behavior Education Program Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner DVD

The Behavior Education Program: A Check-In, Check-Out Intervention for Students at Risk Leanne S. Hawken, Hollie Pettersson, Julie Mootz, and Carol Anderson

Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools Functional Behavioral Assessment S e c o n d Ed i t i o n

Deanne A. Crone Leanne S. Hawken Robert H. Horner

THE GUILFORD PRESS New York  London

© 2015 The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc. 370 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1200, New York, NY 10001 www.guilford.com All rights reserved Except as noted, no part of this book may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America This book is printed on acid-free paper. Last digit is print number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 LIMITED PHOTOCOPY LICENSE These materials are intended for use only by qualified professionals. The publisher grants to individual purchasers of this book nonassignable permission to reproduce all materials for which photocopying permission is specifically granted in a footnote. This license is limited to you, the individual purchaser, for personal use or use with individual clients or students. This license does not grant the right to reproduce these materials for resale, redistribution, electronic display, or any other purposes (including but not limited to books, pamphlets, articles, video- or audiotapes, blogs, file-sharing sites, Internet or intranet sites, and handouts or slides for lectures, workshops, or webinars, whether or not a fee is charged). Permission to reproduce these materials for these and any other purposes must be obtained in writing from the Permissions Department of Guilford Publications. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Crone, Deanne A.   Building positive behavior support systems in schools: functional behavioral assessment / by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner.— Second edition.   pages cm.   Includes bibliographical references and index.   ISBN 978-1-4625-1972-9 (pbk.)—ISBN 978-1-4625-1973-6 (cloth)   1.  Behavior modification—United States.  2.  Problem children—Education— United States.  I.  Hawken, Leanne S.  II.  Horner, Robert H.  III.  Title.   LB1060.2.C75 2015  371.39′3—dc23 2014039378

About the Authors

Deanne A. Crone, PhD, is Research Associate at the Center on Teaching and Learning at the University of Oregon. She has directed several research and training grants that address behavior disorders, positive behavior support, and functional behavioral assessment. Dr. Crone has presented her work on function-­ based support locally, regionally, and nationally. She has conducted workshops with a variety of professionals, including school psychologists, administrators, teachers, and paraprofessionals, to facilitate the implementation and use of functional behavioral assessment behavior support planning. Leanne S. Hawken, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah. She has more than 15 years of experience helping schools implement positive behavior interventions and supports. Her research focus is on Check-In/Check-Out (CICO), a Tier 2 behavior intervention for students at risk. Dr. Hawken has consulted nationally and internationally on supporting implementation of CICO as well as on how to combine functional behavioral assessment procedures with CICO to improve its effectiveness. Robert H. Horner, PhD, is Professor of Special Education at the University of Oregon and Director of Educational Community Supports, a research unit within the College of Education that develops and implements practices resulting in positive, durable, and scientifically validated change in the lives of individuals with disabilities and their families. Dr. Horner’s 35-year history of research has focused on applied behavior analysis, stimulus control, instructional technology, positive behavior support, and large-scale system change. v

Contributing Authors

Courtenay A. Barrett, PhD, is Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology at Utah State University. Her research and teaching emphasize ecobehavioral approaches to assessment and consultation. Allison L. Bruhn, PhD, is Assistant Professor of Special Education at the University of Iowa, where she teaches courses in designing, implementing, and evaluating behavioral interventions. Her research interests include multi-­tiered systems of support and technology-­based behavioral interventions. Kaitlin Bundock, MEd, is a doctoral candidate in Special Education at the University of Utah. Her research interests include Tier 2 behavioral and academic interventions, as well as functional behavioral assessment in secondary schools. Donna M. Gilbertson, PhD, is Associate Professor of School Psychology at Utah State University. Her teaching and research interests focus on intervention and consultation to help adults respond effectively to children and the learning, social, and emotional adjustment problems of adolescents in school settings. J. Matt Jameson, PhD, is Assistant Professor in the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah. His primary research interests include inclusive instructional procedures and technology use for behavioral assessment and instruction of students with significant cognitive disabilities. Sheldon L. Loman, PhD, is Assistant Professor at Portland State University. His research interests include the use of efficient function-­based supports in public school settings. He has co­authored the Basic FBA to BSP Trainer’s Manual, available at www.pbis.org. Robert E. O’Neill, PhD, BCBA-D, is Professor and Chair of the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah. He has been engaged in research, teaching, and consulting activities involving functional behavioral assessment and positive behavior support in educational and community settings for over 30 years. Kathleen Strickland-­Cohen, PhD, is Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership at Texas Tech University, where she teaches courses on functional assessment, classroom and behavior management, and advanced ethical issues in applied behavior analysis. Dr. Strickland-­Cohen’s research focuses on enhancing school capacity to efficiently use functional behavioral assessment to design and effectively implement function-­ based behavior support. vi

Acknowledgments

The Department of Special Education and Community Resources at the University of Oregon formed a group of colleagues, the Functional Assessment Work Group, to discuss and investigate issues related to implementing functional behavioral assessment (FBA) and positive individual behavior support in general education settings. Collaboration with the Functional Assessment Work Group was an invaluable resource in developing the first edition of this book. In addition, we had the good fortune to work with many talented representatives of local school communities. These individuals have taught us to understand the contextual considerations of implementing FBA and individual behavior support in elementary and middle schools. Finally, we would like to thank the members of the behavior support teams in each of the schools that have participated in our school-­based FBA training and implementation. Their insights, feedback, and suggestions made a significant contribution to the continued development and improvement of our original school-­based training model. We thank our contributing authors, Courtenay A. Barrett, Allison L. Bruhn, Kaitlin Bundock, Donna M. Gilbertson, J. Matt Jameson, Sheldon L. Loman, Robert E. O’Neill, and Kathleen Strickland-­Cohen, for their valuable insights and contributions to this second edition. The authors also would like to thank Kaitlin Bundock and Kristin Kladis for their extensive work on editing, locating resources, and updating references for this edition of the book. Special recognition is due to Melissa Bergstrom, PhD, for her significant contributions in the development of the initial and revised versions of the Functional Behavioral Assessment–­Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol) included in this book. vii

Preface

What Is the Purpose of This Book? This book is designed as a blueprint for embedding a successful, efficient system of individual behavior support within a school. The goal is to increase the skills required to identify and implement effective solutions to behavior problems. Part I provides some history and context for the use of functional behavioral assessment (FBA) within school systems. Part II illustrates the process of using FBA to design and evaluate behavior support plans (BSPs) for three example students. Part III presents the mechanics of what is needed to implement and develop the capacity for a system of FBA-based behavior support planning (FBA-BSP) within a school and school district. Part IV describes how FBA-BSP can be applied to specific populations or problems as well as how technology can be used to increase the efficiency and accessibility of FBA-BSP procedures.

For Whom Is This Book Written? This book is written for educational personnel, such as school psychologists, counselors, special educators, and teachers, who lead and serve on behavior support teams. The book also has value for administrators and management teams who design behavior support systems and resources. We have found that schools are most successful in reducing behavior problems when they designate and train a behavior support team, instead of relying on only one individual. The success of this team, especially initially, depends on having a member who is skilled in FBA and BSP and has the ability to efficiently viii



Preface ix

and effectively organize its members. This book is written as a guide for the leaders and members of behavior support teams.

What Are the Intended Outcomes for Schools Using This Book? This book is designed to produce five primary outcomes for schools: • Adherence to the professional standards for FBA. • An efficient and effective model for conducting FBA. • Specific procedures for using the results of FBA in the design of behavioral support. • Specific procedures for implementing, monitoring, and modifying BSPs. • Specific procedures for building the capacity to implement function-­based behavior support within a school.

What Investment Is Required to Accomplish These Outcomes? The success of individual behavior support within a school depends on the resources dedicated to ensure sustainability. Sustainability is increased by (1) allocation of sufficient financial and personnel resources, (2) long-term commitment, (3) adequate within-­building capacity, and (4) administrative support. Rob Horner, George Sugai, and colleagues (Horner, Sugai, & Todd, 1996; McIntosh, Filter, Bennett, Ryan, & Sugai, 2010) have specified the critical features schools need in order to develop a sustainable system of function-­based behavior support: • The school should establish behavior support as one of the top three annual development goals. • The school should establish a team to address structural change in the school. This team should include an administrator, at least one person with behavior analysis skills, and adequate faculty/staff representation. • The team should receive FBA-BSP training together and avoid relying on training just one or two people and expecting them to train everyone else. It is important to train 5–10 team members, from each participating school, together. • Adequate time and resources should be provided for the team to plan, design, and implement the new procedures. • The school faculty and staff should be informed about the purpose of the behavior support team and how to access the team’s services. • An evaluation system should be in place to provide regular, accurate information to the faculty about the outcomes of FBA-BSP implementation. • The new procedures need to produce an outcome valued by all key stakeholders while requiring minimal time commitment from teachers.

x

Preface

Why Is This Book Needed? Public schools face a serious challenge. The incidence and severity of serious behavior problems threaten effective education. On average, 5% of the students within a school account for half or nearly half of all school discipline referrals (Sherrod, Getch, & Ziomek-­Daigle, 2009; Sugai, Sprague, Horner, & Walker, 2000). Students who engage in violent, disruptive, and dangerous behavior compromise the fundamental ability of our schools to educate children, making these behaviors an issue for all students and all schools. The bright spot in this picture is that we are now better prepared to prevent and alter patterns of problem behavior than at any previous time (Carr et al., 1999; Gresham, Sugai, Horner, Quinn, & McInerney, 1998; Scott & Caron, 2005; Scott & Eber, 2003; Sugai, Horner, et al., 2000). A practical and effective technology for responding to problem behaviors, called functional behavioral assessment (FBA), is accessible to school-­based staff. The technology of FBA can be used to identify the variables supporting problem behaviors and to rearrange the environment to both reduce problem behaviors and build constructive skills (e.g., Ervin, DuPaul, Kern, & Friman, 1998; Lewis & Sugai, 1996; Sugai & Horner, 2000). Carr et al. (1999) reported that in more than two-­thirds of published studies interventions using positive behavior support resulted in reducing problem behavior by 80% or more. This success rate is supported by more recent research as well (Gage, Lewis, & Stichter, 2012). Of special importance were indications that interventions were more likely to be effective if they were guided by functional assessment, conducted in typical settings by typical personnel and implemented in a comprehensive manner. FBA is a powerful and effective technology that is expected in schools. The 2004 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004; von Ravensberg & Tobin, 2006) explicitly recommend that FBA information be collected and used to guide behavior support in schools. Unfortunately, while the value and the positive results of FBA are now highly acclaimed, there are important limitations to the availability of this technology for school personnel. FBA has previously been characterized by procedures that require very skilled personnel and considerable periods of time. If FBA is to become a basic tool within schools, the efficiency of the procedures (both in terms of who can use them and the amount of time required) must be improved. Responding to this need is a primary focus of this book. We describe procedures that were developed in collaboration with school psychologists, teachers, administrators, families, and behavior specialists. These procedures are designed to fit the needs, skills, and time constraints within typical schools. A major focus of the book will be on the school- and district-­based organizational commitments that are essential if FBA and individual behavior support are to be used for real student gains.



Preface xi

What Is Functional Behavioral Assessment? FBA is a method of gathering information about situational events that predict and maintain problem behavior. To obtain this information, the student, his or her teacher(s), and often his or her parent(s) are interviewed about the student’s behavior and daily routines. Students also may be observed in the settings in which problem behavior most frequently occurs; in some cases, systematic manipulations of these settings may also be required. The desired outcome of FBA is to (1) obtain an observable and measurable description of the problem behavior, (2) identify the setting events or antecedents that predict when the behavior will and will not occur, and (3) identify the consequences that maintain the problem behavior (O’Neill et al., 1997). This information can be used to generate hypothesis statements that describe the key features of the environment that influence problem behavior. FBA has several advantages over topological approaches to the treatment of serious behavior problems. First, FBA considers individual differences and environmental factors in the development of BSPs (O’Neill et al., 1997). Second, the intervention strategies can be directly and logically linked to the problem behavior. FBA links assessment of behavior problems to a choice of intervention strategies by indicating strategies for reducing misbehavior and increasing desired or acceptable alternative behavior (O’Neill et al., 1997). Finally, and most important, research suggests that FBA increases treatment effectiveness (DuPaul & Ervin, 1996; Gage et al., 2012; Ingram, Lewis-­Palmer, & Sugai, 2005). Because children with behavior problems represent a continuum of need, complexity, and risk, the actual process of FBA will not look the same for all students. Children who are at risk for suspension or alternative school placement because of chronic, severe problem behavior require a more comprehensive assessment than children who demonstrate mild, less complex misbehavior. The model presented in this book recognizes these differences and discusses three different approaches to FBA: brief FBA, full FBA, and functional analysis. Each approach matches the level of staff involvement to the level of need demonstrated by the identified student. Consistent throughout these approaches is an emphasis on problem solving through identification of predictors and consequences of problem behaviors. Each approach requires an observable and measurable definition of the problem behavior. This multilevel approach to FBA recognizes the practical realities of limited time and resources in schools. Multiple direct observations of behavior are neither practical nor necessary for every student with problem behavior. For many students with mild problem behaviors, an interview with the teacher who is very familiar with the child’s problem behavior (i.e., brief FBA) will suffice to develop an initial working, testable hypothesis and to design an initial BSP. Children with more serious or complex problem behavior will require a more extensive assessment, including direct observations in problem settings. Direct observation is an integral part of full FBA and functional analysis.

xii

Preface

When Is Functional Behavioral Assessment Needed? Schools are required to conduct an FBA for any student with a disability who is at risk for expulsion, alternative school placement, or more than 10 days of suspension (von Ravensberg & Tobin, 2006). Even though FBA is required under limited circumstances, standards of good professional practice dictate a problem-­solving approach to managing problem behaviors in the school. Utilizing this function-­ based approach ensures adherence to standards of professional practice while increasing a school’s ability to reduce problem behavior and promote appropriate behavior.

How Is This Book Organized? In this second edition, we have added several new chapters, updated material to reflect current educational contexts and research, and embedded the content, to a greater extent, within the multi-­tiered framework of schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS). Chapters 1, 8, 9, and 11 are new material provided by contributing guest authors. Chapter 10 is also a new chapter written by Deanne A. Crone. Chapter 2 was extensively revised and rewritten by Leanne S. Hawken and Deanne A. Crone. Chapter 1 provides a review of the contextual, historical, and effective uses of FBA-BSP in schools as well as a practical discussion of the challenges involved in using FBA within the school system. In Chapter 2, we discuss how school personnel can think and act functionally within a multi-­tiered system of behavior support. Chapter 3 details the process of conducting an FBA for three example students and introduces observation and interview instruments. Chapter 4 demonstrates the process of developing an effective, efficient, and relevant BSP for the three example students. In Chapter 5, the use of data-based decisions to evaluate and modify the BSP is discussed. Chapter 6 outlines the roles and responsibilities of the individual members of the behavior support team and addresses critical elements for creating a team that is organized and efficient. In Chapters 7 and 8, the issue of how to develop within-­building and within-­district capacity (i.e., an array of individuals who have the skills to conduct FBAs and to design, implement, evaluate, and modify BSPs) is outlined. Chapter 9 describes how FBA-BSP procedures can be used when the behavioral issues arise mostly from concerns related to academic skill or performance. In Chapter 10, we examine how FBA-BSP can be applied in early childhood settings. Finally, in Chapter 11, we describe how technology can best be used to facilitate data collection and implementation of FBA-BSP. Copies of all relevant forms and instruments are offered in the Appendices.

Contents

PART I. Using Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools: Context and Framework  1. Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools: Historical Background and the Current Context

3

Robert E. O’Neill and Kaitlin Bundock Introduction 3 Historical Perspectives on FBA  4 Basic Components of the FBA Process  4 FBA Procedures in School Settings  5 Best‑Practice Recommendations  10 Summary and Conclusions  14

 2. Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools: Thinking Functionally across All Tiers of Behavior Support

15

The Current Context Regarding Problem Behavior in Schools  15 Overview of SWPBS  16 Thinking Functionally about Problem Behavior  18 Tier 1 and FBA  21 Tier 2 and FBA  24 Tier 3 and FBA  27 Intervention: What Steps Are Involved in Evaluating and Modifying a BSP?  31 Supplementary Section  34

PART II. Embedding Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems: Case Examples  3. Conducting a Functional Behavioral Assessment

39

Introduction 39 The Assessment Process  40 Supplementary Section  64

 4. Designing a Behavior Support Plan Introduction 66 Competing Behaviors  68

xiii

66

xiv

Contents Contextual Fit  73 Individualizing the BSP  74 Documenting a BSP  76 Supplementary Section  82

 5. Evaluating and Modifying the Behavior Support Plan

83

Introduction 83 Rationale 83 Critical Elements  84 Data‑Based Decisions  94 Maintenance Plan  97

PART III. Using Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems: Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacity  6. Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team and How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team?

101

Introduction 101 Behavior Support Team Structure  102 Behavior Support Team: Core Team Membership  105 Core Behavior Support Team Roles and Responsibilities  107 How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team?  109 Supplementary Section  118

 7. How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for Functional Behavioral Assessment on the Behavior Support Team?

122

Introduction 122 Requirements and Commitments  123 A Model for Generating within‑Building Capacity  127 Leadership Models  129 Supplementary Section  131

 8. Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support

134

Kathleen Strickland‑Cohen, Sheldon L. Loman, and Robert H. Horner Introduction 134 The Challenge  134 Basic versus Complex Assessment and Behavior Support  136 Organizing a District to Deliver Basic Behavior Support  137 Establishing a Context to Deliver Individualized Behavior Supports  139 Building Capacity: Investing in Training School‑Based Personnel  142 Training School‑Based Personnel to Implement Basic Behavior Support  143 The Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum  144 Basic FBA to BSP Training Format  146 Empirical Support for Basic FBA‑BSP  149 Implementing Basic FBA‑BSP within Tiered Systems of Behavior Support  150

PART IV. Functional Behavioral Assessment as Applied to Specific Problems or Specific Populations  9. Functional Behavioral Assessment for Academic Concerns Courtenay A. Barrett and Donna M. Gilbertson Introduction 153 The FBA Process and an Examination of Academic Performance  154 Gather Data for Referral  155 Develop a Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior  159

153



Contents xv Develop Initial Supports for Individual Intervention  160 Implement Supports and Monitor Change  162 Case Examples  163 Conclusion 180

10. Functional Behavioral Assessment with Preschool‑Age Children

182

Introduction 182 Is the FBA‑BSP Process Warranted in Early Childhood Education?  182 Multi‑Tiered SWPBS and ECE  183 Problem Behavior in Young Children  187 Functions of Problem Behavior in Young Children  189 Can FBA‑BSP Be Implemented in Typical ECE Settings with ECE Professionals?  190 What Does FBA in ECE Look Like?  191 What Is Unique about This Population That Needs to Be Considered for Both Assessment and Intervention?  192 Case Example  196 Conclusion 213

11. Technology Trends in Functional Behavioral Assessment and Intervention

214

J. Matt Jameson, Allison L. Bruhn, and Leanne S. Hawken Introduction 214 Locating an App for Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior  216 FBA Observational Data Collection Apps/Technology Resources  218 Intervention Apps/Technology Resources  226 Next Steps  235 Web‑Based Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Technology: ISIS‑SWIS  237 Conclusion 239

Appendices Appendix A. Request for Assistance Form

243

Appendix B. Functional Behavioral Assessment–Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol)

245

Appendix C. Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS)

261

Appendix D. Student-Guided Functional Assessment Interview (Primary)

265

Appendix E.

Assessing Activity Routines Form

267

Appendix F.

Brief Functional Assessment Interview Form

268

Appendix G. Functional Assessment Observation Form

269

Appendix H. A Checklist for Assessing the Quality of Behavior Support Planning: Does the Plan (or Planning Process) Have These Features?

270

References 271 Index

283 Purchasers can download and print select materials from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

Part I Using Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools Context and Framework

Chapter 1

Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools Historical Background and the Current Context Robert E. O’Neill and Kaitlin Bundock

Introduction Recent survey data from the National Center for Education Statistics (Neiman & Hill, 2011; Robers, Kemp, Truman, & Snyder, 2013) indicate that disciplinary and safety issues continue to be a stable or increasing concern for schools and districts. The proportion of schools reporting concerns with classroom disruptive behavior, bullying, physical assaults, and gang activity is as high as 50% or more depending on the specific issue being assessed. A wide range of research indicates that typical punitive approaches to dealing with challenging behavior such as in- and out-of-­school suspension or zero-­tolerance expulsion are not effective in reducing such behavior (Skiba & Raush, 2006; Skiba, Ritter, Simmons, Peterson, & Miller, 2006). There clearly remains a critical ongoing need for teachers, administrators, and other school personnel to be prepared to effectively implement and evaluate empirically based schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) strategies. In recent decades such approaches have been conceptualized as providing behavioral support at multiple tiers (multi-­tiered systems of support [MTSS]). These include general support for all students in a school at Tier 1, more targeted strategies for students needing additional support at Tier 2, and intensive support at Tier 3 for students exhibiting more severe and chronic challenging behavior (Crone, Hawken, & Horner, 2010; Sailor, Dunlap, Sugai, & Horner, 2011). It is at this third tier where functional behavioral assessment (FBA) strategies most often are considered to be critical. 3

4

Using FBA in Schools

Historical Perspectives on FBA In many respects, the current emphasis on and adoption of FBA strategies comes from the early roots of the field of applied behavior analysis. B. F. Skinner is typically credited with initial discussion of the importance of analyzing functional relationships between behavioral performances and a range of environmental variables and influences (e.g., Skinner, 1953, 1966). Examples of implementing and evaluating behavioral strategies to manage challenging behaviors began to appear in the 1960s (e.g., Lovaas, Freitag, Gold, & Kassorla, 1965; Risley, 1968; Wolf, Risley, & Mees, 1964). These early efforts typically involved a conceptualization of the contingencies maintaining the challenging behavior as a basis for developing and implementing intervention strategies. This conceptual framework set the stage for the influential work of Brian Iwata and his colleagues (Iwata, Dorsey, Slifer, Bauman, & Richman, 1982/1994). In their seminal article (and in many since) they described a methodology for conducting rigorous experimental analyses of challenging behavior. Such analyses provided guidance in identifying and implementing relevant intervention strategies. Since then there has been a virtual explosion of research and procedural books and manuals providing guidance on conducting FBAs (e.g., Dunlap & Kincaid, 2001). Conducting FBAs has become integral to a variety of educational and human service fields, both in the United States and internationally (O’Neill & Stephenson, 2010). Language referring specifically to FBAs was included in the most recent reauthorizations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004). Standards requiring the competent use of a range of FBA procedures have been put forth by a variety of professional organizations, including the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), Association for Positive Behavioral Support (APBS), and the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB).

Basic Components of the FBA Process FBA includes both critical perspectives and sets of strategies and tools that may be used in various ways at all three tiers of MTSS. However, as mentioned above, it has typically been considered to be a primary component of behavior support at the Tier 3 level for students engaging in more severe chronic challenging behavior (Crone & Horner, 2003). An FBA is typically conducted to evaluate the behavior of a student to document the range of behaviors being exhibited, the setting and antecedent conditions related to those behaviors, and the consequences of reinforcing and maintaining the behaviors (O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015). This information can then be analyzed and organized to help guide the process of developing comprehensive behavior support plans (BSPs; Bambara & Kern, 2005; Umbreit, Ferro, Liaupsin, & Lane, 2007). A large amount



Historical Background and the Current Context 5

of published literature has documented the effectiveness of such function-­based interventions with a broad range of client populations in a variety of settings (Gage et al., 2012; Goh & Bambara, 2012; Miller & Lee, 2013). The FBA process can involve one or more of three basic strategies for gathering assessment information. These include “indirect” information obtained from relevant persons (teachers, parents, etc.) via interviews, questionnaires, and/or rating scales; systematic direct observation in relevant settings (e.g., classrooms); and systematic experimental functional analyses, during which various environmental factors are manipulated and data are collected with regard to their effects on student behavior (Cipani & Shock, 2007; O’Neill et al., 2015; Umbreit et al., 2007). Additional examples and information regarding these strategies are discussed further in subsequent sections of this chapter and throughout the rest of the book.

FBA Procedures in School Settings Since the resurgence of FBA approaches beginning in the early 1980s, a major focus of research and implementation has been their use in school settings. Research in this area has involved a wide variety of student populations and settings, including students with and without disability labels and regular and special educational settings (Ervin et al., 2004; Solnick & Ardoin, 2010). For example, a recent comprehensive review of 30 years of FBA research literature found that 36% of published data-based studies involving FBA were conducted in school settings (Beavers, Iwata, & Lerman, 2013). Anderson, Rodriguez, and Campbell (2014) reported that at least 160 articles concerning FBA procedures in school settings have been published since 1985. These included data-based studies as well as conceptual and procedural articles. Published work regarding the implementation of FBA procedures in schools has presented something of a mixed picture. On the positive side, several studies have documented that school personnel can be trained to conduct effective FBAs and develop and implement effective behavior support plans (BSPs) (e.g., Crone, Hawken, & Bergstrom, 2007). However, researchers and authors have also expressed concerns that school personnel may experience difficulty in implementing FBAs and function-­based support due to a variety of issues including time constraints, level of expertise required, and administrative and other support (e.g., Hanley, Iwata, & McCord, 2003).

Effective Implementation of FBAs and Function‑Based Support in School Settings Crone et al. (2007) provided an example of successful implementation in school settings. Over a 3-year period they trained 10 school-­based teams in concepts

6

Using FBA in Schools

and procedures for conducting FBAs and implementing and evaluating individual function-­based support. They provided training workshops and on-site consultation on FBA and function-­based support over the project period. Participants conducted FBAs and implemented function-­based support for 77 students over the course of the project. The results indicated that participants’ scores on an FBA Knowledge Test increased, and trained process components were largely being implemented based on scores on the Individual Systems Evaluation Tool (ISET). Participants gave the training and implementation process positive scores on the FBA Training Acceptability Questionnaire. While individual student outcome data were not collected for all students, single-­case analyses of a subset of student participants indicated positive outcomes on desired and challenging behavior. Ellingson, Miltenberger, Stricker, Galensky, and Garlinghouse (2000) collaborated with three teachers working with three students with developmental disabilities who exhibited challenging behavior. They conducted teacher interviews and administered teacher questionnaires, and the teachers collected direct observation data to develop hypotheses about the functions of student behavior. The researchers and teachers jointly developed function-­based BSPs, which the teachers implemented. The results indicated positive changes in both desired and challenging behaviors for all 3 students. Christensen, Renshaw, Caldarella, and Young (2012) reported a series of studies during which they worked with general education teachers who were teaching students at risk for behavior disorders. They provided an ongoing series of training and support activities for teachers with regard to conducting FBAs and implementing function-­based support. They presented data from an individual teacher who participated in their work. Results from FBA Knowledge Tests indicated increasing understanding of the processes. Social validity/acceptability measures were positive for both teacher and students regarding the assessment and intervention procedures. Observational data on student performance indicated positive changes in both desired and challenging behaviors. These studies represent a range of literature that indicate that FBA procedures and function-­based support can be effectively implemented in school settings. It is important to note, however, that successful implementation in these studies was dependent on ongoing substantial involvement and guidance from “outside” personnel (e.g., university-­based researchers and graduate students).

Acceptability of FBA Procedures Along with the studies just described, a recent study surveyed a national sample of teachers and professionals working with children with behavioral disorders and a single state sample of school psychologists (O’Neill et al., 2014). This study focused on assessing the attitudes of teachers and school psychologists with regard to their perspectives on the acceptability and usefulness of a range of FBA



Historical Background and the Current Context 7

procedures. Participants were given a vignette description of a student engaging in challenging behavior and asked to rate a variety of FBA procedures (e.g., rating scales/questionnaires, interviews, systematic direct observations, functional analysis manipulations) regarding how willing they would be to use the procedure, whether they thought it would be an appropriate procedure, whether they had used the procedure before, whether they had found it useful, and whether they felt they had the training and resources to use the procedure effectively. Participants were also given the opportunity to provide open-ended comments regarding FBA procedures. Nearly 100% of both groups reported having received some level of training in FBA procedures, including pre- and inservice training, consultation, conferences, and/or books and online materials. Both groups reported relatively high levels of acceptability for all procedures. There were some statistically significant differences between the teacher and psychologist groups. Regarding both systematic direct observation and functional analysis manipulations, teachers reported they were more willing to use the procedures and found them more appropriate and useful as compared to the psychologists. While these differences were statistically significant, the effect sizes were relatively small, but provide interesting indications of possible different perspectives between groups of professionals. The open-ended comments were reviewed and categorized in a qualitative manner. The most frequent comments expressed concerns about the amount of time needed to conduct FBA procedures. However, the vast majority of these (60) were expressed by psychologists rather than teachers (9). This may indicate that psychologists find FBA procedures challenging to conduct given the wide variety of activities for which they are responsible, whereas teachers may be more accustomed to conducting assessments as part of their ongoing daily activities.

Potential Challenges and Issues The studies reviewed above demonstrate the potential benefits of FBA for reducing problem behavior in schools and the ability of school personnel to implement such procedures. However, ongoing challenges remain. As mentioned earlier, much of the published research on implementation in school settings has depended on substantial involvement by outside personnel such as university-­ based researchers. In a recent review, Anderson et al. (2014) reported that the research literature indicates that 70% or more of published functional analyses in school settings were conducted by outside research personnel. Additional research and application are needed to document that school personnel can learn and implement FBA and function-­based strategies consistently and with appropriate fidelity. These concerns are supported by data presented by Cook et al. (2012) and Van Acker, Boreson, Gable, and Potterson (2005). They reviewed state samples of FBAs and behavior intervention plans (BIPs) submitted by school personnel. The

8

Using FBA in Schools

results indicated substantial deficits in the adequacy of the FBAs and BIPs in comparison to accepted best practices. Reviews of the published literature on recommendations for conducting FBAs/BIPs, and state-level policies and resources in this area, illustrate significant shortcomings about what is available to practitioners in terms of resources and support (Allday, Nelson, & Russel, 2011; Weber, Killu, Derby, & Barretto, 2005). A number of authors have addressed some of the most common challenges that may arise for school personnel when implementing FBA (Hanley et al., 2003). Scott, Anderson, and Spaulding (2008) suggest that the main potential challenges in implementing FBA relate to time requirements, sustainability of the practice influenced by personnel and resources, and validity of implementation.

Time One of the primary challenges of FBA implementation is the time that is required (Packenham, Shute, & Reid, 2004). A typical effective FBA process may require multiple interviews, rating forms, and systematic observations and manipulations. As indicated by the survey data we described, individuals such as school psychologists whose primary job responsibilities lie elsewhere may be responsible for implementing FBAs. Balancing FBA implementation with the myriad other tasks educators must do therefore may become difficult. Additional research based on feedback gathered from school psychologists, special education administrators, and teachers (Desrochers, Hile, & Williams-­Moseley, 1997; Nelson, Roberts, Rutherford, Mathur, & Aaroe, 1999) via surveys indicate that school based personnel often view FBA as difficult to implement primarily due to time requirements.

Resources for Sustainable Implementation FBA implementation does not require many expensive physical resources, but it does require personnel who have available time, as well as sufficient training for effective implementation. As we described there have been numerous studies in which researchers have conducted FBA in clinical settings, as well as in education contexts as “outsiders.” For sustainable implementation of FBA in schools, however, it is important that school-­based personnel, rather than external researchers, implement FBA effectively, and that they be trained to do so (Crone et al., 2007). In addition, when FBA is used as part of a preventive approach within SWPBS, there are likely more students in need of FBA than there are professionals available to implement it (Scott, McIntyre, Liaupsin, Nelson, & Conroy, 2004). Due to the numbers of students who could best be supported by interventions determined through FBA, schools need to have individuals on site, such as general and special educators, who are able to implement FBA effectively and efficiently.



Historical Background and the Current Context 9

Training Given the complexities of FBA, it is essential that individuals who may be responsible for implementing it be provided with effective pre- and/or inservice training. Unfortunately, research indicates that the majority of general educators, as well as some special educators, have not received adequate training (Allday et al., 2011; Blood & Neel, 2007; Christensen et al., 2012; Desrochers et al., 1997; Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2004, 2005; Stormont, Reinke, & Herman, 2011). The majority (57%) of general educators surveyed by Stormont et al. (2011) did not even know whether FBA was used at their school. In addition, members of the Psychology Division of the American Association on Mental Retardation surveyed by Desrochers et al. (1997), indicated that FBA was difficult to implement due to a lack of peer expertise and support, as well as knowledge of how to conduct FBA. This demonstrates that a significant potential challenge to FBA implementation involves inadequate training for special and general educators. One challenge to designing and providing effective pre- and inservice FBA training may be that there is disagreement about the necessary and sufficient procedures of FBA (Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2004). It is generally agreed that FBA involves at least operationally defining the behavior, identifying predictable antecedent–­behavior–­consequence (ABC) chains, determining stimulus control and the function of the behavior, identifying appropriate replacement behaviors, and manipulating antecedents and consequences to determine the efficacy of the replacement behavior (Scott, Alter, Rosenberg, & Borgmeier, 2010). There are disagreements about how best to identify the function of the students’ behavior, as well as how to develop interventions from FBA results (Ervin et al., 2004; Gage et al., 2012; Reid & Nelson, 2002). The mechanisms used to identify the function of the behavior range from the use of rating forms to direct observations and experimental manipulation of environmental variables (Ervin et al., 2004; Reid & Nelson, 2002). There is additional disagreement about how many observations are needed to implement FBA. Out of the 14 studies reviewed by Reid & Nelson (2002), the total time needed to implement FBA varied between 3 and 20 sessions. Effective training is difficult to provide when the literature indicates such a large range in how FBA is implemented and used to develop interventions.

Fidelity and Validity of Implementation A final challenge to FBA implementation is maintaining the fidelity of the practice while also accommodating the limited time and resources available in schools. FBA is technically demanding and has typically been considered methodologically rigorous, but must be efficient and accessible to allow school-­based practitioners to implement it (Allday et al., 2011; Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2004; Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2005). Alterations made to traditional FBA run the risk of diminishing its

10

Using FBA in Schools

validity, so the challenge of maintaining fidelity in FBA implementation is balancing the methodological rigor of FBA with feasibility and efficiency. To maintain methodological rigor, FBA is often implemented by external researchers who collect data and determine the number and length of sessions (Solnick & Ardoin, 2010). However, the use of outside personnel may not allow for sustainable FBA implementation, as previously discussed. When school-­based personnel do implement FBA, the main areas of practice for which fidelity and validity may be reduced are in data collection (Desrochers et al., 1997; Katsiyannis, Conroy, & Zhang, 2008; Mueller & Nkosi, 2007; Van Acker et al., 2005) as well as hypothesis development and verification (Van Acker et al., 2005). Survey research assessing the acceptability of FBA implementation indicates that indirect methods of data collection, such as interviews, file reviews, observations, checklists, and rating scales, were used more frequently than direct methods, such as manipulation of environmental variables (Desrochers et al., 1997; Katsiyannis et al., 2008; Mueller & Nkosi, 2007; Van Acker et al., 2005). Indirect methods may pose a risk to the validity of FBA because they have mixed outcome data when compared with the results of direct methods, such as functional analysis, but they can help provide more context for valid school-­based, as opposed to clinic-­based, FBAs (Mueller & Nkosi, 2007), and are generally considered to be more acceptable by school-­based personnel (Desrochers et al., 1997). A part of the FBA process that may present a challenge to validity is the identification and validation of the hypothesis regarding the function(s) of student behavior. Van Acker et al. (2005), in a review of the FBA processes and data from schools in Wisconsin, found that many individuals and/or teams implementing FBA did not take into account the function of the problem behavior when determining interventions. In addition, this study reported that personnel responsible for implementing FBA did not test or confirm their hypotheses using accepted procedures. The results of this research indicate that validity of FBA implementation may be sacrificed in the interest of efficiency and feasibility. While FBA may be difficult to implement in schools due to time restrictions, resource shortages, and balancing validity with efficiency, a variety of different FBA methods have been developed to address these challenges.

Best‑Practice Recommendations Scott and Kamps (2007) proposed three main elements to focus on to address the challenges of implementing FBA in schools: function, efficiency, and context. Function refers to the need for school personnel to be able to implement FBA independently and for FBA to work effectively with a variety of students in a variety of circumstances. Efficiency refers to striking a balance between validity, effectiveness, and efficiency. This balance is essential to ensure that FBA is actually used by practitioners. Context refers to the need to focus on settings



Historical Background and the Current Context 11

and environmental factors that are unique to school contexts, such as student academic needs and how they may relate to behavior when considering FBA implementation. Research regarding best practices of FBA implementation can be grouped into three main categories: tools and strategies, personnel, and training. For each of these categories, studies have indicated that there is a range of practices that have been associated with positive outcomes.

Tools and Strategies The range of methods and materials that researchers have developed for implementing FBAs in schools include indirect methods such as interviews and rating scales, systematic direct observations (e.g., ABC observations), and structured functional analysis manipulations. These methods may often involve behavior specialists or other personnel (e.g., school psychologists). A substantial question that arises is identifying the most efficient and effective strategies for conducting FBAs. A variety of research has found that indirect methods and descriptive observations may not provide valid identification of behavioral functions and related factors as compared to more controlled manipulations (Cunningham & O’Neill, 2007; Gage et al., 2012; Iwata, DeLeon, & Roscoe, 2013). Given these data, some researchers and authors have recommended that controlled experimental manipulation of variables by professionals in school settings be considered best practice (Iwata & Dozier, 2008). However, it is clear that many educators do not have the methods, time, resources, and training to be able to do this in a traditional manner. A variety of more recent approaches that have attempted to respond to the principles of function, context, and efficiency have been developed.

Trial‑Based Functional Analysis Trial-based functional analysis involves exposing the student to conditions that are designed to determine the function of the student’s behavior through experimental manipulation of environmental variables (Bloom, Iwata, Fritz, Roscoe, & Carreau, 2011). Typical functional analyses may involve repeated sessions that are 10–15 minutes long and vary between contingencies that are being applied (e.g., attention or escape being provided contingent on problem behavior). Trialbased functional analysis adapted for use in classrooms involves implementing these procedures in periodic 4-minute sessions, which are built into the classroom routine at naturally occurring points (Bloom et al., 2011). In studies implementing trial-based functional analysis procedures in typical classroom settings, results identified functions matching traditional functional analysis procedures 60% of the time, which demonstrates that trial-based functional analysis may be a helpful method to meet the unique demands of schools and classrooms. Studies have also demonstrated that special education teachers and paraprofessionals

12

Using FBA in Schools

can be trained to use trial-based functional analysis in their classrooms to effectively identify the function of behaviors of their students, as well as implement appropriate interventions that produce positive effects on challenging behavior (Bessette & Willis, 2007; Lambert, Bloom, & Irvin, 2012).

Truncated FBA In truncated FBA procedures, the process is shortened to four steps: teacher interviews, identification of the function of the behavior, hypothesis development, and intervention development and implementation (Packenham et al., 2004). One of the primary differences with truncated FBA procedures is that direct observations are not included and are replaced primarily with teacher reports, as teachers have witnessed the student behavior in multiple occurrences. A variety of forms are used to facilitate truncated FBA implementation, including the simplified form of the functional behavior pathway (Sugai, Lewis-­Palmer, & Hagan-Burke, 1999). This is a format to guide practitioners in identifying the behaviors of concern and the antecedent and consequent variables influencing them. The Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS; McIntosh, Borgmeier, et al., 2008) is another tool to help practitioners identify challenging behaviors, the routines in which they occur, and relevant influences during those routines. Both of these methods have been demonstrated through research to have strong validity. The simplified form of the functional behavior pathway uses clearer language that may be more accessible to teachers and other school-­based personnel than technical behavioral terms (Scott, Alter, Rosenberg, & Borgmeier, 2010). This form can be used in teacher interviews to provide teachers with a mechanism to reflect on student behavior with a functional approach. McIntosh, Borgmeier, et al. (2008) reviewed 10 research studies that employed the FACTS and determined that the checklist has strong evidence of test–­retest reliability and interobserver agreement, strong evidence of treatment utility, and strong evidence of social validity. This research indicates that FACTS is a tool that can be used effectively and consistently by school-­based practitioners. In addition, they found moderate to strong evidence of convergent validity with direct observation and functional analysis procedures, which indicates that the information gained from FACTS may match that gained from observations. The overall message appears to be that school personnel need to be able to select and adapt the procedures used to fit the needs of specific situations.

Personnel: The Importance of Team‑Based Processes Most current research that assesses the personnel involved in FBA implementation focuses on analyzing the impact of team-based procedures. In a review of FBA studies, Goh and Bambara (2012) found that out of all variables they analyzed, teaming had the most significant effect on the success of FBA implementation.



Historical Background and the Current Context 13

Lee and Jamison (2003) found that student assistance teams (SATs) that were trained in problem solving and FBA procedures were able to correctly select interventions related to the identified function of escape, lack of skills, and attention, indicating that team-based approaches can be considered best practice to use within FBA procedures. However, the composition and training of team members is a critical issue. Scott, McIntyre, et al. (2004) conducted a study in which three groups read behavioral vignettes and identified the function of the behavior from the descriptions. One group was composed of researchers, another of school-­based teams, and a third of teams with researchers included. Even when teams received 6 hours of FBA training prior to the study, there was little agreement between the groups regarding the function of the behavior in the vignettes. Benazzi, Horner, and Good (2006) examined BSPs developed by behavior support teams with or without the involvement of behavior specialists, and plans developed by behavior specialists alone. BSPs were judged to be more technically adequate if developed by teams involving a specialist or by specialists alone. However, plans developed by teams alone or by teams with a specialist were judged to be more acceptable for implementation and a better contextual fit. This finding indicates the importance of having teams that include persons with expertise in behavioral theory and procedures and persons familiar with the student and the context in which they are involved. It is clear that ongoing professional training is a key element in support teams’ successful implementation of FBA (Christensen et al., 2012; Gage et al., 2012; Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2005; Van Acker et al., 2005).

Professional Development and Training Studies indicate that teachers and other school-­based personnel can effectively implement FBA more independently given quality pre- and/or inservice training (Bessette & Willis, 2007; Christensen et al., 2012; Gage et al., 2012; Lambert et al., 2012; Skinner, Veerkamp, Kamps, & Andra, 2009). Evidence of the effectiveness of training indicates that it is essential to identify best practices associated with training practitioners to implement FBA. Current best practice recommendations discuss key elements that should be included in training practitioners. First, trainings delivered in only one session without follow-­up maintenance trainings have been proven to be ineffective in comparison to multiple session training (Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2005). Individuals and teams provided with only one training session had higher rates of use of harsh and exclusionary punishments for student problem behavior, and also typically did not implement interventions based on the function of the behavior (Scott, McIntyre, et al., 2005). Multisession training is more effective because it allows for the concept of FBA to be introduced, taught with examples, be modeled in realistic settings, and for support to be provided to practitioners as they implement FBA independently (Scott, Nelson, & Zabala, 2003).

14

Using FBA in Schools

School personnel being trained need to be invested in the importance of positive behavior support (PBS) as a schoolwide system and be committed to ultimately being able to implement FBA without an outside expert as the leader of the intervention (Scott et al., 2003). Case study analysis has demonstrated that four outcome dimensions are important to include within effective trainings on FBA. These include teacher knowledge, teacher skill development, student behavioral change, and social validity (Christensen et al., 2012). Focusing on the ideal outcomes and training teachers in how to achieve those outcomes through FBA provides an effective training framework. To enhance accessibility it may be important to discuss concepts and procedures using some familiar, nontechnical language, rather than specific technical terminology associated with behavior analysis or special education (Scott, Alter, Rosenberg, & Borgmeier, 2010). In addition, it is important to build on teachers’ everyday experiences and vocabulary in discussing effective FBA procedures (Scott, Alter, et al., 2010).

Summary and Conclusions The implementation of FBA and function-­based support procedures in schools stands at a very important point. As is clear from the evidence discussed above, there exists an effective technology for intensive individualized behavior support in school settings (i.e., Tier 3). Research has demonstrated that continuing to implement non-­function-­based support strategies can be ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst (Ellingson et al., 2000; Filter & Horner, 2009; Ingram et al., 2005; Newcomer & Lewis, 2004). However, there is still a clear research-­to-­practice gap in many settings with regard to getting effective procedures implemented in schools in a consistent, valid, and efficient manner (Allday et al., 2011). Researchers and practitioners must continue to work on developing procedures and materials, as well as effective training and supervisory strategies, to enable school personnel to successfully implement effective behavior support. The remainder of this book delineates a range of strategies and procedures for accomplishing this goal.

Chapter 2

Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools Thinking Functionally across All Tiers of Behavior Support

The Current Context Regarding Problem Behavior in Schools A growing crisis faces students and educators. Student disruption, aggression, and academic failure are a problem in schools nationwide. Students’ lack of discipline is viewed in many circles as the biggest problem faced by public schools (National Center for Education Statistics, 2010) and is a common reason why teachers make requests for assistance from their principal or student support team. Students with behavior problems are at risk for multiple problems in academic, social, and daily functioning (Bradshaw, Bottiani, Osher, & Sugai, 2014). These students are more likely than students without problem behavior to drop out before completing high school; to be suspended, expelled, or placed in alternative school settings; to commit crimes against individuals or the community; to have difficult relationships with their parents and siblings; and to have a higher probability of being arrested (Bowen, Jenson, & Clark, 2012; Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995). These students not only harm themselves but also pose multiple challenges for their school administrators, teachers, and classmates. Administrators must spend significant amounts of time responding to teacher, parent, and student needs that accompany problem behavior. Teachers frequently have to interrupt instruction in order to attend to problem behavior. Students with problem behaviors will often require modifications to the curriculum or classroom environment in order to maximize their level of attainment. Administrators, teachers, parents, and communities often feel overwhelmed and challenged by students with problem behavior. They want to create schools that are places of learning, not places to struggle with misbehavior. Unfortunately, 15

16

Using FBA in Schools

whether because of a lack of training or a lack of resources, many schools do not have the tools or skills to identify and implement effective solutions to behavior problems. Historically, a common response to problem behavior in schools has been some type of punishment—­for example, detention, suspension, or expulsion from school. These reactive approaches serve primarily as short-term solutions that remove the child from the setting. Detention, suspension, and expulsion typically are ineffective at producing long-term reduction of problem behavior, generalization of behavior change, or acquisition of appropriate replacement behaviors (Costenbader & Markson, 1998; Royer, 1995). Clearly, schools need something more than a reactive approach to behavior management. Schools interested in implementing a proactive approach to behavior management should adopt a three-tier continuum of SWPBS.

Overview of SWPBS SWPBS is a three-tier prevention and intervention framework that is implemented schoolwide to support all students in the school (Horner, Albin, Todd, Newton, & Sprague, 2010). An assumption of SWPBS is that every student who attends school needs some level of behavior support; the level and intensity of support needed depends on the level of problem behavior the student presents. The intensity of support increases, at each level, from Tier 1 up to Tier 3. The level of support offered at each tier of SWPBS is illustrated in Figure 2.1. Most students come to school ready to respond to behavioral expectations and will benefit from a Tier 1, schoolwide behavior plan (e.g., Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Lewis, Sugai, & Colvin, 1998; Taylor-­Greene et al., 1997). Tier 1 SWPBS involves schools agreeing on three to five positively stated expectations (e.g., “Be respectful,” “Be responsible”), teaching the expectations in all school contexts, (e.g., hallways, cafeteria, classroom), providing reinforcement to students for following expectations, and having agreed-­upon consequences for students who do not follow the expectations. School teams are expected to use data, such as number of office discipline referrals (ODRs) per student, for decision making regarding the effectiveness or need for modifications to this level of support. Tier 1 SWPBS also involves teachers implementing an effective classroom behavior management plan with all students. Research from across the country indicates that Tier 1 SWPBS supports 75–85% of the student population (i.e., these students do not need additional behavior support; Horner et al., 2009). Students who do not respond to Tier 1 SWPBS may benefit from efficient Tier 2 targeted interventions. The “targeted” group of students is the 5–15% who are at risk for developing severe problem behavior due to poor peer relations, low academic achievement, and/or chaotic home environments (Hawken, Adolphson, MacLeod, & Schumann, 2009). These students typically require more practice



Tiers of Behavior Support 17

in learning behavioral expectations and may need academic modifications to ensure learning success. An example of a Tier 2 intervention is called Check-In/ Check-Out (CICO), which increases feedback and positive adult attention to the student throughout the school day (more detailed information on CICO is provided later in the chapter; Crone et al., 2010). Another type of Tier 2 behavior intervention may include instruction on social skills, such as teaching students how to interact with peers and/or anger management techniques (Kalberg, Lane, & Lambert, 2012). The crucial elements of Tier 2 behavior interventions are that they are efficient (i.e., students receive support shortly after being identified) and cost-­effective to implement (i.e., similar procedures are used with a group of students without requiring large amounts of staff time to implement).

•

~5% ~15%

• •

Tier 3 Function-Based Support

Tier 2 Check-In/Check-Out Targeted Social Skills Instruction

Tier 1 • Schoolwide Discipline Plan • Effective Classroom Management Plan • Schoolwide Bully Prevention

~80% of Students FIGURE 2.1.  SWPBS. Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Reprinted by permission.

18

Using FBA in Schools

A small group of students (1–7% of the student population) may need Tier 3 interventions, which involve conducting an FBA and implementing an individualized BSP (March & Horner, 2002; O’Neill et al., 2015). FBA involves gathering data to determine why a student is engaging in problem behavior (i.e., what function does the problem behavior serve?). Some students act out to gain teacher attention while other students act out to escape work that is too difficult for them. Conducting an FBA and using those data to develop an individualized BSP has been shown to be a highly effective tool for intervening with problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; McIntosh & Av-Gay, 2007; O’Neill & Stephenson, 2009). The purpose of this book is to provide school personnel with tools to more effectively and efficiently implement the FBA-BSP process. The FBA-BSP process will also be referred to as “function-­based support” throughout this book. The forthcoming chapters provide forms and guidance for FBA-BSP implementation. However, prior to introducing those materials, it is important to understand how FBA methods and processes (which are detailed in the next sections) can be embedded in each tier of SWPBS. Schools that are interested in embedding FBA methods into all three tiers must first agree to think “functionally” about problem behavior. Note: This book is not intended as a primer on FBA or behavior management. There are a number of excellent resources on both these topics, many of which are listed in the Supplementary Section to this chapter. We assume that the reader of this book has knowledge and experience in FBA-BSP but requires practical assistance in effectively and efficiently embedding FBA-BSP into the school infrastructure.

Thinking Functionally about Problem Behavior In the past, schools often implemented interventions based on the topography or form of the behavior. For example, if a student was frequently talking out or talking back, a menu of interventions were examined to determine what intervention fit best for these behaviors (Sprick, 2008). These interventions were not based on the function or the reason why the behavior was occurring. One of the most difficult challenges in designing effective interventions for children with problem behavior is the highly variable individual response to intervention. Strategies that work for one child may have no impact on the behavior of another child with similar behavior. Behavior intervention plans created in response to the type of behavior (e.g., fighting, stealing, talking back, profanity), rather than in response to the individual characteristics of the student or setting and without addressing the underlying function of the problem behavior, are unlikely to produce the intended effect, at least for any reasonable length of time. To plan a successful intervention, the interventionist should consider more than the problem behaviors and a menu of intervention options: What typically



Tiers of Behavior Support 19

triggers the problem behavior? What reward does the student obtain by engaging in the problem behavior? Given the variety of interventions that could be applied, teachers and school staff need a means for deciding which intervention or combination of interventions will be most effective for an individual student, group of students, or specific school setting or routine. Schools interested in implementing FBA within all three tiers of behavior support need to begin thinking functionally about problem behavior rather than relying on cookbook-­like approaches to solving problems. To think functionally about problem behavior involves school personnel agreeing to the following assumptions: (1) human behavior is functional, (2) human behavior is predictable, and (3) human behavior is changeable.

Human Behavior Is Functional The primary principle of function-­based behavior support is that people act the way they do for a reason. That is, most behavior is functional: it serves a purpose. The function of the behavior may be to obtain something the person wants, to gain adult or peer attention, or to escape from an aversive situation or person. The results or consequences of a behavior affect the future occurrence of that behavior. As intelligent, discerning individuals, students begin to recognize that some strategies are more effective than others at producing the outcomes they desire. Students will use effective strategies more often than ineffective strategies. For example, a student who wants to be part of the cheerleading squad learns that practicing the routines and consistently attending tryouts on time is more effective than complaining that tryouts are unfairly biased toward the “popular” girls. Ironically, students sometimes learn that problem behavior can be more efficient than appropriate behavior in producing desired outcomes. This may be true in cases when a student gets out of a difficult assignment by having a temper tantrum in class or when a student becomes the center of attention for his peers by swearing at a teacher. Much to the dismay of the school staff, these students recognize that inappropriate behavior can be an effective strategy for obtaining what they want. As a result, their problem behavior continues or intensifies. For example, consider the following cases: James is a seventh-­grade student who has difficulty reading aloud fluently. In social studies class, each student is expected to take a turn reading part of the chapter out loud. When it is James’s turn, he responds by getting angry: he pushes his books to the floor and swears at his teacher. His teacher responds by sending him to the vice principal’s office. This problem behavior continues and worsens. Michael, a second-­grade student, pushes the other children in line when he is told to stand at the end of the line. When the teacher lets him hold the

20

Using FBA in Schools

door, he stops pushing. This happens every time the students line up for lunch. The problem behavior continues on a daily basis. Lisa is a fifth-grade student who loves to be the center of attention. She frequently makes loud, inappropriate jokes in class that cause her classmates to laugh. This behavior continues even though the teacher interrupts each incident by giving Lisa a long lecture about appropriate fifth-grade behavior. Despite the disruption and frustration caused by each of these students, their behaviors are understandable within the given context. Each student is achieving his/her desired outcome (escaping embarrassment, obtaining a privilege, or receiving peer attention) by engaging in inappropriate behavior. The inappropriate behavior is serving a function for each student.

Human Behavior Is Predictable Human behavior does not occur in a vacuum. Environmental conditions can set up, set off, or maintain problem behavior. Take, for example, the case of James. James is embarrassed by his poor oral reading skills. Although his teacher is aware of his reading difficulties, she is puzzled by his problem behavior. She views his behavior as unpredictable and does not understand why he is undeterred by her numerous referrals to the vice principal’s office. After closer analysis, the behavior support team notes two important contributors to James’s behavior. First, his problem behavior occurs most frequently in situations when he is expected to read out loud in a large-group setting. This environmental condition serves as a predictor, or antecedent, for James’s problem behavior. Second, when James is sent to the office for problem behavior, he escapes the embarrassment of stumbling through a reading passage in front of his friends. Like many preadolescents, James would rather have his friends believe that he is a troublemaker than have them find out that he is a poor reader. In this case, the consequence of being sent to the office is rewarding to James. In fact, James has learned that if he wants to get out of reading in front of the class, he must have a tantrum. By looking for the antecedents and consequences that set up and maintain James’s tantrums, his problem behavior becomes very predictable.

Human Behavior Is Changeable Not only can we predict behavior, but we can change it as well. Understanding the functions, predictors, and consequences of problem behavior helps us to pinpoint and script the appropriate behavioral interventions. A functional assessment of behavior switches the focus from treatment of within-­child pathology to design of effective environmental routines. The behavior support team learns to analyze problematic routines (e.g., oral reading during James’s social studies



Tiers of Behavior Support 21

class) and decide on how to make feasible, practical changes to these routines to promote the behavioral success of the identified student. The next section details how FBA methods can be used at Tiers 1, 2, and 3 to meet the twin goals of reducing problem behavior and increasing appropriate behavior.

Tier 1 and FBA In our experience, we have found that educators often feel that FBA methods should be reserved for students who need more intensive behavior support. This assumption was likely reinforced when the IDEA (1997; revised in 2004 [IDEIA, 2004]) included provisions requiring educators to conduct an FBA and implement a BSP if a student with disabilities was at-risk for a change in placement (e.g., to be placed in a more restricted setting) or expulsion. However, school staff can think and respond functionally to problem behavior across all three tiers of SWPBS. To implement FBA methods within Tier 1 SWPBS, schools need to (1) examine antecedents/predictors and consequences that are supporting problem behavior for all or the majority of students and (2) provide all school staff with the tools to think functionally about problem behavior. When examining antecedents and consequences that are supporting problem behavior, it is important for school staff to look for predictable failures (Scott et al., 2012). That is, what environmental variables of the school set students up for problem behavior? The assumption is, if 10–15 students are engaging in the same problem behavior (e.g., being loud in the lunchroom) or making the same behavioral errors (e.g., walking incorrectly in the hallway), it is not the students who need intervention on an individual level, it is the environment that needs to be changed or expectations that need to be taught explicitly or retaught. As detailed in Figure 2.1, Tier 1 includes both implementation of a schoolwide discipline plan and effective classroom behavior management. FBA at Tier 1 involves focusing on antecedents or features in the environment that predict problem behavior. We know part of effective Tier 1 implementation involves schools establishing schoolwide behavioral expectations and teaching them explicitly (Horner et al., 2010). This explicit teaching should occur in all of the areas of the school (e.g., hallway, cafeteria, playground) and include instruction on how those schoolwide expectations are applied in the classroom setting. This prevention mechanism alone targets many of the antecedents or predictors for problem behavior. For example, in schools that do not have established schoolwide expectations, many students engage in problem behavior because they do not know what is expected, or because how one teacher expects students to behave in the lunchroom is different than what another teacher expects. Another antecedent feature of implementing Tier 1 SWPBS is establishing consistent consequences

22

Using FBA in Schools

throughout the school for rule infractions. This communicates to students that consequences will be applied consistently across all teachers and staff. When teachers and staff respond consistently, student perceptions like those in the following example can be prevented: “When I’m tardy to Mrs. Carroll’s she doesn’t do anything about it, but I make sure I’m on time to Ms. Winn’s class because we have to stay after school and make up the minutes if we are late to class.” FBA methodology applied to Tier 1 is similar to that applied to Tier 3. That is, there is a focus on teaching new behavior versus relying on punishment or negative consequences to change behavior. With Tier 1 SWPBS, if many students are making errors or not following schoolwide expectations, school staff identify when and where it is occurring (i.e., predictors of problem behavior) and what needs to be retaught. In order for schools to identify problematic routines, settings, and/or times of the day, they must adopt a system to track schoolwide occurrences of problem behavior. For many schools, such occurrences are documented using ODRs. To track ODRs, we recommend a Web-based system called the School-wide Information System (SWIS; May et al., 2000) for recording and analyzing ODR data. Information about SWIS is available online at www.pbisapps.org. SWIS is used to track data to evaluate Tier 1 SWPBS implementation. It can also be used with Tier 2 and Tier 3 behavior supports. Once schools have implemented an effective schoolwide discipline plan (Tier 1), SWIS can be used to identify problematic locations, times of the day, or teachers who may need additional support implementing Tier 1. Figure 2.2 demonstrates how this methodology is used. The figure illustrates the number of discipline referrals for one (fictitious) school, by location, for the first few months of school. For this school, most of the behavior problems are occurring in the classroom, commons, and playground. Thus, using FBA methodology, the Tier 1 behavior support team would hypothesize that expectations may need to be retaught in these settings, or the environments themselves need to be altered to prevent problem behavior. If a disproportionate number of referrals originate in one or two classrooms, only those particular classrooms may need behavioral intervention. For example, Mr. Sanchez, a sixth-grade general education teacher, has referred 15 of the 30 students in his class to the office at least once. Ten of the students have been referred at least twice and five students have three ODRs after the first 4 months of school. Overall, Mr. Sanchez has generated more than 40 referrals for both minor and major rule infractions. So although the overall rate of ODRs for the school is high, the majority of ODRs are coming from one teacher. This signals a need for support for this teacher. Rather than focusing on individual students in Mr. Sanchez’s class, the Tier 1 behavior support team would examine how well Tier 1 (classroom behavior management) is being implemented and then determine whether there are predictors (antecedents) and consequences that are



Tiers of Behavior Support 23

leading to high rates of problem behavior. Mr. Sanchez may also need support by receiving retraining on which problem behaviors should be handled in the classroom versus handled by office administration. By embedding FBA methods into Tier 1, the number of students needing additional behavior support (Tier 2 and Tier 3) will decrease. One final way schools can embed FBA methods into Tier 1 is to ensure all staff are trained on the key behavior principles described previously (i.e., behavior is functional, predictable, and changeable). Table 2.1 provides an outline of the topics that should be covered in such training. Based on the authors’ experience, this training can be accomplished in about 1 hour and can be embedded in one or two staff meetings at the beginning of the school year. The focus of the training is for staff to understand that although other variables may influence behavior (e.g., physical limitations, home environment), the factors that school staff have control over are related to the predictors and consequences associated with problem behavior. Once school staff begin to think functionally about problem behavior, these same principles can be applied to Tier 2 behavior support. The next section outlines how FBA can be embedded in Tier 2 SWPBS.

FIGURE 2.2.  Discipline referrals by location. Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Reprinted by permission.

24

Using FBA in Schools

TABLE 2.1. Thinking Functionally about Problem Behavior: Outline of All Staff Training •• Explanations for problem behavior ||Developmental (e.g., Piaget) ||Medical/physiological (e.g., hormones, syndromes, diagnoses) ||Behavioral „„Behavior is maintained as result of consequences „„Students act out to (1) gain something they desire or (2) avoid something unpleasant or that they dislike •• Human behavior is: ||Functional ||Predictable ||Changeable •• ABC’s of behavior ||A = Antecedent ||B = Behavior ||C = Consequence •• Observing pattern of ABC’s allows us to determine function ||Functions: „„Attention (peer or adult) „„Escape (difficult task, unpleasant situation) „„Tangible (e.g., student wants access to computer time, a preferred ball on playground or to be the line leader) „„Sensory (behavior in and of itself is reinforcing such as rocking, nail biting) •• Practice identifying ABC’s + function ||Case examples from school •• Focus on antecedent interventions ||ABC sequence—focus on “A” of the sequence ||Can antecedent be removed (e.g., loud noises in cafeteria cause student to act out)? ||Can antecedent be neutralized (e.g., student acts out because of hunger— can provide breakfast)?

Tier 2 and FBA Students who qualify for Tier 2 behavior support are those who need more practice and feedback on following behavioral expectations. Typically, Tier 2 interventions involve groups of students who are at risk but not currently engaging in severe or chronic problem behavior. Rather than individualizing interventions for each student who needs behavior support beyond Tier 1, the goal is for the school to develop interventions that can be efficiently applied for all students who have similar behavior intervention needs. More specifically, the key features of Tier 2 interventions include (1) similar implementation for all students (i.e., low effort by teachers); (2) continuous availability and quick access to the intervention; (3) training of all staff on how to make a referral and, if appropriate, how to implement the intervention; (4) consistency with schoolwide expectations; (5) continuous data-based progress monitoring; and (6) the intervention can be modified based on functional assessment data (Hawken et al., 2009).



Tiers of Behavior Support 25

Some sample Tier 2 interventions include CICO (Crone et al., 2010), social skills training, mentoring, academic tutoring, and successful recess (i.e., an intervention to target students who have difficulty on the playground at recess; Hawken et al., 2009). One simple way to gather FBA data is via a teacher interview, but this may be infeasible at the Tier 2 level of SWPBS. At issue is that 5–15% of students in the school may need Tier 2 behavior support. In an elementary school with 600 students, this would mean that up to 90 students would need a teacher interview prior to receiving a Tier 2 intervention. Secondary schools are even larger (e.g., 1,500–3,000+ students), so they would require even more teacher interviews per school year. School personnel are unlikely to have the time (20–30 minutes per interview) or resources to conduct that many teacher interviews per year, while also serving those students with more significant behavioral challenges (i.e., Tier 3, or up to 7% of the population). Therefore, rather than conducting a formal teacher interview for each student who qualifies for Tier 2 support, we recommend thinking functionally, as previously described, when selecting Tier 2 interventions. Here is an example: Mrs. Roderick-­Landward comes to the behavior support team about a student, Halle, who engages in mild problem behavior (e.g., talking out, out of seat) throughout the day. The behavior support team looks at Halle’s academic standing (i.e., grades, rates of work completion). Based on the data, it seems that she is on grade level and the teacher reports she is doing well academically. It’s hypothesized that Halle is probably not acting out to avoid difficult work. Mrs. Roderick-­Landward is then asked whether the student enjoys adult attention, and Mrs. Roderick-­Landward answers in the affirmative. The behavior support team decides to place Halle on the CICO intervention and monitor her progress biweekly. CICO requires that Halle check in each morning with a CICO coordinator and carry a copy of a Daily Progress Report (DPR) to her class. Mrs. Roderick-­Landward uses the DPR to provide feedback throughout the day on the extent to which she met schoolwide expectations. Halle then checks out in the afternoon with the CICO coordinator. Each of these daily interactions with an adult provides opportunities to receive positive attention. The process of identifying Halle for a Tier 2 intervention in this scenario takes about 5–10 minutes versus the 20–30 minutes it would have taken for a formal teacher interview. When Tier 2 interventions have been implemented well, and still are not working, it is time to conduct a more in-depth FBA before moving to more individualized, Tier 3 support (for a model of how FBA is layered into Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports, see Eber, Swain-­Bradway, Breen, & Phillips, 2013). Let’s go back to the case of Halle, who was placed on CICO for mild acting-­out behavior throughout the day:

26

Using FBA in Schools

The behavior support team has met biweekly for the past 6 weeks, and although Halle showed some initial response to the intervention (as indicated by the percentage of points she earned on her DPR), she has had a recent decline in her performance. The behavior support team decides to do a brief FBA teacher interview with Mrs. Roderick-­Landward and a student interview with Halle herself. Based on the interview with Mrs. Roderick-­ Landward, it appears that Halle has talked out less frequently in class but is now spending more time whispering with her friends during class instruction. She is not meeting her daily point goals on CICO for this reason. When Halle is interviewed, she indicates that she likes being on CICO, has enjoyed the tangibles (e.g., pencils, small snacks) she was earning, but was “tired” of the menu of rewards being offered. When asked what she’d be prefer to earn as a reward, she mentioned she’d like to have free time with her friends to talk or listen to music. As a longer-­term reward, she wanted to earn movie coupons so she and her friends could go to the movies together after school. The behavior support team worked with the CICO coordinator to change the reinforcement system, and immediately Halle became more engaged and started meeting her daily point goals on a regular basis (at least 80% of the time). Another way to embed FBA into the CICO intervention is by using the SWISCICO Web-based data system (May, Talmadge, Todd, Horner, & Rossetto-­Dickey, 2014). This system allows schools to input the percentage of points students earn on their daily progress reports by period of the school day (or, in elementary school, by natural transition times such as after recess and before lunch). Similar to how schoolwide ODR data are examined to determine which settings in the school are problematic, SWIS-CICO allows school staff to examine periods of the day that are predictors for problem behavior for a specific student. This is especially important for secondary students who have multiple teachers throughout the day. An example report from the SWIS-CICO database is included in Figure 2.3. This graph shows the percentage of points a (fictitious, but representative) individual student called Chris Black earned by class period across 20 school days. Rather than intensifying support or moving immediately to Tier 3, the team examines the data to determine times of the day that predict problem behavior. For Chris Black, he is meeting expectations (i.e., 80% of points) in all of his classes except period 3 and period 6. In addition, for period 3 he only has 17 days of scores out of 20, which means either he skipped three periods or the teacher did not provide feedback on his daily progress report on those days. In period 6, he is close to meeting his goal, so the team decides to focus on period 3, doing a brief interview with the teacher as well as with Chris to determine ways to improve behavior during this time of the day. Thinking functionally about problem behavior (i.e., using FBA technology) at Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels of behavior support will likely reduce the number of



Tiers of Behavior Support 27

FIGURE 2.3.  Sample individual student graph of percentage of CICO points earned by period. Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Reprinted by permission.

students who require more intensive behavior support. The next section details FBA methods at Tier 3 SWPBS.

Tier 3 and FBA Moving from Tier 2 to Tier 3 supports indicates an increase in intensity and/or frequency of student problem behavior and the need for more intensive behavior support. However, within Tier 3 supports differing levels of assessment are needed; these include brief FBA, full FBA, and functional analysis. This next section details these different levels of assessment, beginning with the steps necessary to conduct an FBA. It should be noted that some of the procedures included in the brief FBA process can also be embedded in Tier 2 (as described above) after the student fails to respond to a Tier 2 intervention.

FBA Procedures An FBA is initiated after the Tier 3 behavior support team receives a request for assistance. The request for assistance can be made by a teacher, an administrator, a team member, a family member, a student, or any other key individual. The goals, tools, and time investment involved at each level of FBA are outlined in Table 2.2.

28

Using FBA in Schools

TABLE 2.2. Goals, Process, Tools, and Time Investment for Each Level of Functional Assessment Level of assessment

Goal

Process

Tools

Investment

Brief functional behavioral assessment

Define challenge

Short interview

F-BSP Protocol: Teacher Interview only or FACTS-A FACTS-B

20–30 minutes

Full functional behavioral assessment

Build understanding of when, how, and why problem behavior occurs

F-BSP Protocol: Teacher/Parent/Student Interview SDFA

20–30 minutes

Extended interviews

FAI

20–45 minutes

Direct observations

FAO

30 minutes– 4 hours

Review archival records

School records

30 minutes

Direct observations and Systematic experimental manipulations

FAO

Up to 20 or more hours

Functional analysis

Confirm understanding

Short interviews

20 minutes

20–30 minutes

Note. The forms listed should be taken as suggestions. Different forms are available and used by different school districts. Copies of most of the forms listed in this table are provided in the Appendices. F-BSP, Function-Based Behavior Support Plan Protocol; FACTS-A, Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff—Part A; FACTS-B, Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff—Part B; SDFA, Student-Directed Functional Assessment; FAI, Functional Assessment Interview (O’Neill et al., 1997); FAO, Functional Assessment Observation Form.

Along with our colleagues, we have developed time-­efficient interview and observation tools to collect information on problem behaviors and their antecedents and consequences. Some of these tools are presented and discussed in Part III of this volume. Blank copies of all these forms are available in the Appendices. The process of FBA can be expedited through accountability, good organization, and close attention to time management. Simple procedures such as regularly scheduled meetings, time-­limited agendas, detailed action plans, and centralized record keeping can significantly improve time usage. These and other procedures for making the best use of time are discussed in detail throughout this book. The efficiency of function-­based behavior support can be further improved by recognizing that the intensity of the assessment process can vary depending on the complexity and severity of the problem behavior. Not every child who is referred for problem behavior requires a full FBA. For many children, the problem behavior can be adequately assessed by conducting a brief FBA. The brief



Tiers of Behavior Support 29

FBA relies on a brief teacher interview to define the problem behavior and identify the antecedents and consequences of that problem behavior. If the teacher is very familiar with the student and his or her problem behavior, an effective BSP can be built on this limited information. The brief FBA would be appropriately applied in situations where (1) the problem behavior is not severe or complex; (2) the team has a high level of confidence that the relevant antecedents, consequences, and functions have been identified through the teacher interview; and (3) the child is not in danger of suspension, expulsion, or alternative school placement. Children with complex, severe, or at-risk problem behavior will require a full FBA. A full FBA is also appropriate if a child’s behavior is not severe, but the team lacks confidence in the testable hypothesis generated from the initial teacher interview. A full FBA includes direct observations of the student in at least two settings. Interviews with additional teachers, the parents, and the child and a review of the child’s school records are often included as well. A small percentage of children may require a functional analysis of behavior to accurately assess and effectively intervene in the problem behavior. Functional analysis involves experimental manipulation of antecedents and consequences to increase the precision and accuracy of the assessment and must be carried out by an individual with experience in applied behavior analysis. Because of limited existing resources, schools will require a comprehensive model of FBA that is efficient, effective, and inclusive, yet can be adapted to fit the different challenges these children represent. This book explains a multilevel model (brief FBA, full FBA, and functional analysis) and delineates a decision-­ making process to distinguish between the three options.

Brief FBA The first task is to define the challenge. The behavior support team must develop an operational definition of the problem behavior. They will also identify the predictors and consequences of the problem behavior. Often, these tasks can be accomplished in a brief interview with the teacher. Teachers are often the team’s greatest resource. Teachers work with and observe their students every day. With focused prompting and practice, the teacher can provide a wealth of information about the predictors, consequences, and underlying functions of problem behavior. The next step is to use the interview data to generate a testable hypothesis about why the behavior is occurring. The testable hypothesis describes the problem behavior, the predictors and consequences of the problem behavior, and the hypothesized function of the problem behavior—­for example: “When James is asked to read a difficult passage out loud, he pushes his books to the floor and swears at the teacher in order to be sent to the office and escape the embarrassment of making a reading error in front of his friends.”

30

Using FBA in Schools

Once the initial hypothesis statement is generated, the team decides whether they have adequately assessed the problem behavior or whether they require additional information: How confident are they that the hypothesis statement is an accurate explanation for the problem behavior? How serious would the consequences be if they were wrong? If the team has minimal confidence in their hypothesis statement, they should collect additional assessment information—­ that is, they should conduct a full FBA. In addition, if the referred student is at risk of suspension, expulsion, or alternative school placement, the team should invest additional time and resources in the assessment process. If the team is confident about its hypothesis statement, and the problem behavior is neither dangerous nor placing the student’s access to education at risk, the team should develop a BSP based on the brief FBA. The referring person takes the recommendations of the team and implements the strategies with the support of team members. A follow-­up date is scheduled to evaluate the effectiveness of the recommended strategies.

Full FBA This is the process of formulating and testing hypotheses about the problem behavior. The purpose of the full FBA is to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of BSPs. Direct observations and extended interviews are added to the brief FBA. Observations are conducted in the settings where problem behavior typically occurs. At least one observation should be peer referenced—­that is, the identified student’s behavior is compared to the behavior of a composite of his peers. Without a peer-­referenced comparison, it is difficult to determine whether the frequency and intensity of the student’s problem behavior is significantly discrepant from his peers. Observations should also document predictors and consequences for each problem behavior event. The full FBA may also include additional interview data. The student, the parents, and staff members may be interviewed to provide a more detailed understanding of the problem. Samples of observation and interview tools are included in the Appendices. A full FBA may also include a review of academic records. After completing the full FBA, the team confirms or modifies the testable hypothesis. If the team feels unsure that they have accurately identified the predictors, consequences, and function of the problem behavior, they must make another decision. Should they design a BSP based on the FBA, or should they invest a significant amount of time and resources to conduct a functional analysis? This decision must be made without capriciousness. A functional analysis is likely to consume significantly more staff time and will require the assistance of personnel with expertise in applied behavior analysis, even if trial-based functional analysis, as described in Chapter 1, is used. The team must decide whether



Tiers of Behavior Support 31

they have the resources available for conducting a functional analysis in each case. If resources are readily available, the behavior support team can go ahead with the functional analysis. If resources are sparse, the team must first consider the severity of the consequences of being wrong about their testable hypothesis and choose to conduct or not conduct a functional analysis accordingly. For example, if the student poses a significant danger to himself or others, a functional analysis of his behavior may be warranted. If a functional analysis is not recommended, the team will begin to design the BSP (in many cases, it will be reasonable to decide to design and test a BSP at this point).

Functional Analysis Functional analysis allows the team to empirically confirm their understanding of the problem behavior, predictors, and functions. It involves the experimental, systematic manipulation of environmental variables to evaluate hypothesis statements (Vollmer & Northrup, 1996). A functional analysis should result in a clear understanding of the predictors, maintaining consequences, and function of the problem behavior. This information is used in the design and implementation of the BSP. The reader may note in Table 2.2 that the assessment period is the longest for the cases with the most severe consequences. The assessment period is increased from 20–30 minutes to 2 or more hours, and then to as many as 20 hours or more. In cases of serious behavioral consequences, the teacher will not have the luxury to wait through several hours’ worth of assessment. Teachers need an intermediary plan for addressing immediate problem behavior. Schools should have a universal crisis plan for dealing with serious problem behaviors. Although the behavior support team completes the FBA, the school should support the teacher with a short-term crisis plan for keeping the student and the classroom safe (refer to the Supplementary Section in this chapter for resources on crisis plans).

Intervention: What Steps Are Involved in Evaluating and Modifying a BSP? Once the team has decided on and completed the appropriate level of FBA, they begin the process of designing, implementing, and modifying the BSP. The BSP should produce multiple outcomes: (1) procedures for preventing the problem behavior through alteration of the setting events and predictors; (2) procedures for teaching appropriate behaviors; (3) procedures for manipulating consequences of problem behaviors; (4) consideration of the contextual fit of the BSP; (5) data collection procedures for evaluating the effectiveness of the BSP; and (6) a timeline for implementation, evaluation, and follow-­up.

32

Using FBA in Schools

TABLE 2.3. Steps and Procedures for Designing a Behavior Support Plan Identify the problem •• Receive request for assistance. •• Decide to build formal plan of support. Conduct an FBA •• Describe problem behaviors in operational terms. •• Conduct interviews and observations to build and test hypothesis statements. •• Conduct functional analysis if necessary. Design a plan of support •• •• •• •• ••

Generate behavioral goals. Complete a Competing Behavior Pathway form (see Appendix B, Step 6). Generate a list of potential intervention strategies. Consider all relevant contextual variables. Select elements of BSP.

Implement the plan •• Agree on the roles and responsibilities of each individual on team. •• Agree on the roles and responsibilities of additional key players (e.g., parents, student). •• Decide on a time for follow-up meeting. •• Document the intervention plan in a BSP. •• Distribute the BSP to all participating individuals. •• Implement the BSP.

Table 2.3 lists the procedures involved in designing a BSP. Examples of hypothetical BSPs are also given in Chapter 4. For additional information on designing BSPs, refer to the basic texts listed in the Supplementary Section at the end of this chapter. After the BSP is implemented, the behavior support team must evaluate the plan in terms of its effectiveness and efficiency. The team should reconvene 2–3 weeks after the initiation of the BSP. The team should then review the goals of the BSP, examine the behavioral data, and determine whether the goals have been met. If the goals have been achieved, the next step is to evaluate the efficiency of the BSP: Is the BSP adequately efficient, or can it be redesigned to save time and resources? If the efficiency of the BSP is adequate, the team does not need to modify or reevaluate it. They should plan to conduct a follow-­up meeting for the student in 1–2 months. If the efficiency of the BSP can be improved, the team decides on the necessary modifications. The modified BSP is implemented. After 2–3 weeks, the team should meet again to reevaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the modified BSP. In the original evaluation meeting (2–3 weeks after initiation of the original plan), the team may decide that the goals have not been achieved. Prior to modifying the BSP, the team needs to determine why the goals were not achieved. Commonly, the BSP is ineffective because it is not implemented appropriately. The team should consider whether there are contextual limitations that make it



Tiers of Behavior Support 33

difficult to implement the plan (contextual fit is discussed further in Chapter 4). If there are serious contextual limitations, the team should take these into consideration and modify the plan. If there are no contextual limitations, the BSP should be reimplemented with fidelity. The team may find that the goals of the BSP were not achieved despite adequate implementation of the plan. The BSP may have been unsuccessful because the original assessment of the problem behavior was incorrect. The team must decide if further FBA is necessary. Further assessment may be appropriate, especially if the original BSP was based on data from a brief FBA. If the behavior support team decides that further assessment is needed, they should continue to develop and confirm an understanding of the problem through additional observations, interviews, or systematic manipulations. If the team feels that further FBA is not necessary, they should modify the BSP. Once again, they should plan to reconvene in 2–3 weeks to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the plan. The steps involved in a brief FBA, a full FBA, and functional analysis are summarized in the flowchart in Figure 2.4.

Referral for problem behavior

N Brief Functional Behavioral Assessment

Student is at risk of suspension, expulsion, or placement change? Y

Confident in testable hypothesis?

N

Full Functional Behavioral Assessment

Functional Analysis

Design initial behavioral supports

Design behavior support plan

Redesign behavior support plan

Implement behavioral supports

Implement behavior support plan

Implement behavior support plan

Y

N N

Are behavioral supports working?

Y

N

Is the behavior support plan working?

Is the behavior support plan working?

Y

Continue plan or modify for efficiency

Continue plan or modify for efficiency

Y Continue plan or modify for efficiency

FIGURE 2.4.  Flowchart of the FBA-BSP process.

34

Using FBA in Schools

SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION Conducting Functional Assessments Bloom, S. E., Iwata, B. A., Ritz, J. N., Roscoe, E. M., & Carreau, A. B. (2011). Classroom application of a trial-based functional analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(1), 19–31. Chandler, L. K., & Dahlquist, C. M. (2001). Functional assessment: Strategies to prevent and remediate challenging behavior in school settings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Johnston, S. S., & O’Neill, R. E. (2001). Searching for effectiveness and efficiency in conducting functional assessments: A review and proposed process for teachers and other practitioners. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16(4), 205–214. Jolivette, K., Barton-­A rwood, S., & Scott, T. M. (2000). Functional behavioral assessment as a collaborative process among professionals. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(3), 298. O’Neill, R. E., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Horner, R. H., & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development: A practical handbook (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Steege, M. W., & Watson, T. S. (2009). Conducting school-­based functional behavioral assessments: A practitioner’s guide (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Tools for Conducting Functional Assessment Interviews Assessing Activity Routines Form (see Appendix E). Brief Functional Assessment Interview Form (see Appendix F). Functional Behavioral Assessment–­Behavior Support Plan Protocol (see Appendix B). Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (see Appendix C). Student-­Guided Functional Assessment Interview (see Appendix D). Functional Assessment Interview (in O’Neill et al., 2015).

Tools for Conducting Functional Assessment Observations Functional Behavioral Assessment Observation Form (in Sugai & Tindal, 1993). O’Neill, R. E., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Horner, R. H., & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development: A practical handbook (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Tools for Developing Behavior Support Plans Functional Behavioral Assessment–­Behavior Support Plan Protocol (see Appendix B).



Tiers of Behavior Support 35

Behavior Management Gable, R. A., Park, K., & Scott, T. M. (2014). Functional behavioral assessment and students at risk for or with emotional disabilities: Current issues and considerations. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(1), 111–135. Kamps, D., Wendland, M., & Culpepper, M. (2006). Active teacher participation in functional behavior assessment for students with emotional and behavioral disorders risks in general education classrooms. Behavioral Disorders, 31(2), 128–146. Mueller, M. M., Sterling-­Turner, H. E., & Moore, J. W. (2005). Towards developing a classroom-­based functional analysis condition to assess escape-­to-­attention as a variable maintaining problem behavior. School Psychology Review, 34(3), 425–431. Scott, T. M., DeSimone, C., Fowler, W., & Webb, E. (2000). Using functional assessment to develop interventions for challenging behaviors in the classroom: Three case studies. Preventing School Failure, 44(2), 51–56. Smith, B. W., Sugai, G., & Brown, F. (2000). A self-­management functional assessment-­ based behavior support plan for a middle school student with EBD. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(4), 208. Stoiber, K., & Gettinger, M. (2011). Functional assessment and positive support strategies for promoting resilience: Effects on teachers and high-risk children. Psychology in the Schools, 48(7), 686–706.

Interventions for Schoolwide, Classroom, or Non-­Classroom-­Specific Settings Scott, T. M., Anderson, C. M., & Spaulding, S. A. (2008). Strategies for developing and carrying out functional assessment and behavior intervention planning. Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 39–50. Sprick, R. (2008). Evidence-­based behavioral strategies for individual students (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing. Trussell, R. P., Lewis, T. J., & Stichter, J. P. (2008). The impact of targeted classroom interventions and function-­based behavior interventions on problem behaviors of students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 33(3), 153–166. Wills, H. P., Kamps, D., Hansen, B., Conklin, C., Bellinger, S., Neaderhiser, J., et al. (2010). The classwide function-­based intervention team program. Preventing School Failure, 54(3), 164–171.

Crisis Plans Shukla, M., & Albin, R. (2003). Twelve practical strategies to prevent behavioral escalation in classroom settings. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 47, 156–161. Sprick, R. (2008). Evidence-­based behavioral strategies for individual students (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.

Part II Embedding Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems Case Examples

Chapter 3

Conducting a Functional Behavioral Assessment

Introduction This chapter begins a detailed illustration of the FBA-BSP process as it would occur in a school. The focus in the chapter is on brief FBA and full FBA, not functional analysis. For references on functional analysis, turn to the Supplementary Section of this chapter. To illustrate the FBA-BSP process, case vignettes of three students were chosen and serve as a cross section of exemplars. The following vignettes do not represent real children, but rather were created as examples to demonstrate the FBA-BSP process across a range of students.

Case Example 1 Vera is a kindergarten student who loves to be the center of adult attention. She has a quick temper and frequently talks out in class. She also frequently “tattles” on other students. When other students use materials that are meant to be shared, she yells at them, tells the teacher, and starts to cry loudly. During recess she has pushed other children on the ground when they have made her angry. Vera’s parents recently divorced. In the first 6 months of kindergarten, Vera has been referred to the office 10 times for her temper tantrums and other problem behavior.

Case Example 2 Tom is a third-grade student in a general education classroom. Tom transferred to his current school in the middle of the academic year. Tom was 39

40

Case Ex amples

referred to the behavior support team by his teacher for fighting, verbal harassment of other students, and being disrespectful to adults. Tom has a very short temper. He has some academic difficulties in reading and writing, and he works with a reading resource teacher for 1.5 hours per week. Tom is athletic and enjoys leading sports activities during recess.

Case Example 3 Ronald is a 12-year-old boy in seventh grade who is disruptive and physically aggressive. He has a diagnosis of attention-­deficit/hyperactivity disorder and is taking Ritalin twice a day. As a third grader, Ronald was referred for special education services due to his poor academic performance and frequent behavior problems. In the first 20 weeks of school, Ronald received more than 50 ODRs. At the time of referral to the individual behavior support team, the school was considering expelling him for his problem behavior.

The Assessment Process The assessment process begins with a referral to the behavior support team. Typically, a teacher makes the referral, but the referral can also begin with a parent or a nonteaching staff member, such as the lunchroom monitor. The referral is given to the referral liaison/coordinator. The liaison/coordinator routes the referral to the behavior support team, who begins the FBA-BSP process. A sample of a completed referral form, called the Request for Assistance Form, for each of the case examples is presented in Figures 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3. A blank Request for Assistance Form is included in Appendix A. As the coordinator examines the teacher referral for each of these students, she or he may note important details that will be informative for the FBA-BSP process. For example, the teachers for both Vera (Figure 3.1) and Ronald (Figure 3.3) have relied heavily on “punishment procedures,” such as detention, office referrals, reprimands, and discipline-­related communication with parents. Although each teacher has been trying these punishment strategies “since school started,” they have “not yet seen any change in behavior.” “Discipline doesn’t seem to faze this child.” These Requests for Assistance Forms illustrate five important points. First, these reactive responses are not working. The BSP will have to incorporate a different, more proactive approach to managing the problem behavior. Second, the teacher’s level of stress or exasperation is often evident on the Request for Assistance Form. The comments of Ronald’s teacher in response to the question regarding strategy use demonstrate a high degree of frustration. This is a teacher who will need strong support in the initial stages of implementing the BSP. Third,



Conducting an FBA 41

Request for Assistance Form Date:  1/4/14

Teacher/Team:  Ms. Riley



IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Vera Situations

Grade:  Kindergarten

Problem Behaviors

Aggression is unpredictable

Talk-outs Pushing She’s a tattle-tale

Most Common Result Other students get upset. I talk with her about how her behavior is not the way that kindergartners behave.

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

All the time I tell her not to tattle. She has been sent to office for pushing and the referrals last a half-hour, and I talked to her mom. I’ve been doing this since school started but have not yet seen any change in behavior. I’ll keep trying, but it’s not working!

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  Don’t tattle What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified assignments to

 X   Changed seating

     Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

     Changed curriculum

     Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

Other?

activities

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

     Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

 X   Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely

expected behavior about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class student

contract with the student

Other?

behaviors in class

program

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?  X   Loss of privileges

 X   Note or phone call to the  X   Office referral

    Time-out

    Detention

 X  Reprimand

     Referral to school

     Meeting with the

     Individual meeting with

counselor

Other?

student’s parents

student’s parents

the student

FIGURE 3.1.  Request for assistance—­Vera. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin. Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.

42

Case Ex amples

Request for Assistance Form Date:  10/5/13

Teacher/Team:  Ms. Smith

IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Tom Situations

Grade:  3rd

Problem Behaviors

Mostly in class Not on playground or cafeteria Whenever I ask him to do something he doesn’t want to do

Fighting Calls other students names Pushes adults Talks back to adults

Most Common Result Gets into arguments with adults or other students. Gets an office referral.

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

I give him office referrals and reprimands. In September, I put him in a reading group that is at his level and gave him one-to-one help in reading. The changes in reading group seem to be the most effective. I’ll keep working on his reading skills and will keep giving office referrals until they work.

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  Don’t be disrespectful to others What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?  X   Modified assignments to

 X   Changed seating

     Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

 X   Changed curriculum

 X   Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

Other?

activities

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

     Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

 X   Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely

expected behavior about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class student

contract with the student

Other?

behaviors in class

program

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?      Loss of privileges

     Note or phone call to the  X   Office referral

    Time-out

    Detention

 X  Reprimand

     Referral to school

     Meeting with the

     Individual meeting with

counselor

Other?

student’s parents

student’s parents

the student

FIGURE 3.2.  Request for assistance—­Tom. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin. Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.



Conducting an FBA 43

Request for Assistance Form Date:  2/1/14

Teacher/Team:  Mr. Jackson

IEP:  Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Ronald Situations



Grade:  7th

Problem Behaviors

Happens all the time Just seems to come out of the blue

Aggressive and out-of-control bullying

Most Common Result I tell him over and over to behave himself. The kids end up ignoring him. He gets referrals and suspension.

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

Since the beginning of the year I have tried detention, discipline referrals, notes to parents, reprimands, and suspensions. Discipline doesn’t seem to faze this child and I’m tired of telling this student to behave!

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  Don’t fight What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified assignments to

 X   Changed seating

     Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

     Changed curriculum

     Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

Other?

activities

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

 X   Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

     Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely

expected behavior about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class

student

contract with the student

Other?

behaviors in class

program

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?  X   Loss of privileges

 X   Note or phone call to the  X   Office referral

    Time-out

 X  Detention

 X  Reprimand

 X   Referral to school

     Meeting with the

     Individual meeting with

counselor

Other?

student’s parents

student’s parents

the student

FIGURE 3.3.  Request for assistance—­Ronald. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin. Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.

44

Case Ex amples

it is important to note that the teachers believe that if they keep persisting on these ineffective strategies, eventually the strategies will work: “I’ll keep trying, but it’s not working”; “I’ll . . . keep giving office referrals until they work.” Despite evidence to the contrary, teachers may exhibit a great deal of faith in punishment as the most effective strategy for behavior change. Even in the face of continued failure, they may continue to use punishment strategies as the strategy of choice. The coordinator and the behavior support team will need to work with the referring teachers to help them explore and understand alternative strategies for behavior change. Tom’s teacher has relied somewhat on punishment strategies, but has also tried curriculum modifications to attempt to reduce the student’s problem behaviors (Figure 3.2). The teacher has seen some success in these efforts. The behavior support team should determine the extent to which they can build on some of these effective strategies. They should also encourage and support the teacher for successful efforts thus far. Further analysis of the Request for Assistance Forms illustrates a fourth important point: the teachers’ description of problem behavior is rather vague and uninformative. Vera is described as a “tattle-­tale,” Ronald as “aggressive” and “out of control.” These descriptors do not provide an observable, measurable description of the problem behavior. The teachers have been unable to identify the times that the behavior is most likely to occur. To the teachers, the behavior seems to occur “all the time,” or it is “unpredictable” and “out of the blue.” The team will have to work with teachers to develop an operational definition of the problem behavior(s) and to determine the most common predictors of each behavior. An operational definition of problem behavior describes behavior in observable, measurable terms. The description of the behavior should be so explicit that two observers could independently observe a student and agree on whether or not the behavior had occurred. For example, rather than describing Ronald as “aggressive,” the teacher could say, “Ronald hits other students in the arm with enough force to hurt the other student” or “Ronald kicks the legs of his chair and the chairs of other students around him.” The concepts of operationally defining behaviors and identifying predictors may be foreign at first to many teachers. After enough opportunities to use behavioral assessment terminology, teachers will become more fluent in defining problem behaviors and identifying predictors and consequences. The behavior support team will begin to see a significant difference in the quality of information communicated in the Request for Assistance Form. Compare the Request for Assistance Form for Ronald to the one for Tom. Tom’s teacher has been at the school for 8 years. In the past 3 years, she has requested assistance for four students. In contrast, Ronald’s teacher is a first-year teacher. This is the first time he has needed to manage the problem behavior of a difficult student. There is a distinct difference in the clarity of the information reported.



Conducting an FBA 45

Finally, the coordinator may notice that many of the expected behaviors are listed as negative rules—“don’t fight” and “don’t tattle.” Adults must teach students to perform expected behaviors in addition to informing them about which behaviors are not allowed. Explicitly teaching expectations to students provides them with an alternative behavior to replace the inappropriate behavior. For example, “keep hands and feet to self” and “be respectful” are two rules that inform students of expected behaviors. In developing the BSP, the team can help the teacher identify how to define, teach, and reward expected behaviors.

Brief FBA The next step in the process is to conduct the brief FBA. The brief FBA consists of a brief interview with the student’s primary teacher. (Middle school and high school students typically do not have a primary teacher. In this case, the interview should be conducted with the referring teacher.) The brief FBA acknowledges and relies on the wealth of information that an individual teacher has about his or her student. The major purposes of the interview are to (1) identify the problem behaviors, (2) define important characteristics of the problem behaviors, (3) identify times of day when problem behaviors are most likely to occur, (4) identify common predictors and setting events for problem behaviors, and (5) identify typical consequences of problem behaviors that affect reoccurrence of problem behavior.

Teacher Interview The behavior support team can choose to use any teacher interview with which they are familiar, if it provides the necessary FBA information. The Functional Behavioral Assessment–­Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol) draws from the Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers (FACTS; March et al., 2000), and was developed to include, among other things, a teacher interview instrument that meets the previously listed objectives. This interview instrument is efficient, easy to use, and easy to train to use. Figures 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6 illustrate completed teacher interview forms for each of the three case examples. Please note that the teacher interview is just one part of the entire F-BSP Protocol. Each part of the protocol is demonstrated throughout Chapters 3, 4, and 5. A complete blank F-BSP Protocol, along with instructions for its use, is included in Appendix B. Typically, the teacher interview is administered by a member of the behavior support team. As teachers become more comfortable with the process of FBA, they may complete the interview form without the assistance of a team member. The interview takes approximately 20–30 minutes to complete. This interview form has several advantages as an assessment instrument. First, it eliminates vague descriptions of problem behavior. In order to be useful, descriptions of (text continues on page 52)

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Vera   Age:  5      Grade:  K

  Date:  1/6/14

Person(s) interviewed:  Ms. Riley (teacher) Interviewer:  Mr. Kohn (action team member) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Very sensitive and caring toward adults and her baby brother, speaks up for herself.

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? If another child wants to share her materials, she will get mad, tell on the student, cry, and be aggressive enough to get the materials back. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? 3–4 times a week How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? 1–5 minutes How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? Not too dangerous, but is disruptive to the teacher

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times) Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

9:00

Attendance, personal activity

9:15

Circle time in large group

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

9:45

Snack

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

10:00

Sounds/letters in large group

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

10:20

Art/music in large group

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

10:50

Recess

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

11:05

Small-group activities

Tattles, pushes, whines

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

11:30

Dismissal

Low      High 1  2 3 4 5 6

1  2 3 4 5 6

(continued)

FIGURE 3.4.  Completed teacher interview—­Vera. The form itself is adapted by permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon.

46

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

Happens both during structured time and unstructured activities—any time that there is more than one student working near or with her. Task difficulty does not seem to influence the behavior.

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Circle time (large group); art or music (large group); or recess

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Attendance in the morning/personal activity time, dismissal

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) If she has a bad morning on the bus and comes in to school upset.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Other kids usually back off and allow her to get the materials she wants. Teacher talks with her about how it is not nice to tattle. Teacher often talks with mother and mother talks to her about the tattling. On occasion she has been sent to the office because she has had a tantrum in the class—crying, yelling at other kids, ripping up the picture another student was working on.

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event Difficult morning at home or on bus

Antecedent Large-group setting with peers, when expected to share materials

Behavior

Consequence

1. Tattles, pushes, whines,

Teacher talks to her about appropriate behavior. Mother talks to her at home. Obtains desired materials from peers.

and cries

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Vera seems to be having the tantrums to get adult attention and to get access to the     materials she wants. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

FIGURE 3.4.  (continued) 47

2

Not at all sure 1

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Tom   Age:  8      Grade:  3

  Date:  10/7/13

Person(s) interviewed:  Ms. Smith (teacher) Interviewer:  Miss Sand (action team member) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Very athletic, a leader on the playground, other students seek him out to be on their team

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? He gets frustrated, refuses to work, throws his books down, tries to “push the teacher’s buttons” by yelling and teasing. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Big tantrums occur 2–3 times a week, at some point in the morning. Smaller displays of frustration and work refusal occur almost daily. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? Big tantrums-seems to build for about an hour or more until lunch time. Other times he has brief tantrums, but they reoccur more frequently, whenever he is redirected. How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? Detrimental to his academic progress. Disturbs whole class, has caused bruises from pushing.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times) Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur? Low      High 1  2 3 4 5 6

8:45

Attendance and sharing

9:00

Math

Refuses to work Shouts at teacher

9:45

Music/art/social studies

Slams things on desk 1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

10:15

Unstructured study period Pushes peers

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers and teacher

10:45

Recess

1 2 3 4 5 6

11:00

Reading

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers and teacher

12:00

Lunch

1 2 3 4 5 6

12:45

Spelling

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

1:00

Language arts

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

2:00

Recess

1 2 3 4 5 6

2:15

Science

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers and teacher

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher aide

(continued)

FIGURE 3.5.  Completed teacher interview—­Tom. The form itself is adapted by permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. 48

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

Big tantrums—structured time, academically difficult, before recess, negative peer interactions Brief frustration/noncompliance—difficult task with no 1:1 aide

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Big tantrums—math or 9:45–10:15 period Brief frustration—language arts, study period, reading, spelling, science

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Recess, lunch, attendance, and sharing

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) He has a history of academic failure. Behavior is worse if the 1:1 aide cannot come in that day.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Behavior is disturbing enough that the class stops. Other kids tell him to be quiet and the teacher also reprimands him. Sometimes he is sent to the office. Often times he ends up not doing any work the whole class period.

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event 1:1 aide absent

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

During structured time that 1. Refuses to work, Teacher attention, occurs before recess; peer shouts, slams books, peer attention makes comment to him disturbs other students

History of Difficult academic tasks to academic failure do without an aide

2. Refuses to work, slams Teacher attention, books

gets out of doing work

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Tom is having the big tantrums in order to get peer attention and teacher attention. 2.  Tom is having smaller tantrums/work refusal in order to escape tasks that he thinks he can’t     do on his own and to get teacher attention. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

FIGURE 3.5.  (continued) 49

2

Not at all sure 1

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Ronald   Age:  12    Grade:  7   Date:  2/3/14 Person(s) interviewed:  Mr. Jackson (teacher) Interviewer:  Mrs. Andrews (action team member) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Comes to school every day

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? Can’t work well in groups. If someone makes a remark to him, he gets mad and punches the student, usually in the arm. He holds grudges and will often fight after school. Also yells at teacher and refuses to do work. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Fighting, about once a week. Work refusal, every class period. Yelling at teacher, approximately twice a week. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? Fighting in class lasts about 5 minutes. Work refusal lasts most of class period unless sent to office. Yelling is brief but reoccurring. How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? Fighting is dangerous. He has sent another student to the nurse with a bloody nose. Yelling is disruptive to class and teacher. Work refusal has put him in danger of failing seventh grade.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

8:20–9:15

Science

Fighting

Low      High 1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

9:20–10:15

Math

Yelling, work refusal

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

10:20–11:15

Reading

Yelling, work refusal

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

11:20–12:15

Spanish

Yelling, work refusal

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

12:20–1:00

Lunch

1:05–2:00

Social Studies

2:05–3:00

Physical Education

1 2 3 4 5 6 Fighting

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers 1 2 3 4 5 6 (continued)

FIGURE 3.6.  Completed teacher interview—­Ronald. The form itself is adapted by permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. 50

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

Fighting—most frequent when he is doing group work, especially with certain students. Work refusal/yelling—when asked to complete assignments in class that are long or difficult.

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Fighting—Science and social studies Work refusal/yelling—Math, reading, and Spanish

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) No problems during lunch or physical education.

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) Behavior is worse when he is around specific students or when he has been in a fight in the past day or two.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Fighting—other kids back off and tell the teacher, teacher sends him to office. Work refusal/yelling—often gets away with not doing work, although he engages each teacher in a long verbal battle over it. He is receiving failing grades in many classes.

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Specific classmates, activity not monitored

Expectation to do cooperative group work. Peer makes a negative or neutral comment to him.

1. Becomes angry. Tells

History of academic failure

Expectation to complete assignment that is difficult/long.

2. Work refusal. Yelling at

Consequence

Other students back off. classmate to leave him Often gets sent to office. alone. If behavior is allowed to escalate, he’ll punch classmate in the arm. teacher about the work.

Ends up not working in class. Teacher argues with him. Gets sent to office.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Ronald is punching peers to assert authority and thereby escape negative peer interactions. 2.  Ronald is refusing work and arguing with teacher because it gets him out of doing the work. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

FIGURE 3.6.  (continued)

2

Not at all sure 1

52

Case Ex amples

problem behavior must be given in such a way that two people looking at the same event will label it as the same problem behavior. For example, there is a meaningful difference between saying “Lisa is just like a kid with ADHD” and “Lisa is disorganized. Her desk is full of crumpled papers. It takes her three times as long as her classmates to find the appropriate book and materials. She rarely sits still for more than 10 minutes. She answers out of turn and interrupts other children and adults.” The teacher interview from the F-BSP Protocol guides teachers to give useful definitions of problem behaviors by requiring specific, measurable, objective information that describes the frequency, intensity, and context of problem behavior. On the Request for Assistance Form, Vera was described as a “tattle-­ tale.” The completed teacher interview (Figure 3.4) provides a much clearer picture of her problematic behavior: “If another child wants to share her materials, she will get mad, tell on the student, cry, and be aggressive enough to get the materials back.” This happens “3–4 times a week” and each episode lasts “1–5 minutes.” The behavior is “not too dangerous, but is disruptive to the teacher.” The second major advantage of the teacher interview from the F-BSP Protocol is that it emphasizes the child’s routines, not the child, in identifying the problem. In other words, the interview focuses staff attention on alterable events, or the circumstances that the staff members have control over. It guides the team to look for predictors and patterns in the problem behavior and to begin to identify where the most impact can be made. The interview accomplishes this by illustrating those times of day that are problematic for a child and those that are not difficult. For example, on the Request for Assistance Form, Ronald’s teacher indicated that his problem behavior “happens all the time,” and “just seems to come out of the blue.” However, the completed F-BSP interview (Figure 3.6) clearly indicates that certain times of the day are much more problematic for Ronald than others. During math and reading there is a very high likelihood that Ronald will engage in problem behavior. Lunch and physical education are relatively problem free. This information will be critical in forming hypotheses about the problem behavior and in designing effective BSPs. The final step in completing the teacher interview from the F-BSP Protocol is to develop a testable hypothesis to explain why the problem behavior is occurring. Testable hypotheses are developed for each problematic routine. Many children have complicated patterns of problem behavior, which may require the team to identify several distinct routines.

Developing a Testable Hypothesis The testable hypothesis serves as a prescription for the BSP, suggesting which predictors and consequences of behavior should be manipulated in order to reduce the problem behavior and indicating which new behaviors should be taught to replace the problem behavior. The testable hypothesis also creates



Conducting an FBA 53

a link between the FBA and the BSP by describing the function served by the problem behavior. Research identifies at least two major function(s) of problem behavior: positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement (Carr, 1977; O’Neill et al., 1997). If problem behaviors are maintained by obtaining something (e.g., attention or a tangible item), the behavior functions as positive reinforcement for the child (O’Neill et al., 1997). In contrast, if problem behaviors are maintained by escaping or avoiding something undesirable, the behavior functions as negative reinforcement for the child (O’Neill et al., 1997). The same topographical behavior may serve different functions for the same child or different functions for different children. In Tom’s case, analysis of the routine matrix (Identifying Routines section of Figure 3.5) and the responses to the Summarize Antecedent questions (Figure 3.5) indicate at least two routines that are highly likely to produce problem behavior: (1) structured class times that are demanding and occur before recess and (2) structured class times that are demanding and do not provide 1:1 assistance. Tom’s problem behavior for the first routine can be summarized in the following testable hypothesis: “During structured time that is academically challenging and occurs before recess, Tom will refuse to work, will shout at the teacher, and will slam his books loudly. This problem behavior is maintained by teacher and peer attention.” The following testable hypotheses could be developed for Vera and Ronald, respectively: “When Vera is in a large-group setting with peers, and a classmate attempts to use her materials, Vera will tattle, push, whine, or cry in an attempt to get attention from the teacher.” “During group activities with low supervision and long duration, a negative comment by a peer will incite Ronald to punch the other student. This is done in an attempt to force the student to stop making negative comments.” At the bottom of the second page of the teacher interview of the F-BSP Protocol, a space is provided to indicate how confident the team is in the testable hypothesis. The rating is made on a scale of 1–6, where 1 equals “Not at all sure” and 6 equals “Very sure.” A rating of 4, 5, or 6 indicates that the team feels confident that they understand the routines that predict and maintain the problem behavior. A rating of 1, 2, or 3 indicates that the team is not confident that they understand the problem behavior. At this point, the brief FBA is complete. Some teams may feel more comfortable including at least one observation of the student during problematic routines to confirm that the teacher’s description of the problem behavior is on target (observations are described below). If two criteria are met, the team can begin to design the BSP without completing a full FBA: (1) the student is not a student with a disability who is at risk for suspension, expulsion, alternative school placement, or any other disciplinary action that limits the student’s access to public education; and (2) the team has confidence in the accuracy of the initial testable hypothesis (a confidence rating of 4 or more). If either of these criteria is not met, the team should complete a full FBA.

54

Case Ex amples

Full FBA Additional Interviews The full FBA builds directly upon the brief FBA. The full FBA includes observation of the student in a natural setting and additional interviews. The interviews may be conducted with additional teachers, the parents, and/or the identified student. Each of these individuals can add valuable information to the overall understanding of the problem behavior. The teacher interview of the F-BSP Protocol can be adapted to be used with parents. (An example is given in Figure 3.7.) Keeping the interview focused on school-­related concerns can be difficult when interviewing families. Families may be dealing with multiple concerns—­for example, complications stemming from financial difficulties, divorce, or drug use—in addition to the child’s academic difficulties. The interviewer may be tempted to “try to fix everything” or to gather detailed information on every family historical event that “may be the key to why the child acts this way.” It is important to be aware of significant family issues that act as setting events for the problem behavior. To be effective in K–12 education, however, the interviewer must stay focused on those things that are within the school’s purview and that are alterable events. As an example, the family may be going through a divorce that is emotionally difficult for the identified student as well as for the rest of the family. The school does not need to provide divorce counseling, nor should it use the divorce to justify and excuse the child’s behavior. However, the school should be aware of the divorce and how it may act as a setting event for distractible, withdrawn, or aggressive behavior. To illustrate, joint custody issues may be relevant. Rules, morning routines, and expectations may vary significantly between each parent’s household, thereby creating a difference that could significantly affect the child’s school behavior in the morning. An intervention strategy that is within the school’s domain and that could reduce the impact of negative setting events is to provide the student with a supportive adult mentor who has consistent daily contact with the child before the school day begins. This adult could check in with the child first thing in the morning, make sure that the child has had something for breakfast, has brought all of his or her school materials, and is ready to begin the day. An effective strategy for keeping the parent interview focused on school-­ related concerns is to complete the interview form in relation to before-­school and after-­school routines. For example, How does the student get home? Does he or she engage in problem behavior during transportation? What does the student do when he or she gets home? Is there a routine for homework? Figure 3.7 illustrates an example of an F-BSP interview completed with Tom’s parents. This interview reveals that problem behavior occurs most often at times when homework completion is expected. The information gathered from the parents may help the behavior support team initiate a collaborative home–­school effort to encourage Tom to consistently complete and turn in his homework.



Conducting an FBA 55

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Tom   Age:  8      Grade:  3

  Date:  10/7/13

Person(s) interviewed:  Tom’s mother Interviewer:  Miss Sand (action team member) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Loving child, creative, lots of energy, athletic

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? Says he doesn’t know how to do homework. Talks back to mother and father, rips homework sheet, throws pencil down, cries, whines. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Every night that homework is expected. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? Until dinner (about 2 hours). How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? Very frustrating for child and parents, big struggle, not dangerous.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

7:15–7:45

Get up, get dressed

Doesn’t like to get up— complains

Low High Mom 1  2 3 4 5 6

7:45–8:15

Breakfast

8:15–8:30

Takes bus to school

1 2 3 4 5 6 Once or twice—peer argument

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

3:00–3:20 Takes bus home

Once or twice—peer argument

3:20–3:30 Snack 3:30–?

Supposed to do homework

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers 1 2 3 4 5 6

Refuses, cries, yells

1 2 3 4 5 6 Mom and Dad (continued)

FIGURE 3.7.  Completed parent interview—­Tom. The form itself is adapted by permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon.

56

Case Ex amples

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.) After he’s had snack and he’s expected to start his homework.

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) At 3:30 every day that he has homework.

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) He doesn’t have too much trouble getting up, going to school, or riding the bus.

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) Behavior is worse if mother pushes him harder than usual to do the work. Behavior is worse on days when mother shows less patience with him.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Mother gets into argument with him. Mother is less able to pay attention to his younger siblings. Often he doesn’t complete homework, so mother will sometimes do it for him so he doesn’t get a failing grade at school.

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

Mother is in bad Expectation to do homework 1. Cries, whines, yells, mood and has right after school refuses to do work less patience

Mother argues with him, sometimes does work for him

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Tom is having the tantrums to get his mother’s attention and to get out of doing work that he     perceives as too hard. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

FIGURE 3.7.  (continued)

2

Not at all sure 1



Conducting an FBA 57

Often, the student is not included in the FBA process. However, research has demonstrated that students can contribute valuable information to a functional assessment of behavior (e.g., Murdock, O’Neill, & Cunningham, 2005). Reed et al. (1997) assessed the agreement between students and teachers regarding students’ problem behaviors. Teachers and students demonstrated high agreement on the predictors (77%), behaviors (85%), and consequences (77%), but much less agreement on the setting events that set up the problem behavior (26%). These results are similar to the pattern of results found by Nippe, Lewis-­Palmer, and Sprague (1998). It is interesting to note that there was relatively low agreement between teachers and students on the setting events for problem behavior. This is not a surprising finding since teachers may be unaware of many setting events that affect student behavior—­for example, the student is irritable because he missed breakfast or is upset because of a family argument that occurred at home. Students also identified more problem behaviors than did their teachers (Nippe et al., 1998; Reed et al., 1997). The differences in identified behaviors suggested that teachers reported on behaviors that were observable in the classroom, whereas students were able to include behaviors that occurred during transitions between classes or before and after school. Teachers, parents, and other observers do not have access to the knowledge students possess regarding the occurrence, motivations, and context of their own behaviors. Clearly, students who are old enough to contribute can provide valuable information that might otherwise be missed in the FBA process. This information could be critical to the effectiveness of intervention plans. The F-BSP Protocol includes a student interview for identifying problem behaviors, predictors, and consequences. The student interview is completed with the assistance of a member of the action team. (The action team is a subset of the behavior support team.) Consider the child’s age before conducting an interview. A young child may be unable to participate in the interview process or may be uncomfortable doing so with a less familiar adult (e.g., the school psychologist rather than his or her own teacher). Prior to interviewing the student, the action team member should fill in the student’s daily schedule on the first page of the student interview. As the action team member conducts the interview, the student identifies the settings and times when she or he is most likely to get in trouble at school. In collaboration with the team member, the student then discusses what is occurring at these times to cause the misbehavior. Information gathered from the student interview can be used to generate hypothesis statements regarding the function and predictors of the problem behavior. An example student interview for Ronald is illustrated in Figure 3.8. A blank copy of the student interview is included in Appendix B as part of the complete F-BSP Protocol. Middle school and high school students have to travel from class to class, usually on an hourly basis. This means the students must make multiple transitions. Ronald reports engaging in problem behaviors during transition times on

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Student Student Name:  Ronald   Age:  13    Grade:  7   Date:  2/7/14 Interviewer:  Mrs. Andrews (action team member) Student Profile: What are the things you like to do, or do well, while at school? (activities, classes, helping others, etc.)

Likes hanging out with friends during lunch. Gym class is fun and is good at it. Science can be okay sometimes. Likes the school parties and dances.

Step 1B: Interview Student Description of the Behavior What are some things you do that get you in trouble or that are a problem at school? (talking out, not getting work done, fighting, etc.) “Fight with other kids. Punch other kids in the arm. Talk back to the teacher.”

How often do you        ? (Insert the behavior listed by the student)

“I get in fights in social studies and science whenever we have to do that stupid group work. I think that’s usually on Friday.” “I don’t talk back to the teachers too often. Just when they give us stupid, boring stuff to do.”

How long does         usually last each time it happens?

“Fights last until the teacher notices. Then I get to leave and just go to the office for a while.”

How serious is        ? (Do you or another student end up getting hurt? Are other students distracted?) “I’ve ended up hurting some kids before, not too bad, though.”

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

8:20-9:15

Science

Fights

Low High Peers 1 2 3 4 5 6

9:20-10:15

Math

Don’t understand work

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

10:20-11:15 Reading

Don’t understand work

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

11:20-12:15

Spanish

Don’t understand work

1 2 3 4 5 6 Teacher

12:20-1:00

Lunch

1:05-2:00

Social Studies

2:05-3:00

Physical Education

Other

Transitions between classrooms

Other

Working with substitutes

1 2 3 4 5 6

Teacher

Other

Getting help

1 2 3 4 5 6

Teacher/Peers

1 2 3 4 5 6 Fights

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers 1  2 3 4 5 6

Fights

1 2 3 4 5 6 Peers

(continued)

FIGURE 3.8.  Completed student interview—­Ronald. The form itself is adapted by permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. 58

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What kind of things make it more likely that you will have this problem? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

“Fighting? If I have to work with J. D. or M. L. because they always say something stupid to me. Especially if the teacher is working at his desk, so he’s not watching us too good.”

When and where is the problem most likely to happen? (days of week, specific classes, hallways, bathrooms)

“I get in the most fights in social studies, sometimes in science class too because we have to work in groups and J. D. is in that class.”

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (days of week, specific classes, hallways, bathrooms)

“I never get in trouble in gym or lunch—that’s fun time. Nobody bugs me to do anything.”

Setting Events: Is there anything that happens before or after school or in between classes that makes it more likely that you’ll have a problem? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.)

“If I get into a fight with somebody on Monday, I might get into it with him again on Tuesday, ’cuz I’m still mad.”

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the problem occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) “Usually the other kid gets mad or hurt and leaves me alone. Then the teacher tells me to knock it off. He hardly ever yells at the other kids even if they started it. But I don’t want to be there, so I just keep bugging them until he sends me out of the room.”

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2B: Develop a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Presence of Cooperative group work, J. D. or M. L., not monitored, negative previous peer comment fight

1. Punches other

students. Unable to work in group.

Consequence Classmate withdraws. Teacher reprimands. Eventually sent to office and escapes situation.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Ronald is hitting other students to get out of an aversive situation. He wants to escape the     negative peer comments that occur during cooperative group work.

FIGURE 3.8.  (continued)

59

60

Case Ex amples

a frequent basis. The teacher was unaware of this information and did not report it during the teacher interview. Because transitions are often a time when problem behavior is likely to occur, it is very important to include them in the routine matrix of the student-­guided interview. After the student interview is completed, the behavior support team analyzes the information to generate a testable hypothesis for when, where, why, and with whom the problem behavior is occurring. The testable hypothesis generated by the student interview can be compared to the testable hypotheses generated by the teacher (and parent) interview(s). The stronger the agreement between two testable hypotheses of the same behavior and same setting, the more confident the team will be in the accuracy of their assessment. The F-BSP Protocol includes a section to compare the hypotheses between teacher and student interviews and to rerate the confidence in the testable hypothesis. This is illustrated in Figure 3.9. We should point out that we have found it difficult to obtain FBA information from students in second grade or younger. Young children typically have less awareness of, and insight into, their behavior than do older children.

Observation At least one observation of the student is necessary to complete the full FBA. Ideally, observations are conducted until a predictable pattern of behavior is observed and multiple occurrences of the targeted behavior have been exhibited. The student should be observed in the setting in which problem behaviors typically occur, as indicated by the teacher, parent, and student interviews. Multiple observation systems are available. The behavior support team may choose to use any adequate observation system with which they are familiar. An adequate observation system will provide objective quantifiable data regarding the (1) antecedents of problem behavior, (2) occurrence of problem behavior, and (3) maintaining consequences of problem behavior. The Functional Assessment Observation (FAO) form is one useful tool for conducting functional observations Step 3: Rate Your Confidence in the Testable Explanation If you completed both interviews, was there agreement on these parts?  (Y/N) (a) Setting Events       (b) Antecedents   Y   (c) Behaviors   Y/N   (d) Consequences   Y   (e) Function   Y 

Student focused on fewer problem behaviors than teacher

How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure So-so 6

5

4

3

FIGURE 3.9.  F-BSP Protocol, Step 3.

Not at all sure 2

1



Conducting an FBA 61

of behavior. “The FAO indicates: a) the number of events of problem behavior, b) the problem behaviors that occur together, c) the times when problem behavior events are most and least likely to occur, d) events that predict problem behavior events, e) perceptions about the maintaining function of problem behaviors, and f) actual consequences following problem behavior events” (O’Neill et al., 1997, p. 37). If desired and feasible, multiple observations over several days can be recorded on one FAO sheet. A sample of a completed FAO for Vera is included in Figure 3.10. A blank copy of the FAO is included in Appendix G. Instructions for completing this form can be obtained in O’Neill et al. (2015). The purpose of this observation is to test the validity of the hypothesis statements and to resolve any discrepancies between the teacher-­generated and the student-­generated hypotheses. The FAO is completed by a member of the behavior support team who has demonstrated competency conducting FBA observations. The sample FAO for Vera confirms the testable hypotheses about the predictors and maintaining consequences of Vera’s problem behavior. The problem behavior reported in the interviews was the same type of problem behavior noted during the observation. Most of the problem behavior occurred during large-group activities. Most of the problem behavior was maintained by adult attention to the problem behavior and to get access to items she desires. The close correspondence between the interviews and the observations increases the team’s confidence in the testable hypothesis, from which they will build the BSP for this student. Often, it is useful to conduct a peer-­referenced observation in addition to the FBA observation. The major purpose of the peer-­referenced comparison observation is to determine the severity of the student’s problem behavior relative to his or her same-age peers. The student’s behavior is compared to the behavior of a composite of the student’s classmates. The requisite data include percentage of time on task, percentage of time off task, and percentage of time engaged in problem behaviors. This observation typically lasts for 15–30 minutes. An example of data from a sample Peer Comparison Observation Form is included in Figure 3.11. Summaries of observational data for Vera are included in Figure 3.12. The summary of peer observation data clearly validates the teacher’s concerns that Vera’s behavior is significantly discrepant from her peers and is disruptive to the classroom. She was off task 30% of the time and she engaged in tattling behavior that distracted the teacher from instruction during 12% of the intervals. This is compared to her peers, who were only off task 17% of the time and engaged in tattling behavior during 0% of intervals observed. After completing the additional interviews and an observation of multiple occurrences of the problem behavior within the typical routine or setting, the behavior support team has collected enough information to verify or modify the original testable hypothesis. At this point, they are ready to design a BSP and form an action plan. The next chapter outlines how the behavior support team develops a function-­based BSP.

62

Time

14

Sm Grp Activities

g

2

1/15

3

9

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10 2

4

2

5

st Di

6

k

7 1/16

8

9

on

Predictors

9 14

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10 2

Get/Obtain

Ending Date:

9 14

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10

Escape/Avoid

Perceived Functions

1/17/14

1/17

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10

Alo n att e (n en o tio n) Lg Gr p Ac tiv Sh ity ar e pe Mat er . w s .

Actual Conseq.

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10 2

9 14

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

1 5 10

R. K.

R. K.

FIGURE 3.10.  Functional Assessment Observation Form—Vera. The form itself is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-­Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/ permissions.

Totals

9

3 6 11 4 7 12 8

1 5 10

ng

ma

g

Events: 1 Date:

3 6 11 4 7 12 8 13

Sound/ Letters Lg Grp Art/ Music Lg Grp Recess

Dismissal

1 5 10

Circle Time Lg Grp Snack

Attend.

s

1/15/14

De

sir ed Ac Item tiv ity /

Behaviors

in

sh

Pu

lin

tt

Ta

as lt T ffic u

Starting Date:

T

ni

hi

W

ion sit ran

ion

Name: Vera

n

ue eq nd /R

De

pti ru Int er

st A

cti vi

n

ten

At

lat mu

lf-S ti

Se

) ( ty

ue eq d/R

ma De

tio

Functional Assessment Observation Form

Pe rso n Ot he r/ D on ’t K Te no ac w he r at te Ob nt ta io in n s ob je Co ct n m s o th men in ing h ts: pe ap (if r ini iod, pen tia w ed ls) rit e



Conducting an FBA 63 Student:  Vera   School: Wilson Elem   Date:  1/15     Grade: K         Setting:  Classroom Activity:  Circle Tm.    Begin Time:  9:15    End Time:  9:35     Observer:  Mr. Green    :10

:20

On = On task       Off = Off task T = Inappropriate talk  OS = Out of seat F = Fidgeting Beh 2 =  Tattling    Beh 2 =  Pushing   

:30

:40

:50

:00

Stdt

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

Peer

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

M  F

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

:10

:20

:30

:40

:50

:00

Stdt

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

T F

On

Peer

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

OS

Off

M  F

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

Beh 2

FIGURE 3.11.  Sample line of data from Peer Comparison Observation form.

January 15: 9:15–9:35 (Classroom—Circle Time) Student

Peer comparison

On task

70%

83%

Off task

30%

17%

Talk-outs

 6%

 3%

Out of seat

 0%

 0%

Fidgeting

 0%

 0%

Tattling

12%

 0%

Pushing

 0%

 0%

FIGURE 3.12.  Sample summary of data from Peer Comparison Observation form.

64

Case Ex amples

SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION References on Functional Analysis Carr, E. G., Yarbrough, S. C., & Langdon, N. A. (1997). Effects of idiosyncratic stimulus variables on functional analysis outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(4), 673–686. Daly, E. J., III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26(4), 554–574. Davis, T., Durand, S., Fuentes, L., Dacus, S., & Blenden, K. (2014). The effects of a school-­ based functional analysis on subsequent classroom behavior. Education and Treatment of Children (West Virginia University Press), 37(1), 95–110. Derby, K. M., Wacker, D. P., Peck, S., Sasso, G., DeRaad, A., Berg, W., et al. (1994). Functional analysis of separate topographies of aberrant behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(2), 267–278. Gage, N., Lewis, T., & Stichter, J. (2012). Functional behavioral assessment-­based interventions for students with or at risk for emotional and/or behavioral disorders in school: A hierarchical linear modeling meta-­analysis. Behavioral Disorders, 37(2), 55–77. Harding, J., Wacker, D., Cooper, L., Millard, T., & Jensen-­Kovalan, P. (1994). Brief hierarchical assessment of potential treatment components with children in an outpatient clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(2), 291–300. Haynes, S. N. (1998). The assessment–­treatment relationship and functional analysis in behavior therapy. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14(1), 26–35. Haynes, S. N., Leisen, M. B., & Blaine, D. D. (1997). Design of individualized behavioral treatment programs using functional analytic clinical case models. Psychological Assessment, 9(4), 334–348. Iwata, B., Deleon, I., & Roscoe, E. (2013). Reliability and validity of the functional analysis screening tool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(1), 271–284. Kahng, S. W., & Iwata, B. A. (1999). Correspondence between outcomes of brief and extended functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 149–159. Lee, S. W., & Jamison, T. (2003). Including the FBA process in student assistance teams: An exploratory study of team communications and intervention selection. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 14(2), 209–239. Meyer, K. A. (1999). Functional analysis and treatment of problem behavior exhibited by elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 229–232. Miller, F., & Lee, D. (2013). Do functional behavioral assessments improve intervention effectiveness for students diagnosed with ADHD? A single-­subject meta-­analysis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22(3), 253–282. Northup, J., Wacker, D., Sasso, G., Steege, M., Cigrand, K., Cook, J., et al. (1991). A brief functional analysis of aggressive and alternative behavior in an outclinic setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(3), 509–522. Preciado, J. A., Horner, R. H., & Baker, S. K. (2009). Using a function-­based approach to decrease problem behaviors and increase academic engagement for Latino English language learners. Journal of Special Education, 42(4), 227–240. Rispoli, M., Davis, H., Goodwyn, F., & Camargo, S. (2013). The use of trial-based functional



Conducting an FBA 65

analysis in public school classrooms for two students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(3), 180–189. Schmidt, J., Drasgow, E., Halle, J., Martin, C., & Bliss, S. (2014). Discrete-­trial functional analysis and functional communication training with three individuals with autism and severe problem behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(1), 44–55. Selinske, J. E., Greer, R., & Lodhi, S. (1991). A functional analysis of the comprehensive application of behavior analysis to schooling. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(1), 107–117. Vollmer, T. R., Iwata, B. A., Duncan, B. A., & Lerman, D. C. (1993). Extensions of multi-­ element functional analyses using reversal-­t ype designs. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 5(4), 311–325. Vollmer, T. R., Marcus, B. A., Ringdahl, J. E., & Roane, H. S. (1995). Progressing from brief assessments to extended experimental analyses in the evaluation of aberrant behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28(4), 561–576. Wacker, D. P., Steege, M., & Berg, W. K. (1988). Use of single-­case designs to evaluate manipulable influences on school performance. School Psychology Review, 17(4), 651–657. Watson, T. S., Ray, K. P., Turner, H. S., & Logan, P. (1999). Teacher-­implemented functional analysis and treatment: A method for linking assessment to intervention. School Psychology Review, 28, 292–302. Wright-Gallo, G. L., Higbee, T. S., & Reagon, K. A. (2006). Classroom-­based functional analysis and intervention for students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 29(3), 421–436.

Chapter 4

Designing a Behavior Support Plan

Introduction Using the three case examples introduced in Chapter 3, this chapter demonstrates how to use an FBA to design a BSP. A BSP is a written record that summarizes the FBA information and documents the intervention plan. An effective BSP describes in detail how, by whom, and in what situations the intervention strategies will be implemented. In addition, an effective BSP should include monitoring and evaluation procedures. Intervening with problem behavior has two primary goals: to reduce problem behavior and to increase appropriate behavior. Meeting these goals will often require comprehensive changes in teachers’ behaviors and in student(s)’ routines and repertoire of skills. There are at least three ways to meet these goals: 1. Make the problem behavior irrelevant. Decrease or eliminate the need to engage in the behavior. 2. Make the problem behavior inefficient. Provide the child or group of children with a replacement behavior that serves the same function as the inappropriate behavior. 3. Make the problem behavior ineffective. Do not allow the child or group of children to obtain what he or she wants through inappropriate behavior. 66



Designing a BSP 67

Make the Problem Behavior Irrelevant Altering a problematic routine by altering its predictors often makes the problem behavior irrelevant. As an example, Susan is a sixth-grade student who was referred for extreme distractibility during reading and math instruction. An FBA of Susan’s behavior and her environmental routines yielded two important findings: (1) math and reading instruction took place during the morning and (2) Susan was often sent to school without breakfast. The behavior support team concluded that Susan’s distractibility was a direct result of her hunger. They altered her environmental routine by sending Susan to the school cafeteria every morning for breakfast. Once Susan had eaten in the morning, her distractibility in math and reading was eliminated. In other words, the problem behavior was made irrelevant by an inexpensive, practical change in the student’s routine. Often, it can be less time- and labor-­intensive to change a problem behavior by changing its predictors than by changing the consequences of the behavior (Luiselli & Cameron, 1998).

Make the Problem Behavior Inefficient Teachers and educators usually do not consider the function of problem behavior to be inappropriate or offensive. Teachers understand that students want to solicit attention, escape aversive situations, and receive tangible rewards and privileges. Rather, it is the means that the student uses to achieve the end (the function) that is problematic. A critical component of an effective behavioral intervention is teaching the child an appropriate replacement behavior that serves the same function as the inappropriate behavior. If a child can achieve his desired end without damaging his relations with peers or teachers, the problem behavior becomes less efficient than the appropriate behavior. The child will begin to use the replacement behavior more frequently. In the brief example in Chapter 2, James would have a temper tantrum in order to get out of an embarrassing situation. The behavior support team must teach James an alternate behavior that serves the same function as the tantrum, without resulting in detention or in-­school suspension. The team could teach James to ask for a 2-minute break when he is feeling overwhelmed by the assignment. Alternatively, the team could ask the teacher to give James silent reading assignments matched to his reading ability to replace the oral reading tasks. Both of these options serve the same function as James’s tantrum: to provide him with relief from the embarrassment of a publicly challenging academic situation. The alternative behaviors, however, are much more acceptable to James’s teacher than his temper tantrums. The problem behavior is rendered inefficient. James can now escape his embarrassment without creating a negative situation for himself and his teacher.

68

Case Ex amples

Make the Problem Behavior Ineffective From the student’s point of view, problem behavior works. It may get her out of a difficult situation or it may help her obtain something she wants. Imagine the preschool child who wants to eat a cookie before lunch. Initially, the teacher says no. The child begins to whine. The teacher holds her ground and sends the child to time-out for whining. The child gets louder and more adamant. Finally, the teacher gives in and gives the child the cookie. Rather than learning that she will get in trouble for whining, the child learns that she just needs to whine louder and longer to get what she wants! In order to make problem behavior ineffective, the behavior support team must identify the consequences that maintain the problem behavior. The maintaining consequences must then be eliminated. By eliminating the maintaining consequences (e.g., giving in to whining), the child learns that the problem behavior is not an effective strategy for obtaining the desired outcome.

Competing Behaviors The first step in designing a BSP is to generate strategies for reducing problem behaviors and increasing appropriate replacement behaviors. By ensuring that the intervention is linked with the FBA, the efficiency, efficacy, and relevance of the BSP are increased. The Competing Behavior Pathway Form is one instrument used to create a link between the FBA and the BSP. The Competing Behavior Pathway Form is incorporated into the F-BSP Protocol. A blank copy is included in Appendix B (Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway). Competing behaviors are behaviors that are mutually exclusive. An individual cannot simultaneously engage in two competing behaviors. For example, running and walking are competing behaviors. Applied to BSPs, problem behaviors and desired behaviors are competing behaviors. A child cannot simultaneously engage in “ignore the teacher” and “follow directions.” The purpose of the Competing Behavior Pathway step is threefold: (1) to highlight the importance of building the behavior support plan around the hypothesis statement; (2) to identify competing behavioral alternatives (desired or acceptable behaviors) to the problem behavior; and (3) to determine strategies for making the problem behavior ineffective, inefficient, or irrelevant through changes to the routine or environment. The behavior support team uses the Competing Behavior Pathway step to brainstorm multiple strategies for changing the routine by (1) modifying the predictors that set off the problem behavior, (2) teaching appropriate or alternate behaviors, and (3) modifying ineffective consequences that have maintained rather than eliminated the problem behavior. The intervention strategies developed by referring to the Competing Behavior Pathway step will become the basis of the BSP.



Designing a BSP 69

To clarify, examine the sample Competing Behavior Pathway Form for Tom in Figure 4.1. The middle section of the Competing Behaviors Pathway Form restates the hypothesis statement. Put simply, “This is what is happening now.” The top section identifies the appropriate, desired behavior expected of the child: “This is what we’d like to have happen eventually.” The bottom section indicates alternative behaviors that serve the same function as the problem behavior, but are more acceptable to the teacher, other school staff, and parents: “This is what we’d be happy with in the meantime.” Often, it is not the function of the problem behavior that is offensive (e.g., to receive adult attention). Rather, it is the strategy the child uses to achieve that function (e.g., causing serious disruptions in the class) that is problematic. To create an effective BSP, the behavior support team and referring teacher must teach the child alternative, acceptable behaviors that serve the same function as the problem behavior (e.g., teaching the child to request help for difficult tasks). Consider the case example of Tom by referring to Figure 4.1. Tom’s primary problem behavior was “refusing to do work” and causing disruption. The function of his problem behavior was “gaining teacher and peer attention.” A desired alternative (i.e., competing behavior) could be “completing work without disruption.” An acceptable alternative behavior, serving the same function as the problem behavior while also competing with the problem behavior, could be “requesting intermittent attention and assistance from the teacher or a competent peer.” If the student begins to consistently engage in the acceptable alternative, this alternative will serve as a stepping stone to the “desired behavior.” For example, Tom’s teachers and parents would like him eventually to be able to work independently without overreliance on his teacher or peers. The Competing Behavior Pathway Forms for Vera and Ronald are presented in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. Once the team has determined the desired behavior and an acceptable alternative to the problem behavior, they must generate strategies to facilitate the student’s performance of these behaviors. In order to make the problem behavior ineffective, inefficient, and irrelevant, the team should focus on strategies that teach the child new skills and behaviors or that alter aspects of the child’s routine. At each point in the hypothesis statement (setting event, triggering antecedent, problem behavior, consequence), adults can alter the student’s routine to improve the likelihood that the child will be successful—­that problem behavior will be decreased and appropriate behavior will be increased. The Competing Behavior Pathway Form (Step 6 of the F-BSP Protocol) provides space to brainstorm strategies for (1) setting event manipulations, (2) triggering antecedent manipulations, (3) behavioral teaching, and (4) consequence manipulations. The following are some strategies suggested on Ronald’s Competing Behavior Pathway Form (Figure 4.3): (1) to change the setting event—“physically separate Ronald from those peers with whom he has the most negative interactions”; (2) to change the antecedents—“allow Ronald a choice of group or individual

70

Case Ex amples

Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway Desired Behavior Complete work without disruption

Setting Event Low academic skills, especially in math

Triggering Antecedent During structured academic time that is difficult and occurs before recess

Problem Behavior Refuses to do work Shouts, slams book

Maintaining Consequences Receive positive adult attention for completion of work

Maintaining Consequences Gains teacher attention or peer attention

Function Attention

Alternative Behavior Request intermittent attention/ assistance from teacher or competent peer

Setting Event Strategies Assess whether math curriculum is at appropriate level Additional instruction in math 1:1 instruction in math

Antecedent Strategies

Behavior Teaching Strategies

Consequence Strategies

Define expectations

Teach expectations

Reward expectations

Divide one long recess into two short recesses that occur earlier

Teach about reward system

Ignore inappropriate behavior

Teach to ask for help through role play

Earn “attention tickets”

Precorrect Move desk to quiet area

Earn other tangibles (e.g., art supplies or time to work on art projects)

FIGURE 4.1.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 6—Tom. The form itself is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-­Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions.



Designing a BSP 71

Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway

Setting Event Conflict that occurs on bus to school or at home before school

Desired Behavior

Maintaining Consequences

Shares materials appropriately Works cooperatively with classmates

Positive teacher attention Positive peer attention

Problem Behavior

Maintaining Consequences

Triggering Antecedent Large-group setting with peers, classmate tries to share materials

Tattles, pushes, whines, cries

Gains attention from teacher

Function Attention

Alternative Behavior Requests teacher help to solve peer conflict without engaging in pushing, whining, crying

Setting Event Strategies Increase communication between home and school Increase communication between bus and school

Antecedent Strategies

Behavior Teaching Strategies

Define expectations

Teach expectations

Precorrect

Teach to request help

Consequence Strategies Reward expectations

Increase number of supplies available

Give positive attention for working Teach to problem-solve appropriately and with peers cooperating

Seat next to competent peer

Teach to take turns using materials

Pair with peer who is a good role model

Reward system to earn rewards for entire group

FIGURE 4.2.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 6—Vera. The form itself is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-­Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions.

Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway Desired Behavior Work cooperatively and productively during structured group activity

Setting Event Negative interactions with peers Academic difficulties

Triggering Antecedent Academic, group activities with low supervision

Problem Behavior Fighting Punching

Maintaining Consequences Improvement on grades for group task

Maintaining Consequences Escapes negative peer comment because peers are subdued

Function Escape

Alternative Behavior Request break from group activity Request to work with other peers

Setting Event Strategies

Behavior Teaching Strategies

Antecedent Strategies

Consequence Strategies

Physically separate from peers with whom he has the most negative interactions

Define expectations

Teach expectations

Reward expectations

Assess academic skills

Reduce number of group activities expected

Teach Ronald to request a break or change in partners

Emphasize connections between actions and grades

Allow choice of group or individual projects

Teach problem-solving skills

Reward Ronald for appropriate behavior

Individualize/modify curriculum to match skills

Increase his monitoring/supervision Check-in system Pair with peer who provides good role model

FIGURE 4.3.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 6—Ronald. The form itself is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-­Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions. 72



Designing a BSP 73

projects” or “increase his monitoring/supervision”; (3) to teach new behaviors— “teach Ronald to request a break or a change in partners”; and (4) to change the consequences—“reward Ronald for appropriate behavior.” At this point in designing the BSP, the behavior support team is brainstorming. Team members should not censor any reasonable suggestions. Later the team will consider the list of ideas and decide which strategies fit best within the contextual limitations of the school and classroom. By brainstorming, the team creates a bank of ideas from which to draw. The team may choose a few strategies to begin with and then realize that the original plan does not work for a particular child. The team will find that modifying an ineffective BSP is much easier when there are multiple additional options to go back to and choose from. The primary reasons for using the Competing Behavior Pathway Form and for including parents and teachers in the development of the BSP are: “1) it increases the link between intervention procedures and functional assessment results; 2) it increases the fit between the values, skills, resources, and routines of the people who will carry out the plan and the procedures that will be employed; 3) it increases the logical coherence among the different procedures that could be used in a multi-­element plan of support; and 4) it increases the fidelity with which the plan is ultimately implemented” (O’Neill et al., 1997, p. 69).

Contextual Fit A second, important consideration in designing a BSP is to increase the fit between the BSP and the values, skills, resources, and routines of the people who will carry it out. This concept is called contextual fit (Albin, Lucyshyn, Horner, & Flannery, 1996). The importance of contextual fit cannot be overstated. Imagine designing the “perfect” BSP, one that if implemented properly could not fail to work, only to find that it cannot be implemented properly. The behavior support team may find that they have forgotten to consider important practical constraints such as time, resources, finances, skills, facilities issues, attitudes, or beliefs. The importance of contextual fit can be illustrated with a few examples.

Example 1 The behavior support team may choose to incorporate a home–­school note into Ronald’s BSP. First, the team identifies a behavioral goal for each class period. On a daily basis, Ronald checks in with each teacher to mark whether he has met his goal during that class period. At the end of the day he checks out with the school counselor and takes the behavior sheet home. His parents are expected to review the behavior sheet, sign it, write an encouraging comment for Ronald, and return it to the school.

74

Case Ex amples

This is a sound strategy, one that has been demonstrated to work with middle school students at risk for serious behavior problems. Parents can be taught to understand and participate in the system. However, what if Ronald’s parents are functionally illiterate? In this case, they will not be able to read the daily report or add comments to it. How will this affect Ronald’s success? Will it embarrass the parents and alienate them from the school? These types of problems can be easily avoided (once contextual fit is considered) with slight modifications. For example, the school could make regular phone contact rather than paper contact with the student’s parents.

Example 2 Part of Tom’s original BSP involved increasing communication between his homeroom teacher and his resource room teacher. Tom’s resource room teacher would write a note about his behavior during class and Tom would carry the note back with him to his homeroom teacher. Two problems arose: (1) When Tom is angry (e.g., if he receives a negative report on his behavior), he has a tendency to rip his papers into shreds; and (2) Tom is very forgetful and distractible and often forgets or loses the resource room teacher’s note. The intervention strategy does not have to be eliminated. Rather, by considering contextual fit, the strategy could be modified and made more effective. To eliminate the first problem, the behavior note could be laminated and reused, using a dry-erase marker, on a daily basis. To eliminate the second problem, the responsibility for sending the note between teachers could be placed on the teachers, not on the student. Another possible solution would be to reward Tom for delivering the note to his homeroom teacher, whether the note contained good news or bad news. Often, problems of contextual fit revolve around issues of time and effort. The team may design a comprehensive BSP that requires more time and effort than the teacher has to give. In designing BSPs, the behavior support team should emphasize effectiveness and efficiency. For example, rather than design a BSP that requires very frequent teacher monitoring and interaction, the behavior support team might create a BSP that includes self-­management or self-­monitoring strategies by the student. By taking some of the burden off the teacher, while teaching the child responsibility and independence, a BSP that includes self-­ management achieves a double purpose.

Individualizing the BSP One of the most difficult challenges in intervening with children with behavior problems is their variability in response to treatment. Intervention strategies may be effective for some children but not for others, or may only be effective for certain children in certain settings. When a BSP does not incorporate FBA,



Designing a BSP 75

different children exhibiting the same type of behavior problems may receive the same intervention, even if the problem behavior serves different functions for different children. Imagine a second-­grade student who frequently causes serious disruption in the classroom. Based on an FBA, the following hypothesis statement is generated: “After the teacher gives Reuben a difficult reading assignment, Reuben crumples his paper and starts flinging spit wads at his peers in order to get out of the assignment.” An FBA of the same behavior exhibited by a different child yields a slightly different hypothesis statement. For example, “When Rita is in reading class and she has not received any individual teacher attention for more than 10 minutes, she starts crumpling her assignment and flinging spit wads at her classmates in order to get the teacher’s attention.” The behavior of the two students looks exactly the same. However, the predictors and function of the behavior are quite different and suggest very different BSPs. Assume that the teacher employs a common response to disruptive behavior: each time a child causes a serious disruption he or she is made to sit in the hallway for 10 minutes. This generic approach to managing problem behavior is actually rewarding to Reuben! By being placed in the hallway he obtains what he is seeking: escape from his reading assignment. Placing the student in the hallway might be a more effective discipline strategy for Rita. This strategy further reduces the amount of teacher attention Rita receives. In the future, she is less likely to try that strategy to obtain teacher attention. A function-­based approach considers the unique features of the situation, the child, or the behavior that predict the success or failure of a behavioral intervention. Use of FBA procedures helps the behavior support team to design BSPs for each student with whom they work. A second important consideration in individualizing BSPs is the choice of reinforcers. Many BSPs will incorporate a reward system to reinforce the child’s appropriate behavior. The choice of reinforcers should be based on what is motivating to this particular student, not based on what an adult believes is motivating to all students. For example, in Tom’s original BSP, the team decided that he could earn 15 minutes of computer time if he exhibited appropriate behavior during typically problematic routines. The plan was implemented, but Tom’s behavior got worse. Why did Tom’s behavior get worse after implementing the intervention? The team was perplexed until they spoke with Tom. After speaking with Tom, they discovered that his least favorite activity was using the computer! In effect, the team was “rewarding” Tom’s good behavior with an activity that was actually punishing to him. Upon further questioning, the team learned that Tom enjoys using art supplies. The BSP was modified so that Tom could earn 15 minutes of art time instead of computer time. Immediately, his behavior improved as he worked toward a personally meaningful reinforcer. Information about a student’s preferred activities and reinforcers can be easily obtained through the student-­guided interview, as described in Chapter 3. For additional examples of

76

Case Ex amples

age-­appropriate reinforcers, the reader is referred to the reinforcer checklists included in Crone et al. (2010).

Documenting a BSP After completing the Competing Behavior Pathway Form and deciding which strategies will be used, the behavior support team documents these decisions in the form of a written BSP. Each school district typically provides their own forms for documenting BSPs. A sample form for each of the three case examples is presented in Figures 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6. A blank copy of this form is incorporated into the F-BSP Protocol (see Appendix B, Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies). The team chooses among the strategies generated on the Competing Behavior Pathway form and lists each strategy on the Select Intervention Strategies Form. At times, the team may add strategies that were not used in Step 6. It is critical to document who is responsible for implementing the strategy, when it will be implemented, and how it will be implemented. If the student is to be taught a new behavior, the plan must indicate who will teach the child the behavior. Someone on the team should be designated to discuss the BSP with the student. This critical step is often forgotten or neglected. If the BSP is to be effective, the student must be informed about its expectations, goals, and rewards, and must have the opportunity to ask questions about the plan. An essential component of the BSP is documenting a plan for managing inappropriate behavior. The child’s inappropriate behavior has developed over a long period of time. It may take a long period of time to replace the inappropriate behavior with appropriate behavior. The adults in the student’s routines should have a consistent plan for responding to inappropriate behavior. In the case of mild misbehavior, the plan may be simply to ignore the behavior. Severe or dangerous behavior may require a crisis plan. A crisis plan was developed for responding to Ronald’s severely disruptive or dangerous behavior. This crisis plan, as presented in Table 4.1, should be attached to the BSP. The crisis plan should be based on data collected during the FBA and during discussion of the school’s resources and the staff’s availability to assist each other. Each of the staff involved in Ronald’s plan agreed to their part in the plan. A copy of the crisis plan is distributed to the principal and each of Ronald’s teachers. A critical step in documenting the BSP is to obtain the written agreement of everyone involved in the implementation of the plan, including the student, teacher, parent/guardian, and other members of the action team. Finally, the team should specify a date when the plan will be reviewed, evaluated, and modified if necessary. A copy of the BSP should be provided to each of the student’s teachers and to the student’s parents. A copy should also be kept on file in the behavior support team’s records.



Designing a BSP 77

Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies—Tom

Tasks

Person Responsible

1. Math assessment and curriculum individualization

Math resource teacher

Two weeks— 11/1/13

2. Role-play how to make appropriate requests for help

School psychologist

By 11/8/13 10/25/13

3. Allow Tom to earn “coupons” to trade in at school store or for 15 minutes of art time as a reward for appropriate behavior throughout a class period

Teacher

Begin 11/8/13 10/22/13

4. Design behavior card and “coupons.” Communicate to all relevant adults how the behavior card will be used

School psychologist

10/21/13 11/8/13

5. Explain behavior support plan to student

Teacher

10/21/13 11/8/13

By When

Review Date

Evaluation Decision • Monitor • Modify • Discontinue

2–3 weeks

*If emergency behavior management procedures are necessary, attach crisis plan as a separate sheet.

FIGURE 4.4.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 7—Tom.

78

Case Ex amples

Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies—Vera Person Responsible

Tasks 1. “1-minute check-in.” Teacher provides positive attention first thing in the morning by asking Vera how her morning was and by precorrecting her about behavioral expectations for school

By When

Review Date

Kindergarten teacher

1/25/14

Within 2–3 weeks 2/6/14

2. Practice role-playing with student Kindergarten the right way to share with other teacher students and how to ask for help from teacher rather than tattle

1/28/14

2/6/14

3. Provide positive attention (smile, Kindergarten encouragement, pat on back) after teacher every 10 minutes of cooperative, nondisruptive work exhibited by Vera

1/25/14

2/6/14

4. Explain behavior support plan to Vera

School psychologist

Day before it starts 1/25/14

2/6/14

5. Ignore tattling behavior

Kindergarten teacher

1/25/14

2/6/14

Evaluation Decision • Monitor • Modify • Discontinue

*If emergency behavior management procedures are necessary, attach crisis plan as a separate sheet.

FIGURE 4.5.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 7—Vera.



Designing a BSP 79

Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies—Ronald

Tasks

Person Responsible

1. Provide student with choice to complete project individually or with group

Science and social studies teachers

Next day 2/11/14

2–3 weeks 2/28/14

2. Increase supervision of group activities

Teachers

2/11/14

2/28/14

3. Student participates in peer conflict resolution group

Led by school counselor

Ongoing group: begin 2/18/14

4. Student participates in relaxation skills group

Led by school counselor

Ongoing group: begin 2/19/14

5. Teach student to request a break from work or to request a change in work partners

School psychologist

2/11/14

6. Respond to student requests for break and praise student for appropriate use of the strategy

Teachers

2/11/14

7. Create behavior card for monitoring behavior in class

School psychologist

2/11/14

8. Explain behavior support plan to student

School psychologist

2/11/14

By When

Review Date

Evaluation Decision • Monitor • Modify • Discontinue

*If emergency behavior management procedures are necessary, attach crisis plan as a separate sheet.

FIGURE 4.6.  Behavior Support Plan, Step 7—Ronald.

80

Case Ex amples

TABLE 4.1. Sample Crisis Plan for Ronald 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Be aware of cues that student is upset. Try to calm student. Separate student from peers if possible. If problem gets worse, notify school principal. School counselor will cover gym teacher’s class. Gym teacher will come to talk with student and escort him to gym. Student takes a 10-minute time-out outside of gym. Student is verbally praised for calming himself and for taking time-out appropriately. The gym teacher reminds student of expectations upon returning to class. The gym teacher (or other adult) escorts student back to class.

Designing an effective BSP is both a science and an art. To be effective, each BSP needs to address numerous critical features that have been discussed in this book. Some of these critical features include (1) an observable, measurable description of the problem behavior; (2) a testable explanation regarding the function of the problem behavior; (3) strategies for extinguishing problem behavior; (4) strategies for reinforcing appropriate behavior; (5) strategies for measuring and evaluating behavioral change; and (6) consideration of contextual fit. Although Step 7 of the F-BSP Protocol lists the actual strategies that will be employed, the entire document, Steps 1–8, can be considered part of the final BSP. The F-BSP Protocol includes all of the critical features of a good, function-­ based BSP without creating redundancy by requiring the same information on multiple forms (e.g., on the interview form, the BSP form, the evaluation form). Horner, Sugai, Todd, and Lewis-­Palmer (1999–2000) designed a checklist for assessing the quality of BSPs. This checklist is reproduced in Figure 4.7; a copy of the checklist is also included in Appendix H. Although a complete treatment of the subject of designing a BSP is beyond the scope of this chapter, the reader can refer to the Supplementary Section for a list of additional resources on this topic.

A Checklist for Assessing the Quality of Behavior Support Planning: Does the Plan (or Planning Process) Have These Features? When developing and implementing behavior support plans, judge the degree to which each of the following has been considered: G = Good   O = Okay   P = Poor   N = Not applicable  1.  2.  3.  4.  5.

 6.

 7.

 8.

 9.

10.

     Define academic and lifestyle context for behavior support      Operational description of problem behaviors     Problem routines identified      Functional assessment hypotheses stated Intervention/Foundations (issues that cut across routines) a)      health and physiology b)     communication c)     mobility d)     predictability e)     control/choice f)      social relationships g)      activity patterns Intervention/Prevention (make problem behavior irrelevant) a)     schedule b)     curriculum c)      instructional procedures Intervention/Teaching (make problem behavior inefficient) a)      replacement skills b)      new adaptive skills Intervention/Consequences Extinction (make problem behavior ineffective) a)      minimize positive reinforcement b)      minimize negative reinforcement Reinforcement (make appropriate behavior more effective) a)      maximize positive reinforcement Punishment (if needed) a)      negative consequences contingent upon problem behavior Safety/Emergency Intervention Plan a)      clear plan for what to do if/when problem behaviors occur Evaluation and Assessment a)      define the information to be collected b)      define the measurement process c)      define decision-making process Ensure Contextual Fit a)     values b)     skills c)     resources d)      administrative system e)      perceptions that program is in best interest of student

FIGURE 4.7.  Behavior support plan checklist. Adapted from Horner, Sugai, Todd, and Lewis-­ Palmer (1999–2000). Copyright 1999–2000 by Taylor & Francis. Adapted by permission.

81

82

Case Ex amples

SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION Behavior Support Plans Artesani, A. J., & Mallar, L. (1998). Positive behavior supports in general education settings: Combining person-­centered planning and functional analysis. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34, 33–38. Benazzi, L., Horner, R. H., & Good, R. H. (2006). Effects of behavior support team composition on the technical adequacy and contextual fit of behavior support plans. Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 160–170. Erbas, D. (2010). A collaborative approach to implement positive behavior support plans for children with problem behaviors: A comparison of consultation versus consultation and feedback approach. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45(1), 94–106. Fad, K. M., Patton, J. R., & Polloway, E. A. (1998). Behavioral intervention planning. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-­Palmer, T. (1999–2000). Elements of behavior support plans: A technical brief. Exceptionality, 8(3), 205–215. Killu, K., Weber, K. P., Derby, K., & Barretto, A. (2006). Behavior intervention planning and implementation of positive behavioral support plans: An examination of states’ adherence to standards for practice. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8(4), 195–200. Lane, K., Kalberg, J., Bruhn, A., Driscoll, S. A., Wehby, J. H., & Elliott, S. N. (2009). Assessing social validity of schoolwide positive behavior support plans: Evidence for the reliability and structure of the primary intervention rating scale. School Psychology Review, 38(1), 135–144. Muscott, H. S. (1996). Planning and implementing effective programs for school-­aged children and youth with emotional/behavioral disorders within inclusive schools (Mini-­Library Series on Emotional/Behavioral Disorders). Reston, VA: Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders. Repp, A. C., & Horner, R. H. (Eds.). (1999). Functional analysis of problem behavior: From effective assessment to effective support. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Smith, B. W., Sugai, G., & Brown, F. (2000). A self-­management functional assessment-­ based behavior support plan for a middle school student with EBD. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(4), 208. Sugai, G., Lewis-­Palmer, T., & Hagan, S. (1998). Using functional assessments to develop behavior support plans. Preventing School Failure, 43, 6–13.

Chapter 5

Evaluating and Modifying the Behavior Support Plan

Introduction This chapter demonstrates how to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of BSPs. The case examples presented in Chapter 3 will be used to illustrate strategies for evaluating and modifying the BSP. Evaluation activities are essential elements of any effective BSP and must be integrated into the initial design of the plan. The critical elements of evaluation should (1) assess changes in behavior; (2) assess feasibility and acceptability of the BSP; and (3) assess student, parent, and teacher satisfaction. Evaluation procedures should be simple and efficient. The behavior support team should collect sufficient data to make data-based decisions, without accumulating superfluous information. In addition, the team should give careful consideration to issues of contextual fit. Evaluations should conclude with a plan to maintain behavioral gains over time.

Rationale Of the steps involved in the assessment of and intervention for behavior problems, evaluation is the one step that is most likely to be ignored. Yet it is a critical part of embedding an effective program of individual behavioral support within a school. Without systematic evaluation, there are no objective means by which to determine whether an intervention has been successful or if the efforts of the behavior support team have been worthwhile. In an environment of scarce resources, a program that cannot provide evidence demonstrating that 83

84

Case Ex amples

it is effective and worthwhile may be quickly abandoned or replaced. At the same time, an evaluation plan that is cumbersome or time intensive will be discarded before its usefulness is tested. The behavior support team should strive to make data-based decisions regarding whether to continue, monitor, or modify BSPs, using information that is simple and time efficient to collect. A well-­planned evaluation can pinpoint problem areas in an unsuccessful intervention. Careful monitoring allows the team to identify problems early in the intervention process. For example, Ronald’s home–­school check-in system initially did not affect his behavior. He continued to fight with fellow students with the same frequency and intensity as he did prior to the implementation of the BSP. The behavior support team was ready to eliminate this strategy from Ronald’s BSP. After examining the daily data sheets, however, the team discovered that the home–­school check-in system had not been fully implemented. Ronald’s parents were not participating. Further examination of the problem revealed an issue of contextual fit. Both of Ronald’s parents were functionally illiterate. They were not actively participating because they were unable to participate. Based on this knowledge, the behavior support team modified the BSP to include regular phone contact rather than written contact between the school and Ronald’s parents. This minor change resulted in increased participation by the parents and a corresponding improvement in Ronald’s behavior. Systematic evaluation enables the behavior support team to make objective, data-based decisions. Routine presentation of individual data serves to update each member of the action team regarding the student’s progress or lack thereof. Often, a student will make significant progress, yet still remain outside the limits of expected behavior. Without data, the team is likely to focus on the student’s continuing deviation from peers rather than the improvements between his initial and his current behavior. The team may become discouraged, erroneously believing that their efforts did not make a difference. Routinely collected behavioral data can illustrate the student’s improvement over time, encouraging and sustaining the team to keep up their efforts.

Critical Elements Problem behavior affects multiple people—­the teacher, the principal, parents, and students—­each with their own unique assessment of and reaction to the problem behavior. Consequently, it is critical to collect multiple sets of evaluation data from multiple individuals. These different sources of information are discussed below. Any person involved in the assessment and intervention can contribute to the evaluation, including the teacher, a parent, the student, or other action team members. Involving the student in self-­evaluation is a particularly useful strategy. Self-­evaluation increases the salience of the student’s own behavior to the student, often motivating and encouraging him or her to try harder. This phenomenon is



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 85

also true for teachers. We have often heard teachers remark that evaluation data are more meaningful if they themselves are personally involved in the evaluation.

Assessing Changes in Behavior Numerous methods can be used to evaluate the impact of a BSP on reducing inappropriate behavior and increasing desired behavior. Frequency counts, individualized behavior rating scales, and observation are some of the most commonly used methods.

Frequency Count One of the simplest evaluation methods is the frequency count. Teachers need an efficient strategy to record how often a child engages in a high-­frequency problem behavior. Vera, for example, engages in tattling behavior multiple times per day, every day. Requiring the teacher to document Vera’s tattling behavior after each occurrence could become burdensome and would also negatively affect instructional time. Much simpler means, for example, the “paper-clip transfer strategy,” could accomplish the same goal. To use the paper-clip transfer strategy, the teacher starts each day with a handful of paper clips (or other tiny objects) in one pocket. Each time the student engages in the problem behavior, the teacher transfers one paper clip to the opposite pocket. At the end of the day, the teacher counts how many paper clips have been transferred to the second pocket. The number of paper clips in the second pocket equals the incidence of problem behaviors (e.g., the number of times Vera tattled on another student) observed by the teacher. This number is recorded on a summary sheet. Progress or decline can be determined with a quick glance. The summary sheet should be kept in a place that is easy to find and easy to remember. A very simple solution is to place a Post-It note in the teacher’s lesson plan book (or any other place that the teacher consistently uses on a daily basis). The summary Post-It would include one column for the date and one column for the number of behavioral incidents (see Figure 5.1). At the end of each week, the teacher would give the Post-It note to a designated member of the action team for more permanent recording of the weekly data.

Date

Number of times student tattled—Vera

2/2

      

2/3

    

FIGURE 5.1.  Summary of frequency data using a simple Post-It.

86

Case Ex amples

Behavior Rating Scale A second evaluation method is to complete an individualized Behavior Rating Scale on a regularly scheduled (hourly, daily, weekly) basis. First, the target behaviors are chosen and written on the summary sheet. Target behaviors can be problem behaviors (expect a decrease in frequency over time) or desired behaviors (expect an increase in frequency over time). Each target behavior is rated on a Likert scale (e.g., 0 = behavior did not occur; 1 = behavior occurred on a few occasions; 2 = behavior occurred frequently). For a younger child, the scale could be simplified to two items (e.g., yes = behavior occurred; no = behavior did not occur). Pictures of happy and sad faces could be substituted for a very young child or for a child with limited literacy skills. A sample of an individualized Behavior Rating Scale is illustrated in Figure 5.2. Ratings are a means of providing feedback to a student about his or her behavior. Ratings can also prompt the teacher to regularly praise or reward the student for demonstrating appropriate behavior. Ratings that are made frequently (e.g., after each class period) are likely to have a stronger impact on the student’s behavior than infrequent or inconsistent ratings. Ratings are most often made by the student or by the teacher, rather than by an outside observer. Those made by the student are incorporated into a self-­management behavioral intervention. The team must decide how frequently ratings should be made—for example, hourly, daily, or weekly. This important decision should take into account (1) the frequency of the target behavior as indicated in the FBA, (2) the age of the student, and (3) natural breaks in the student’s schedule. If a problem behavior occurs frequently, ratings of the child’s behavior should occur frequently as well. Children with high-rate behaviors have a better chance of succeeding when short periods between evaluative ratings are scheduled. Achieving success during one rating period may increase the child’s motivation to succeed in subsequent rating periods. Rating periods that are too long will increase the likelihood that the child will fail within each rating interval, resulting in low motivation to behave appropriately in the subsequent rating period. Younger children require more frequent feedback than older children. Optimally, rating scales for young children should be designed to provide feedback several times within a class period (e.g., four times during a 60-minute reading lesson). Rating periods for older children can be longer (e.g., after each class period for a middle school student). Rating periods can often fit into natural breaks in the student’s schedule. For an elementary school student, each rating period could correspond to a new task—for example, circle time, language arts, and recess. For a middle school student, each rating period could correspond to the break between classes or between blocks of classes. Once the data have been collected over a specified period, it should be graphed to illustrate the student’s progress. Two to 3 weeks (the recommended period of time between the design of the BSP and the first follow-­up meeting) is

Student Name: Date:

 

Teacher Signature:



  Resource Rm Teacher Signature:

Behavior Goals: 1.  Complete work accurately and completely 2.  Request assistance when needed SCHEDULE Attendance & Sharing

YES

NO

Math

YES

NO

Music/Art

YES

NO

Social Studies

YES

NO

Unstructured Study Period

YES

NO

Recess

YES

NO

Reading

YES

NO

Lunch

YES

NO

Spelling

YES

NO

Language Arts

YES

NO

Recess

YES

NO

Science

YES

NO

Goal:     /12 Reward:

Total:     /12 (Earn a Coupon)

Comments:

FIGURE 5.2.  Sample individualized Behavior Rating Scale. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

87

88

Case Ex amples

FIGURE 5.3.  Graphical summary of Tom’s evaluation data.

a reasonable amount of time to collect enough data to make data-based decisions about the BSP. A graph of Tom’s evaluation data is illustrated in Figure 5.3. A member of the team should share the student’s graph with the student. A visual depiction of the student’s behavior may mean more to the student than other means of providing feedback. Often, the team will want to keep a record of the behavior summary sheet while providing a daily report to the student’s parents. This potential paperwork problem can be resolved by using rating forms printed on duplicate or triplicate paper. Alternatively, if time and resources allow, the child’s daily report could be scanned and e-­mailed to the parents on a regular basis.

Observation Observation is another commonly used method of evaluation. Observations are typically conducted by a member of the team who has skills in behavioral assessment. The observer notes occurrences of on-task behavior, off-task behavior, problem behaviors (as defined by the FBA), and expected behaviors (as defined by the evaluation plan; see Appendix B, Step 8: Evaluate Plan). The observation should be conducted during the routine(s) that is (are) targeted in the evaluation plan. The length of the observation is dictated by the length of the routine. The team may want to assess whether a new skill has generalized to reduce problem behavior in a nonintervention routine. If so, they must collect evaluation data in nonintervention settings as well. A sample observation coding sheet was illustrated in Chapter 3 (see Figure 3.11). Figure 5.4 provides a graphic summary



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 89

FIGURE 5.4.  Summary of observation evaluation data for Vera.

of observation evaluation data for the first 2 weeks after Vera’s BSP was implemented.

Documenting the Evaluation Plan The F-BSP Protocol includes a page to document the evaluation plan (see Appendix B, Step 8). Figures 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7 illustrate the evaluation plans for Vera, Tom, and Ronald. There are three key components to designing the evaluation plan: (1) deciding on the long-term and short-term behavioral goals; (2) deciding how to measure whether the goals have been met; and (3) documenting when the team will reconvene to examine the evaluation data and make decisions regarding whether to monitor, modify, or discontinue the BSP. The long-term and short-term goals have been previously suggested by the Competing Behavior Pathway Form. The long-term goal can be identified by operationally defining the “desired behavior.” Likewise, the short-term goal can be derived from the “alternative behavior.” These goals can be transferred to the evaluation plan page. It is important to be specific about the criterion level for reaching the goal. For example, rather than stating something like, “Carlos will increase his work completion rate,” the goal may be listed as “Carlos will complete at least 50% of each assignment before the end of each class period.” Measurement of the behavior can be accomplished using any of the methods described in the previous section. A follow-­up meeting to assess the impact of the behavioral strategies on the short-term and long-term behavioral goals should be scheduled to occur within 2–3 weeks.

90

Case Ex amples

Step 8: Evaluate Plan—Vera Behavioral Goal (use specific, observable, measurable descriptions of goal) What is the short-term behavioral goal? For 95% or more of intervals observed, Vera will request help from teacher to solve peer conflict without engaging in “tattling,” in other words, pushing, whining, or crying about other students.

2/6/14     Expected date

What is the long-term behavioral goal? Share materials appropriately and work cooperatively (without tattling) with classmates for 100% of intervals.

3/6/14     Expected date

Evaluation Procedures Data to Be Collected Time on task (includes working cooperatively)

Procedures for Data Collection School psychologist does brief, daily observation during circle time and records graphically. Share graph with team at follow-up meeting.

Time tattling

Person Responsible

Timeline

School Begin psychologist 1/25/14 until 2/6/14

Peer comparison for on task and tattling

Plan review date:  2/6/14      We agree to the conditions of this plan: Student (date) Parent or guardian (date) Teacher (date) Teacher (date) Action team member (date)

Action team member (date)

FIGURE 5.5.  Evaluation plan for Vera.



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 91

Step 8: Evaluate Plan—Tom Behavioral Goal (use specific, observable, measurable descriptions of goal) What is the short-term behavioral goal? For at least 10 out of 12 class periods, Tom will learn to request intermittent attention/ assistance from teacher or competent peer (when needed) rather than have a tantrum.

11/8/14    Expected date

What is the long-term behavioral goal? For at least 10 out of 12 class periods, Tom will complete work on his own, without disruption.

12/15/14    Expected date

Evaluation Procedures Data to Be Collected Daily report on whether he met his two behavior card goals during each class period

Procedures for Data Collection Daily behavior report card. Make sure all staff (e.g., homeroom teacher, music teacher) understand purpose and use card consistently. Teachers are responsible for filling out card daily. Report data to team graphically.

Person Responsible School psychologist initiates and monitors

Timeline Begin immedi­ ately, 10/21/14; continue at least until review date 11/8/14

Plan review date:  11/8/14     We agree to the conditions of this plan: Student (date) Parent or guardian (date) Teacher (date) Teacher (date) Action team member (date)

Action team member (date)

FIGURE 5.6.  Evaluation plan for Tom.

92

Case Ex amples

Step 8: Evaluate Plan—Ronald Behavioral Goal (use specific, observable, measurable descriptions of goal) What is the short-term behavioral goal? For 95% or more of class periods, Ronald will avoid aggressive behavior toward peers by requesting a break from group activity or requesting to work with different peers.

2/28/14    Expected date

What is the long-term behavioral goal? For at least 80% of class periods, Ronald will work cooperatively and productively during structured group activity.

6/6/14     Expected date

Evaluation Procedures Data to Be Collected Daily report on whether he met his behavior card goals during each class period with comments about requests for breaks

Procedures for Data Collection Daily behavior report card. Make sure all staff (e.g., homeroom teacher, music teacher) understand purpose and use card consistently. Teachers are responsible for filling out card on daily basis. Report data to team graphically.

Person Responsible School psychologist initiates and monitors the card

Timeline Begin imme­ diately, 2/11/14; continue at least until review date 2/28/14

Plan review date:  2/28/14     We agree to the conditions of this plan: Student (date) Parent or guardian (date) Teacher (date) Teacher (date) Action team member (date)

Action team member (date)

FIGURE 5.7.  Evaluation plan for Ronald.



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 93

The evaluation plan page also includes a space for the signatures of the student, parent, teacher, and action team members. By signing at the end of the F-BSP Protocol, all of the participating members indicate that they (1) understand the assessment information provided, (2) understand and agree to their responsibilities in implementing the BSP, and (3) understand and agree to the evaluation plan. Requesting these individuals to sign the F-BSP Protocol provides a means for increasing communication and collaboration among the key players involved in providing behavioral support to the identified student.

Assessing Feasibility and Fidelity of BSP Implementation Poor or inconsistent implementation is a common cause of BSP failure. Evaluation data can help the team determine whether the failure of a BSP is due to a failure to appropriately implement it. The simplest evaluation strategy is to ask each member of the team whether he or she completed his or her role in the student’s BSP. One of the strategies listed on Ronald’s BSP was that the school psychologist would teach Ronald to ask for a break. The school psychologist can quickly confirm whether this strategy was implemented. A quick check on implementation fidelity can be achieved by requesting each team member to briefly describe his or her role. A team member who cannot describe what he or she was expected to do has obviously not implemented his or her portion of the BSP. This situation indicates a larger communication problem among members of the team, one that can be remedied by careful attention to collaboration, documentation, and distribution of the BSP. We recommend that, on the first few days of BSP implementation, the team leader check in with each involved staff member to determine whether that person has carried out his or her part of the plan. These brief check-ins are a simple way to increase accountability for BSP implementation, while also serving to detect any support needs that a staff member may experience in the initial implementation stages. Individualized behavior rating scales can easily be used as a check on fidelity of implementation. If completed rating scales demonstrate consistent completion over a continuous period of time, the action team can conclude that the intervention was implemented as planned. Conversely, if the rating scales are blank, missing data, or appear to have been completed in one sitting during a “catch-up moment,” the team can conclude that the intervention was not implemented as planned. Direct observation is a time-­consuming yet informative strategy to monitor implementation fidelity. Often, the BSP requires the teacher to change his or her typical responses to the target student. The teacher may be expected to ignore inappropriate behavior or to provide reinforcements for appropriate behavior. The teacher can invite a member of the team to observe his or her classroom to determine whether the BSP is being implemented as planned. The observer can

94

Case Ex amples

also act as a consultant to the teacher, providing support and suggestions for improving implementation fidelity. Some BSP strategies will be very simple to observe. For example, Ronald’s BSP indicated that he should be separated from certain peers during group projects. The observer could visit Ronald’s class during a group activity and simply note whether the change in seating arrangement had been completed. The evaluation may show that significant portions of the BSP were not implemented as planned. The behavior support team must determine whether implementation was hampered by issues of contextual fit and subsequently work to resolve any existing problems.

Assessing Parent, Teacher, and Student Satisfaction Consumer feedback is an important element of program development and maintenance. It can identify dissatisfaction with elements of the FBA-BSP process that could affect willingness to contribute and participate. Consumers can also offer perceptive suggestions for improving function-­based behavior support. Students, parents, teachers, and members of the behavior support team can be regularly surveyed to determine their satisfaction with, and suggestions for, the FBA-BSP process. These surveys can be used to improve services for the identified child or to improve the overall process. Sample consumer satisfaction surveys are included in Chapter 6.

Data‑Based Decisions The behavior support team should use the evaluation data to make decisions about four questions: 1. Were the goals of the BSP achieved? 2. Was the intervention implemented as planned? 3. Is more assessment needed? 4. In what ways should the intervention be modified? In the first meeting following implementation of the BSP, the team must evaluate whether the goals of the BSP were achieved. One member of the team should summarize the evaluation data in a graph and distribute copies to each member of the core team. The criterion for determining whether the goals were achieved is specified by “short-term goal” and “long-term goal” in the evaluation plan. This criterion level can be indicated by the graphical summary of the evaluation data (see Figure 5.8 for an example). If the data are collected and used properly, it should be rather simple to decide if the goals of the BSP were achieved. Examine Figures 5.8 and 5.9. It is clear that the strategies in the BSP



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 95

were effective in increasing Tom’s appropriate behavior (Figure 5.8). In contrast, it appears that the initial implementation of Ronald’s BSP was unsuccessful; his behavior remained at levels far below the criterion level, and several days are missing data (Figure 5.9). If the goals of the BSP were not achieved, the team should assess the problem and proceed accordingly. First, the team should assess whether the BSP was implemented as planned. This question is answered by examining the evaluation of implementation data. Ronald’s behavior rating scale contains missing data points for seven of the 14 possible rating periods. Clearly, this strategy was not implemented with sufficient frequency or consistency. If, based on the functional behavioral assessment data, the team believes that this strategy should be an effective response to Ronald’s problem behavior, the strategy should be reimplemented over the subsequent 2-week period. Prior to reimplementation, the team should examine whether issues of contextual fit hinder the full implementation of the strategy and should modify the plan to meet the contextual fit needs. The team can also evaluate the fidelity of implementation by examining observational data. Figure 5.10 presents the summary of observation data for implementation of Vera’s BSP. The strategies observed are ignoring tattling behavior and praising appropriate behavior. During the interval observed, Vera’s teacher ignored her tattling behavior for 90% of the behavioral events. She praised Vera for working appropriately and sharing materials for 100% of the observation intervals. From this data, it is clear that Vera’s teacher implemented the BSP as planned.

FIGURE 5.8.  Evaluation data for Tom with criterion level.

96

Case Ex amples

FIGURE 5.9.  Summary of evaluation data for Ronald—­Behavior Rating Scale.

Despite its fidelity of implementation, Vera’s BSP did not result in reduction of tattling (refer to Figure 5.4). At this point, the team must decide whether further assessment is necessary. The BSP may be based upon an erroneous hypothesis statement. For example, the team concluded that Vera tattled on fellow classmates to obtain attention from her teacher. The BSP was designed so that Vera could earn teacher attention by engaging in appropriate play with her peers. If, however, Vera tattles in order to escape her peers, the BSP intervention will simply increase her anxiety and discomfort without providing the necessary reinforcement. In such a case, the team should reconsider the function of Vera’s tattling behavior (further assessment may be necessary) and redesign the BSP to match the true function of the problem behavior. How does the team decide whether additional assessment is necessary? If the BSP was implemented carefully and consistently, but progress toward the goals was not achieved, additional assessment should be considered. If failure to achieve any progress was based on a brief FBA (i.e., teacher interview only), additional assessment will be essential. Additional assessment should emphasize (1) interviewing the student to identify personally meaningful punishers and reinforcers and (2) increasing confidence in the hypothesis statement. Teacher Behavior

% of intervals Student Behavior

% of intervals

Ignore tattling behavior

 90

Tattling—baseline

12

Praise appropriate sharing

100

Tattling—Day 6 intervention

15

FIGURE 5.10.  Summary of implementation observation data.



Evaluating and Modifying the BSP 97

Maintenance Plan After a student has successfully achieved his or her behavioral goals, the behavior support team should design a maintenance plan to ensure continued support and success for the student and his or her teacher. Students are vulnerable to losing behavioral gains as they transition from one grade level to the next. Without continued support from the new teacher, the student may quickly revert to the more familiar, baseline levels of problem behavior. To create the maintenance plan, the team should redesign the BSP for efficiency. They may choose to remove, modify, continue, or update different aspects of the BSP. The primary goal of the maintenance plan is continued success for the child while reducing the required amount of staff time and resources. The maintenance plan should be documented and distributed to each member of the team.

Part III Using Functional Behavioral Assessment within School Systems Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacity

Chapter 6

Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team and How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team?

Introduction A sustainable system of individual behavior support should be built on a teambased foundation (Todd, Horner, Sugai, & Colvin, 1999). Often, schools rely on one individual, such as the school psychologist, to take on the role of the behavior support specialist. This person often is an itinerant employee, based in multiple buildings during one school year, who may also switch buildings from year to year. This arrangement makes it challenging for the individual to build relationships with staff and students, understand the daily challenges and successes experienced by the school, or develop an enduring system of individual behavior support. Other schools may have an in-­building behavior specialist. However, the loss of this one person to a new job, illness, or other obligation could result in the loss of the school’s foundation of individual behavior support. A team-based approach to behavior support should be established so that it can support a changing membership. Given the dynamic nature of many schools, it may be difficult to predict staff responsibilities and team participation from year to year. Even so, individuals who serve on the core individual behavior support team should commit to serving on the team for at least 1 to 3 academic years. Each school should concentrate on developing within-­building capacity to implement function-­based behavior support so that the school can become resilient to fluctuations in team membership. Chapters 7 and 8 delineate recommendations for developing FBA-BSP capacity at both the building and district level. 101

102

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

At the same time, behavior support teams are also dynamic in that the individuals involved in each referral will change from student to student. For example, the parents and the teacher(s) of the referred student should be involved in the assessment and intervention process. This set of individuals will change for each new referral. The team must be structured to handle rotating parent and teacher involvement. In this chapter we outline the structure, membership, roles, and responsibilities of the behavior support team.

Behavior Support Team Structure Each behavior support team is unique. Teams will vary from school to school in terms of size, membership, structure, fluency, student population, and theoretical perspective. Despite these differences, all teams should share certain critical features. Todd et al. (1999) outline these features: “Teams that support students with chronic problem behaviors need to (a) possess specialized behavioral skills within their membership, (b) allow and encourage contributions from all their members, (c) have predictable and efficient procedures for doing business and solving problems, (d) have regular opportunities to access building staff, families, and community agencies to communicate and solicit information” (p. 74). A team that possesses these defining features should be able to meet the following primary objectives: “(a) manage teacher requests for assistance, (b) ensure that teachers and students receive support in a timely and meaningful manner, (c) provide a general forum for discussions and possible solutions for individual student behavioral concerns, and (d) organize a collaborative effort to support the teacher” (Todd et al., 1999, p. 74). We advocate a two-level model for behavior support teams. The first level consists of the core team members. The second level consists of separate action teams for each referred student. The membership at each level is illustrated in Figure 6.1. The core team will consist of a school administrator, an individual with behavioral expertise, and a representative sample of the school staff. The action team will consist of one or two members from the core team, the student’s parents, the student’s teacher(s) and/or the staff member who made the initial request for assistance, and any other significant adults in the student’s life who wish to participate (e.g., counselor, social worker, probation officer). (In the case of referrals that require only a brief FBA, the action team may be limited to the referring teacher and an individual with behavioral expertise.) At least one person on each action team should have expertise in FBA and individual behavior support. In the early stages of implementing FBA-BSP, there may be only one individual within a school who has this behavioral expertise. Until additional within-­building expertise is developed and available, this individual should serve on every action team.



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 103

FIGURE 6.1.  Diagram of the two-level team approach to function-­based individual behavior support.

The core team and the individual action team work together to respond to each referral. Figure 6.2 illustrates this process. The core team is responsible for receiving and managing referrals, forming and supporting action teams, and contributing (as needed) to the design, evaluation, and modification of BSPs. The action team acts as a subgroup of the core team. The action team collects the FBA data for a particular student, leads the design and implementation of the individualized BSP, provides support to the student and teacher before and during the implementation of the BSP, collects evaluation data on the effectiveness of the BSP on the student’s behavior, and gives feedback on contextual limitations that affect the implementation of the BSP.

104

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y Initial Meeting (15 minutes) • Take and review referral • Form action team • Provide support to action team throughout process as needed Assessment • Conduct brief FBA (30 minutes) • Conduct full FBA if recommended (90–120 minutes) • Prepare to report findings Second Meeting (60 to 90 minutes) • Discuss assessment findings • Design BSP • Implement BSP

Third Meeting (30 to 60 minutes) • Evaluate effectiveness of BSP • Modify BSP as necessary

Support and Follow-Through • Follow progress on identified student • Provide support as needed

FIGURE 6.2.  Process and responsibilities of the core team and the action teams.

Membership on the core team lasts for at least 1 academic school year and often for 2 or more academic years. If core team members commit to participating for 2 or more years, the individual behavior support system should become more stable since the team will have more time and flexibility to develop within-­ building capacity for function-­based behavior support. Membership on an individual action team, on the other hand, lasts until the team is satisfied that the goals of that BSP have been achieved. Members of the action teams must be apprised of the expected time commitment necessary to design, implement, and evaluate an individual BSP. Although time commitments will vary depending on the needs of the student, on average the action team should expect the following: (1) reviewing referral and planning assessment (15-minute meeting); (2) collecting assessment data (about 30 minutes for a brief FBA and 90–120 minutes for a full FBA); (3) designing a function-­based BSP (60–90-minute meeting); (4) follow-­up of evaluation (30–60-minute meeting); and (5) continued meeting and support (as necessary). Action team members must agree to this time commitment while remaining flexible enough to handle unpredictable delays or extensions.



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 105

Teachers (or other staff) who request assistance with an individual student should understand that they will be expected to become part of the action team for that student. Building-­level administrators can make this clear when they provide inservice opportunities for the entire staff on FBA-BSP. Without input and assistance from the referring staff member, the team will not be able to gain a clear understanding of the problem, nor will they be able to implement effective solutions. In most cases, the referring staff member will also be responsible for implementing some of the intervention strategies generated by the team. Initially, in order to develop expertise and fluency in function-­based behavior support, all of the core team members may choose to participate on each action team. That is, after one or two individuals have collected assessment information, the entire core team may decide to meet with the referring teacher and/ or parent to summarize the assessment information and to develop and evaluate the BSP.

Behavior Support Team: Core Team Membership The actual size of the core team will vary from school to school, depending on the size and grade levels served by the school. A typical team size may be four to six individuals. We suggest limiting the maximum size of the group to eight. Beyond eight individuals, it becomes quite cumbersome to move forward with decision making and planning.

The School Principal The principal must be an active participant on the core team. There are multiple reasons for involving an administrator on the behavior support team: 1.  Awareness. Effective principals need to know what is going on in their schools, with their students. Serious problem behaviors of individual students are an especially sensitive issue in which the principal must be involved. 2.  Valuable input. The administrator may have unique information to contribute to the FBA-BSP process. The administrator may have had more contact than other staff with the student’s family and may be aware of important setting events for problem behaviors. 3.  Spending authority. Administrators have spending authority over any flexible monies in the school budget. One of the critical elements in building internal capacity for individual behavior support is to allocate approximately 10 hours of employment time per 200 students to a team coordinator. If the administrator is an integral part of the behavior support team, she or he is much more apt to agree that this is a wise use of the school’s flexible money.

106

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

4.  Administrative influence. Within a school, administrators have the power to drive change or to impede it. Administrators have the authority to approve or refuse teacher and staff requests. To illustrate, the core team may develop a BSP that requires one teacher to assist another teacher during initial implementation. The principal must decide whether the first teacher can leave her own classroom to assist in the other classroom. The principal is also responsible for finding a temporary substitute for that teacher. It is much more efficient to develop the BSP with the principal’s input and approval than to revise and modify a BSP after an administrative veto.

An Individual with Competence in Behavioral Assessment and Intervention There should be a person with expertise in behavioral management and analysis to guide decision making, assessment, and intervention. This person can be an outside-­contracted behavioral consultant, the school psychologist, or an in-­ building person with training, experience, and competence. This person must have a firm knowledge of behavioral theory and its application, FBA, and behavioral intervention. It is important to avoid relying solely on the expertise of an outside-­contracted behavioral consultant. Initially, schools may have to rely on outside expertise, but a plan should be put in place to create internal behavioral capacity within the school. In Chapters 7 and 8 we discuss models for creating internal and district-­level behavioral capacity.

A Representative Sample of School Staff The core team needs to include a representative sample of the school staff. A representative sample would include teachers of different grade levels, general and special educators, and other key staff (e.g., school counselor, ELL teacher). A representative sample of middle or high school teachers would also cut across subject matter fields or departments. Note that some secondary schools prefer to have multiple core behavior support teams, one for each grade level. Each core team includes representation from teachers within that grade level. Often one administrator will participate across all grade level teams. Paraprofessionals (e.g., educational assistants) who play an important role in school settings where problem behaviors often occur should also be represented on the team. For example, a recess or cafeteria monitor can contribute invaluable information about the predictors and consequences of problem behaviors in these settings. Educational assistants may also have more flexible time than a classroom teacher. This flexible time can allow them to conduct observations or collect other assessment information for the FBA-BSP. Whereas the technical person is the expert in applied behavioral theory, these other team members are experts in understanding the strengths, weaknesses, and contextual limitations of their own school environment.



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 107

A Parent Some behavior support teams choose to include a parent as a permanent member of the core team. Often, a parent can offer a new and discerning perspective. Including a parent on the team reduces the tendency to blame families for problem behaviors and helps maintain the team’s focus on altering problematic environmental routines within the school.

Core Behavior Support Team Roles and Responsibilities The members of the core behavior support team will fill both management and performance roles.

Management Roles Each behavior support team will need a coordinator/referral liaison. The person who serves these functions should remain constant throughout the school year. Utilizing more than one initial-­contact person may be confusing to school staff and result in underutilization of the individual behavior support system. In addition, division of responsibility for initial referrals could lead to disorganization, decreased accountability, and reduced efficiency in responding to teachers’ requests for assistance. The level of credibility of and teacher confidence in the core behavior support team can sustain or ruin this system of individual behavioral support. Thus choosing a conscientious, responsible member of the team to act as the referral liaison for the entire team is of critical importance. The role of coordinator/referral liaison can be filled by any member of the core team. This person should be organized, responsible, and possess strong leadership and communication skills. Previous experience managing or leading a school-­based team will facilitate the individual’s ability to fulfill the role of coordinator, but is not necessary. The role of coordinator is not easy, nor is it always rewarding. Coordinators are typically most successful when they are intrinsically interested in individual behavioral support and are strongly committed to the success of the team. Finally, coordinators must be supported by the rest of the team members. A coordinator who has many negative relationships with other school staff will impair rather than expedite the success of the team. The coordinator/referral liaison’s role is to facilitate the FBA-BSP process. The responsibilities of this role may change as the team develops and strengthens their skills in FBA-BSP. In the initial stages of forming the individual behavior support team, all of the team members may participate on each action team. In this case, the coordinator will need to take on a strong leadership role. The coordinator will generate an agenda for each team meeting. To increase the team’s overall preparedness, the coordinator should distribute the agenda at least 1 day before the meeting. The coordinator will lead the meetings and try to keep

108

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

them focused and efficient. The behavior support team will generate a task list for each referral (e.g., invite parent to next meeting, conduct FBA interview with teacher). The coordinator will assure that someone is responsible for completing each task. It is not the coordinator’s role to assign tasks to members of the team. Rather, the coordinator should foster a spirit of collaboration and volunteerism among team members. If certain tasks are left unclaimed, the coordinator may ask for assistance from individual team members. The coordinator should resist the temptation to take all remaining tasks upon him- or herself. This would only create an imbalance in team involvement, as well as cause undue stress and overload. The coordinator should distribute a list of responsibilities to each team member. The list should identify each task, the person responsible for each task, and the expected deadline for completion of each task. This list should highlight the date of the next follow-­up meeting for the referred student. The team will also need an individual to take notes at each meeting. This responsibility can be shifted from meeting to meeting. The note taker should be sure to record any tasks that arise, as well as deadlines, dates, and decisions that were made. The note taker will provide this information to the coordinator, who will then organize and distribute it. Some teams elect to use a file-­sharing system such as Google Docs or Dropbox to share team notes so that notes and action lists are always easily accessible to all core team members. As each team member begins to feel more comfortable in conducting FBAs and developing BSPs, the core team may move to the action team model described earlier. In the action team model, only one or two members from the core behavior support team are involved in each student referral. Once the school adopts the action team model, the coordinator of the core team will play a smaller role because the core team members serving on each action team will take on the leadership responsibilities for that team that were previously filled by the coordinator. The coordinator of the core team will continue to (1) receive the referrals; (2) distribute the referral to one or two core team members, who will form an action team for that student; (3) follow up on the progress of the action team; and (4) maintain a copy of the assessment data and records generated by the action team.

Performance Roles Performance roles are dictated by the tasks that need to be completed. These roles include: (1) conducting FBA interviews and observations; (2) reviewing academic records and work samples; (3) reporting FBA data to the larger group; (4) generating testable hypotheses; and (5) designing, implementing, evaluating, and modifying BSPs. The individuals who complete these tasks can rotate from referral to referral. Once each team member has developed skills in conducting FBA assessment and intervention, he or she will be able to lead an individual action team. These individuals will conduct the interviews and observations for a specific referral. Ideally, every member of the core team should be skilled



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 109

in interviewing, observing, reporting, designing, evaluating, and monitoring. Achieving this goal will take time, commitment, and training. Until team members are adequately skilled, a behavior consultant or the school psychologist may complete all of the FBAs while the team contributes to the design and implementation of the BSP. Refer to Chapter 7 for information on how to build a school-­ based team with FBA-BSP skills.

How Do You Get the Behavior Support Team to Work Together as a Team? A function-­based approach to individual behavior support will be a new approach to behavior management for many schools and many behavior support teams. It will take time, effort, and patience to become effective and efficient as a team. A strong organizational structure and process will lay the foundation for building an effective, efficient team and will maintain the team as it develops and grows. Critical features of an effective team with strong organizational structure include: (1) efficient use of time, (2) high profile within the school, (3) consistent participation, (4) efficient system of documentation, (5) clear organizing procedure that delineates roles and responsibilities, (6) system of accountability for responsibilities, and (7) a clearly defined system for making data-based decisions. These features are now discussed in detail.

Organizing Structure A basic organizing structure will go a long way in getting a team to work together. An organizing structure should (1) keep the team focused on their objectives, (2) keep the team moving forward toward real (observable and measurable) outcomes, and (3) give the team a record of where they began and how much progress has been made. Everyone has been in meetings that seem to drag on without providing any useful information or resulting in any decisions. After one or two of these meetings, team members begin to avoid attending meetings or participating on that committee. One of the most serious obstacles to implementation of FBA-BSP is limited staff time (Packenham et al., 2004). Team members cannot afford to waste time in inefficient disorganized meetings. How do you run an efficient meeting? Begin with an agenda. Without an organizing focus, groups tend to stray off the topic, especially when the topic is serious problem behaviors. The best way to regain momentum is to focus the group on the agenda and the objectives that must be achieved within the allotted time. The content of each agenda will vary depending on what stage the team is at in responding to a referral. As discussed earlier, the team will meet at least three times to develop and implement an individual FBA-BSP: (1) after the initial

110

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

referral, (2) after the action team has collected functional assessment data, and (3) after the BSP has been implemented for at least 2 weeks. Figures 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5 illustrate sample agendas for each of these meetings. On many occasions, the behavior support team may be working on more than one referral at a time and may well be at different stages with each referral. As time permits, the agendas illustrated in Figures 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5 can be combined into one meeting for more than one student to fit the needs of the behavior support team. The agenda should include time limits for each agenda item. Placing time limits on the discussion of each item helps the team prioritize and complete the objectives of the meeting. It is too easy to persist on one point and not complete the entire agenda. Items that are not addressed in one meeting will have to be added to the agenda of the next meeting, yet school-­based teams do not have the luxury of waiting an additional week or two to respond to a teacher’s request for assistance. Serious problem behaviors could pose possible safety or health issues for the school. Delaying assistance because the team persisted on one agenda item will be unacceptable to the teacher in need. The length of the team meeting will vary depending on whether it is a planning meeting, a BSP design meeting, or a follow-­up meeting. The length of the meeting will also depend on how skilled the team is in completing each stage of function-­based behavior support. Throughout the year, as teams have more opportunities to practice, they will become more fluent in the process. We suggest that the team coordinator allocate 15 minutes to the planning meeting, at least 1 hour to the assessment summary and BSP design meeting, and at least 30 minutes for the follow-­up/evaluation meeting. Figures 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5 include approximate time limits for discussion of each agenda item.

BEHAVIOR SUPPORT TEAM AGENDA Date:        Student:        (Initials only) I. Introductions (introduce themselves to parents or other new members and summarize purpose of meeting)—5 minutes II. Review Request for Assistance—5 minutes III. Determine level of functional assessment to begin with (brief or full)—2 minutes IV. Form action team—1 minute V. Assign responsibilities and deadlines for completing FBA—2 minutes

FIGURE 6.3.  Sample agenda—­Initial meeting. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 111 ACTION TEAM AGENDA Date:        Student:        (Initials only) I. Action team reports data from brief FBA or full FBA—15 to 20 minutes II. Develop testable hypothesis—10 to 15 minutes III. Determine whether further FBA or functional analysis is required—4 minutes IV. If further assessment is not required, design BSP—20 to 30 minutes V. Design plan for implementation of BSP—5 to 10 minutes VI. Determine method of data collection for evaluation of behavior support plan— 5 to 10 minutes VII. Schedule follow-up meeting—1 minute

FIGURE 6.4.  Sample agenda—­Second meeting. Note: This is a great deal of work to complete in 1 hour. If the team is available for longer, we suggest extending this meeting to 90 minutes and expanding the amount of time allowed for each activity accordingly. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

BEHAVIOR SUPPORT TEAM AGENDA Date:        Student:        (Initials only) I. Action team reports on implementation and impact of BSP—5 to 15 minutes II. Determine whether BSP goals were achieved—5 to 10 minutes III. Determine whether BSP modification is necessary—5 to 10 minutes IV. Modify BSP and evaluation plan as necessary—15 to 25 minutes V. Schedule follow-up plan as necessary—1 minute

FIGURE 6.5.  Sample agenda—­Third meeting. Note: This is a great deal of work to complete in 30 minutes. If the team is available for longer, we suggest extending this meeting to 60 minutes and expanding the amount of time allowed for each activity accordingly. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

112

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

Using a stopwatch to keep time is an effective strategy for completing each objective on the agenda on time. At the beginning of each meeting, one person volunteers to be the timekeeper. After the coordinator introduces a new agenda item, the timekeeper reminds the group, “We have 10 minutes to report the functional behavioral assessment data.” When there is 1 minute left to complete an item, the timekeeper tells the group to finish discussion on the first agenda item and move on to the next one. We have found that school-­based teams adapt quite readily to using a stopwatch to move the agenda forward. Full team attendance and participation should be encouraged by holding regularly scheduled meetings at the same time on the same day of the week. The frequency of meetings will be determined by the number of referrals the team receives. A bimonthly rather than a weekly meeting may be sufficient in a school that has a limited number of referrals. The core team will have to decide on the most convenient time for a regular meeting. Many behavior support teams prefer to meet immediately before or after school. In some school districts, the children start school an hour late, once a week. This weekly “late-start” is used by the teachers to participate in committee meetings or to prepare weekly lesson plans or work together as professional learning communities. It is also an opportune time to hold a behavior support team meeting. The coordinator will generate the agenda for each team meeting. Distributing the agenda before the meeting will serve as a reminder to each team member to complete his or her responsibilities and to come to the meeting prepared with all necessary materials. Many schools use their in-house e-mail system as a convenient, efficient means to distribute the meeting agenda and follow-­up notes to each team member. Whether the agenda is distributed via e-mail or on paper, the coordinator must be careful to maintain student confidentiality. The best way to ensure confidentiality is to assign and use an identification number for each student who is referred. An alternate choice is to use the student’s initials rather than the student’s full name. The note taker should include a brief summary of each agenda item, including any decisions that were made and any tasks or deadlines that were assigned. An example of a notes form is included in Figure 6.6. Meeting notes should be easily accessible to members of the team. A written record of each meeting will increase the logical flow between meetings and reduce redundant discussion and decision making.

Organizing Procedure In addition to an underlying organizational structure, the team will need an organizing procedure to follow. This procedure should delineate the team’s actions from the initiation to the conclusion of each referral. The process should be efficient and responsive.

Date:             Note Taker: Present: (Fill in names of all those present) Student:        (Initials only) Agenda Item: Discussion:

Decision:

Agenda Item: Discussion:

Decision:

Agenda Item: Discussion:

Decision:

FIGURE 6.6.  Sample ­Meeting Notes Form. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

113

114

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

The FBA-BSP process begins when a referral is made for a student with serious problem behaviors. Typically, the initial referral is made by a teacher, but requests for assistance can be made by any staff person, parent, or even the student him- or herself. The referring person completes a Request for Assistance Form. These forms should be available from the core team coordinator. It should be easy to access these forms and this person; for this reason, the coordinator should not be a parent volunteer or an itinerant employee who is in the building only once or twice a week. The Request for Assistance Form should provide (1) identifying information about the referred student, (2) information about the problem behaviors, and (3) a list of strategies that the teacher has used in the past to address the student’s behavior. Directions for completing and returning the form should be clear. It should require less than 10 minutes of teacher time to complete the Request for Assistance Form. An example Request for Assistance Form is included in Appendix A. The teacher may require immediate short-term assistance in addition to the long-term assistance provided by the behavior support team. This is the case any time the student poses a danger to him- or herself or to others—­for example, a child who engages in repetitive head banging or a child who threatens another child. Every school should have a crisis plan in place for dangerous behavior. For resources on developing and implementing crisis plans, refer to the Supplementary Section at the end of Chapter 2. The crisis plan is a temporary solution to the child’s problem behavior, a “bandage” to be used until the team can develop and implement a long-term solution to changing the student’s pattern of problem behavior. The referring teacher or staff member should be invited to the first meeting. The core team may also want to invite the parent(s) to the planning meeting. In some cases, the core team may be discussing more than one student at a meeting. In such a case, the parent(s) should only be invited to the portion of the meeting that concerns their son or daughter. At the first meeting (the planning meeting), the core team will review the Request for Assistance. The team coordinator will request or assign one or two members from the core team to be part of the action team for this referral. Decisions regarding who serves on which action team can be based on multiple criteria: 1. Initially, there may only be one team member with expertise in FBA-BSP. Until other team members develop proficiency in FBA-BSP, this person (often the school psychologist or behavior support specialist) will have to lead every action team. 2. Team members may prefer to lead action teams for referrals from a particular grade or department. For example, a first-grade teacher may prefer to do FBA interviews with other first-grade teachers because he or she may know those teachers and those students better than the third-, fourth-, or fifth-grade students. 3. Team members may choose to rotate responsibility so that each team member participates on an equal number of action teams.



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 115

The core team determines which other individuals should be included in the action team and identifies who will invite them to participate. It is essential to include the referring teacher or staff member on the action team. The parents can be invited to be part of the action team. It is assumed that the parents can agree or decline to participate. Sometimes, the student may be receiving additional services through a speech pathologist, ELL teacher, social worker, or other specialist. If feasible, it is often useful to include these individuals as well. The planning meeting concludes by scheduling the next action team meeting (usually within a week to 10 days of the planning meeting). The note taker puts a copy of the meeting notes in the team’s three-ring binder or electronic file-­sharing space and the meeting is adjourned. After the meeting, the team coordinator should distribute a list of responsibilities to everyone on the core team. The planning meeting should be brief, lasting 15 minutes or less. The referring teacher, core team members, and other members of the action team must agree to work together as partners to develop, implement, and evaluate a BSP. We suggest formalizing this agreement by having all the members of the action team sign a Partnership Agreement. The purpose of the Partnership Agreement is to (1) inform action team members of their roles, (2) hold action team members accountable for their part, (3) facilitate collaboration and cooperation among members of the action team, and (4) ensure successful implementation and evaluation of the BSP. An example Partnership Agreement Form is included in Figure 6.7. Before the next action team meeting, one of the core team members who was assigned to the action team will complete an FBA interview with the referring staff member. The interview should be guided by the information reported on the Request for Assistance Form. The purpose of the interview is to (1) make an immediate contact with the referring teacher; (2) get a verbal report of the problem behavior; and (3) obtain information on the typical setting events, predictors, and consequences of the problem behaviors. Next, the action team must decide whether the data collected in the brief FBA (teacher interview) are adequate or whether a full FBA is necessary. This decision can be made by the team member who interviewed the referring teacher or through informal discussion with other behavior support team members. A formal meeting does not need to be convened to make this decision. As discussed in earlier chapters, this decision is based on the following two questions: 1. “Is the student at risk for suspension, expulsion, or alternative school placement?” 2. “Are we confident that the testable hypothesis [generated from the brief FBA] is correct?” If the answer to the first question is no and the answer to the second question is yes, the brief FBA is probably adequate. The action team should meet to develop

The behavior support team receives referrals for students exhibiting recurring or serious problem behaviors at school. The team attempts to meet the following primary objectives: (1) manage referrals, (2) ensure that teachers and students receive support in a timely and meaningful manner, (3) provide a forum for discussions and solutions for individual student behavioral concerns, and (4) organize a collaborative effort to support the teacher and student. These objectives are met through a problemsolving approach called functional behavioral assessment-based behavior support planning (FBA-BSP). The behavior support team will form an action team to meet the needs of each referred student. The action team will consist of the student’s teacher, parents, 1 to 2 members of the behavior support team, and any additional persons that should be included (social worker, speech pathologist, etc.). In order to receive support from the behavior support team, teachers must agree to do the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Participate in a brief interview about the identified student. Provide any additional information requested by the action team (e.g., work samples). Allow members of the action team to observe the student. Attend action team meetings for the identified student. Contribute to the design and implementation of a BSP. Collect evaluation data to document student progress after implementation of a BSP. Maintain the student’s confidentiality.

The behavior support team agrees to do the following: 1. Conduct interviews and observations in a timely and professional manner. 2. Form an action team to provide individualized assessment, intervention, and support for the teacher and student. 3. Design time-efficient interventions based on research-based best practices. 4. Design time-efficient methods of data collection for evaluation. 5. Report data documenting student’s progress to the student, teacher, and parents. 6. Solicit teacher, student, and parent input in the assessment, intervention, and evaluation processes. 7. Modify the BSP as necessary.

Action team member

Relation to student

Date

Action team member

Relation to student

Date

Action team member

Relation to student

Date

Action team member

Relation to student

Date

FIGURE 6.7.  Sample Partnership Agreement Form. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

116



Who Will Be Involved in the Behavior Support Team? 117

a BSP to address the student’s problem behavior. The action team should also determine how to implement and monitor the effectiveness of the plan. If the brief FBA is inadequate, a full FBA must be completed. If a full FBA must be conducted, the next step is to schedule appointments to collect further assessment data. These appointments are written down on the notes form. The full FBA is completed and the assessment person prepares to report the assessment findings to the rest of the action team. The action team attends the second meeting (additional members of the core team can attend, but are not required to do so). The assessment person reports the full FBA data. As a group, the action team develops a testable hypothesis to explain why and under what circumstances the problem behavior is occurring. Once again, the team asks: 1. “Are we confident that the testable hypothesis is correct?” 2. “If we are wrong about the testable hypothesis, would the consequences be severe?” If additional information is needed, the team must ask themselves whether they have the resources and expertise to conduct a functional analysis. If they do, an individual on the action team or an outside behavior consultant can be assigned to conduct a functional analysis of behavior. If the school does not have the resources to do a functional analysis, the team may decide instead to collect additional observation or interview data to firm up their testable hypothesis. If no additional information is needed, the action team designs a BSP from the full FBA. The BSP must specify individual responsibilities, timelines, and deadlines. Often the teacher will need initial intensive support, in the beginning, to implement the BSP. This support will often come from the school psychologist, behavior support specialist, or a core behavior support team member. The action team also decides on a method of data collection for evaluating the effectiveness of the BSP. Before the conclusion of the second meeting, a follow-­up meeting is scheduled. After the meeting, the leader of the action team distributes a copy of the meeting notes and the BSP to everyone on the team. A copy is also placed in the core behavior support team’s files. Between the BSP design meeting and the follow-­up meeting, the BSP is implemented and evaluation data are collected. Before the action team reconvenes for the third meeting (follow-­up meeting), the team leader distributes the new agenda. At this meeting, the members of the action team report on the implementation and the evaluation of the BSP. The action team decides: 1. “Were the goals of the BSP achieved or was adequate progress toward meeting the goals made?” 2. “Does the BSP need to be modified?”

118

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

If necessary, the action team modifies the BSP. Once again the meeting notes (and modified BSP) are completed and distributed. If the BSP was modified, a follow-­up meeting is scheduled to evaluate the effectiveness of the modified plan. If the action team decides that no modifications are needed, no follow-­up meetings are scheduled. However, the leader of the action team should check in with the teacher from time to time to determine whether behavioral gains are maintained or whether the teacher requires additional support. At the end of the function-­based behavior support process, the student, the teacher, and the parents can be surveyed to evaluate their level of satisfaction with the support received. Examples of Consumer Satisfaction Surveys for parents, students, and teachers, respectively, are included in Figures 6.8, 6.9, and 6.10. Feedback from these surveys should be used to improve the team’s responsiveness for future referrals. SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION Additional resources on team-based models of behavior support are included below. Benazzi, L., Horner, R. H., & Good, R. H. (2006). Effects of behavior support team composition on the technical adequacy and contextual fit of behavior support plans. Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 160–170. McIntosh, K., Mercer, S., Hume, A., Frank, J., Turri, M., & Matthews, S. (2013). Factors related to sustained implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 293–311. Newton, J., Algozzine, B., Algozzine, K., Horner, R. H., & Todd, A. W. (2011). Building local capacity for training and coaching data-based problem solving with positive behavior intervention and support teams. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 27(3), 228–245. Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., Newton, J., Algozzine, R. F., Algozzine, K. M., & Frank, J. L. (2011). Effects of team-­initiated problem solving on decision making by schoolwide behavior support teams. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 27(1), 42–59.

1. The goals of the behavior support plan addressed my concerns about my child’s behavior. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

2. The goals of the behavior support plan addressed my concerns about my child’s academic progress. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

3. The suggestions made by the team were helpful. Strongly Agree 1

2

4. The suggestions made by the team were manageable to implement at home. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

4

Strongly Disagree 5

5. I implemented the team’s suggestions consistently and continuously. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

6. I have seen an improvement in my child’s behavior since the behavior support plan was implemented. Large Improvement 1

2

3

4

No Improvement 5

7. I have seen an improvement in my child’s academic progress since the behavior support plan was implemented. Large Improvement 1

2

3

4

No Improvement 5

8. I felt that my opinion and input were respected and useful to the team. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

9. Please list any other comments, concerns, or questions.

FIGURE 6.8.  Parent Consumer Satisfaction Survey. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

119

  1. I was informed about the goals and procedures of the behavior support plan. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

4

Strongly Disagree 5

  2. I agreed that the goals of the behavior support plan were important. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

  3. I agreed with the procedures that were developed for the behavior support plan. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

4

Strongly Disagree 5

  4. My opinions and input were requested and respected. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

  5. The suggestions made by the team were consistently implemented at school. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

  6. The suggestions made by the team were consistently implemented at home. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

  7. I feel that my behavior has improved since the beginning of the behavior support plan. Large Improvement 1

2

3

4

No Improvement 5

  8. I feel that my academic skills have improved since the beginning of the behavior support plan. Large Improvement 1

2

3

4

No Improvement 5

  9. I would like to continue working with my teacher, parents, and the team. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

10. Please list any other comments, concerns, or questions.

FIGURE 6.9.  Student Consumer Satisfaction Survey. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

120

1. The goals of the behavior support plan addressed my concerns about       ’s behavior. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

2. The goals of the behavior support plan addressed my concerns about       ’s academic progress. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

3. The suggestions made by the team were helpful. Strongly Agree 1

2

4. The suggestions made by the team were manageable to implement in my classroom. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

4

Strongly Disagree 5

5. I implemented the team’s suggestions consistently and continuously. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

6. I have seen an improvement in       ’s behavior since the behavior support plan was implemented. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

7. I have seen an improvement in       ’s academic progress since the behavior support plan was implemented. Strongly Agree 1

2

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

3

4

Strongly Disagree 5

8. Do you need any more help from the team? Strongly Agree 1

2

9. Please list any other comments, concerns, or questions.

FIGURE 6.10.  Teacher Consumer Satisfaction Survey. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

121

Chapter 7

How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for Functional Behavioral Assessment on the Behavior Support Team?

Introduction Each school that endeavors to provide effective, individualized behavior support to their at-risk students should develop a schoolwide plan to meet the following objectives: (1) provide all staff with background knowledge about the function, assessment, and intervention of serious behavior problems; (2) provide school-­ based personnel with strategies to conduct FBAs; (3) provide school-­based personnel with strategies to design, implement, evaluate, and modify effective BSPs; (4) train enough individuals within a school to have the skills to complete behavioral assessment and intervention; and (5) implement a model by which efficient, effective, and relevant behavioral support can be embedded within the existing school system. Each of these objectives emphasizes the need to generate within-­building capacity for behavioral assessment and intervention. In this chapter, we discuss a strategy for promoting within-­building capacity. As within-­building capacity evolves, schools may choose to adopt one of several different models of leadership for their behavior support team. At the end of this chapter, three possible models of team leadership are outlined.

The Challenge The 2004 amendments to IDEIA recommend that schools should have the capacity to use FBA in their behavior management and disciplinary actions. 122



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 123

Unfortunately, many school personnel are still unaware of this technology or lack the skills and resources to implement it. The pressure generated by the need to be in compliance with IDEIA 2004 can create two serious problems: (1) haphazard, ineffective implementation of FBA-BSP or (2) excessive spending for service contracts with behavioral consultants. The immediate challenge is to transform any current lack of skills and resources in behavioral assessment and intervention by making FBA an accessible technology that can be applied in typical school settings.

The Goal Simply providing the “technology” (i.e., FBA-BSP) to manage problem behaviors in schools is not enough. School and district leaders also need to allocate the necessary resources for its successful implementation. The schools’ resources for managing problem behavior will be improved by increasing the array of individuals qualified to conduct meaningful assessments of problem behavior and to contribute to the design of effective, efficient, and relevant BSPs.

Requirements and Commitments Prior to implementation, schools should be willing to commit to the following four criteria: 1. Improving behavior support systems must be established as one of the school’s top three priorities and must be backed by administrative support. 2. A team should be established to assess and intervene with students who have behavior problems that require FBA-BSP. 3. Each school should be willing to allot adequate time and resources for the team to be trained and for the team to plan, design, and implement individual behavioral support. 4. Each school should make a commitment of at least 3 years to developing and improving the individual behavioral support system within the school. Without these commitments, successful efforts to train staff in behavioral assessment and intervention will be hampered.

Priorities The function of the public school system used to be much simpler. Schools existed to provide children with an education. In the past 30 years, the “job

124

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

description” of schools has expanded rapidly. Schools are now responsible for moral development, child protection, behavior management, and even health care in some cases. At the same time, schools have limited resources and limited funds. It is difficult for one system to effectively fill all of these roles. To be successful, school administrators must prioritize their goals. Most schools should be able to achieve an effective, efficient system of behavior support, but behavior support should be one of the school’s top priorities for at least 3 years. Weak efforts at implementing behavior support will result in frustration and wasted time. Without a serious commitment to individual behavior support, the school is better off investing its resources and efforts elsewhere. With prioritization and commitment, substantial positive changes can occur. Commitment to individual behavior support can be demonstrated and fostered through multiple actions. First, schools can make a written commitment by including individual behavior support as a top priority in their annual school improvement plan. Administrators can promote individual behavior support by encouraging and facilitating staff participation. Flexible money in the school budget can be allocated to developing and maintaining an individual behavior support team. School staff can volunteer to serve on the team or can utilize the team by making appropriate referrals. School staff can be cooperative in the assessment process and instrumental in the intervention process. Team members and other school staff can engage in frequent discussion about how to improve the system. School staff can remain flexible and supportive as the team evolves, learns, and improves.

Resources Adequate allocation of time and money is critical to the success of the individual behavior support team. Time and money are often scarce resources in many schools and must be used wisely.

Time School psychologists and school administrators often mention “lack of time” as the biggest obstacle to implementing FBA-BSP in their schools. We believe the best way to address this limitation is through increased efficiency of the individual behavior support team and system. Throughout this book, we have suggested several strategies to make the best use of limited staff time. These strategies are summarized in Table 7.1. One strategy that warrants further discussion is “making the best use of existing school-­based teams.” In some cases, creating a new team may be unnecessary if an existing school-­ based team could be expanded or modified. Student support teams or their counterparts (e.g., teacher assistance teams, RTI teams) have become a common



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 125

TABLE 7.1. Strategies for Making the Best Use of Time •• Implement schoolwide systems of behavior support to act as a proactive screening process for referrals. •• Determine whether each referral to the individual behavior support team is valid. •• Determine the extent of FBA that is necessary: brief FBA, full FBA, or functional analysis. •• Generate an agenda for each meeting. •• Distribute the agenda before each meeting to remind team members to complete tasks and to come to the meeting prepared with all necessary materials. •• Attach time limits to each agenda item. •• Use a stopwatch to enforce time limits. •• Keep notes at each meeting. •• Keep all agendas, notes, and other relevant materials in a three-ring binder or on filesharing system in a confidential, central location. •• Meet at the same time on the same day of the week. •• Assign a within-building staff member to be the referral liaison. •• Use a wall-size calendar or file-sharing system to remind team members of deadlines, follow-up meetings, and the like. •• Make the best use of existing school-based teams.

feature of many schools’ infrastructure. These teams typically serve a similar function to that of the individual behavior support team described in this book and typically consist of a similar cross-­section of school staff: general education and special education teachers from a representative portion of grade levels, the school psychologist, a counselor, and/or the principal. Students who are referred to the team may be struggling academically or behaviorally. After considering the student’s needs, the team generates, implements, and monitors an intervention plan. Unfortunately, members of these existing teams may not be trained in FBA or BSP design. If members of this team are to become the core team for function-­based behavior support, in order to take advantage of existing support structures, they will need to be trained in FBA-BSP. Assessment and use of existing teams is recommended for at least two reasons. First, efficient use of time is a high-­priority concern among school staff. Many teachers, paraprofessionals, and principals feel that they are already overcommitted. Creating a new team that serves a similar function as an existing team will be perceived (appropriately so) as an unnecessary drain on staff time and resources. Second, if two school teams serve similar purposes, but do not communicate with each other, they are likely to develop different intervention plans. Consequently, the two teams may well work at cross-­purposes. Teachers seeking assistance will feel caught in the middle and unsupported. The teachers’ natural response will be to cease requesting assistance from either team. We suggest increasing the schools’ resources for managing problem behavior by using three strategies:

126

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

1. If a school has an existing student support team or equivalent, use that team to coordinate the individual behavior support system within the school. Do not create a new team. 2. Increase the school’s internal capacity for behavioral expertise by providing training in function-­based behavior support to members of the school’s student support team. 3. Include paraprofessionals, such as educational assistants, as important contributors to the team. The use of paraprofessionals in the FBA-BSP process could significantly increase the “number of hands” schools have available to conduct teacher, student, and parent interviews, and to do multiple classroom observations. Paraprofessionals could also improve the school’s capability to monitor the implementation and outcome of behavior support planning.

Financial Budget In order to be truly effective in building a school’s capacity for individual behavior support, the school or district will need to allocate financial resources to achieve this goal. The budget will vary from school to school and will depend on a number of factors, including (1) number of students enrolled, (2) number of staff, (3) magnitude of problem behaviors experienced at school, (4) current number of staff with behavioral competence, and (5) model of behavioral training implemented. At least four important items should be built into the budget for individual behavior support: (1) part of an individual’s employment allocated to lead and coordinate the activities of the individual behavior support team, (2) money to allow teachers and staff to attend FBA-BSP development workshops and to implement their FBA-BSP training in the school, (3) compensation for FBA-BSP development trainers, and (4) materials to support the system of individual behavior support (e.g., forms, reinforcers, curricula).

Continuum of Behavior Support Systems A system of individual behavior support will work best in a school that has established a continuum of positive behavior support systems as described in Chapter 2. There are at least four major behavioral systems within a school: (1) schoolwide, (2) classroom, (3) non-­ classroom-­ specific settings, and (4) individual. Students can be grouped into one of four behavioral categories: (1) students with mild or no problem behaviors, (2) students at risk for problem behaviors, (3) students with chronic patterns of problem behavior, and (4) students with dangerous problem behaviors. Valuable time and resources will be saved if the overall positive behavioral support system within a school incorporates elements for all four groups of students across all four behavioral systems. Implementing



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 127

a multi-­tiered SWPBS model, as described in Chapter 2, is an evidence-­based approach to address this ambitious goal (Sugai & Horner, 2009). If the school has an effective SWPBS system in place for the majority of students and a targeted group intervention system in place for the at-risk students (see, e.g., Crone et al., 2010), then only those students who truly require individualized behavior support should be referred to the individual behavior support team. The schoolwide and targeted group-­intervention tiers act as a screening process for the individual behavior support team. By increasing the validity of each referral for individual support and by reducing the overall number of referrals received, the team can be more effective and efficient. The individual behavior support team may not be able to handle all problem behaviors that are raised, especially by those students with dangerous problem behavior. For these students, the school will need to have access to additional community services (e.g., counseling and other wraparound services). Many schools may not have an effective continuum of SWPBS already in place. Patience, planning, and adequate allocation of resources will be essential. (Refer to the Supplementary Section of this chapter for references on schoolwide systems of behavioral support.) A behavior support team that attempts to respond to every behavioral issue within a school with individualized FBA-BSP can quickly become overwhelmed, flounder, and fail. Therefore, in a school that does not have an established SWPBS, the team will need to be very careful about deciding which referrals are valid and correspond to the group of students who require individualized support. We recommend that a school conduct a full FBABSP with no more than 1–7% of their student population, annually.

A Model for Generating within‑Building Capacity Expected Training Outcomes Initially, a behavioral consultant may be the only member of the behavior support team with expertise in FBA and behavior support planning. To build a sustainable team, the other members of the team will need training that provides content and practical experience in (1) conducting FBAs, (2) designing BSPs, and (3) embedding the function-­based behavior support process within the school’s current structure. After training, team members should be able to demonstrate competency in several areas. Competency is defined as having a knowledge of and ability to demonstrate mastery of a skill. The competencies that team members should be able to demonstrate include: • Defining roles and responsibilities of team members. • Defining problem behaviors in observable and measurable terms. • Understanding setting events, antecedents, and consequences of behaviors.

128

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

• Understanding the function of a behavior. • Developing a routine matrix. • Interviewing students, teachers, and parents about problem behaviors. • Observing problem behaviors in classroom and non-­classroom-­specific settings. • Reporting assessment data to a team. • Developing testable hypotheses from assessment data. • Brainstorming intervention strategies based on the competing behaviors model. • Designing BSPs. • Implementing, monitoring, evaluating, and modifying BSPs.

The Training Model By providing members of the individual behavior support team with adequate training, supervision, and support, their impact on individual students will improve and their usefulness as a resource to the school will increase. Leighton et al. (1997, pp. v–vi) recommend several activities that should be applied in effective training: “1) formal orientation that sets the foundation for the individual’s work; 2) training sessions that supplement and enhance knowledge and skill development; and 3) structured, on-the-job coaching in classrooms or other learning environments.” Each school must be willing to allot adequate time and resources for the team to be trained and for the team to plan, design, and implement FBA-BSP. For example, the administrator must be willing to release the team members from daily duties to attend training sessions. The school will need to be resourceful in locating an individual to conduct the training. If a school has already contracted for the services of a behavioral consultant, this person may be the most logical and accessible choice. Alternatively, potential training resources include special education teachers, certified school psychologists, licensed clinical psychologists with behavioral training, behavioral specialists hired by the educational services district (or equivalent), and research teams at local universities. Not all the individuals we’ve listed will have experience or materials to conduct training in function-­based behavior support. The school or district should be prudent in making this decision. We recommend that schools should require the following qualifications in an individual hired to conduct FBA-BSP training with members of the individual behavior support team: • Experience conducting FBAs. • Experience designing and evaluating BSPs. • Experience training teams to conduct FBA-BSP. • Experience in general education settings.



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 129

• Available on a regular basis for at least 2 years for training, consultation, and support. • Experience in using data-based decision making. • Sensitive to practical realities of implementing FBA-BSP in schools. Each trainer will have his or her own approach and materials for training. However, many basic elements will be similar for all trainers. Training can be conducted for the team members of one school or concurrently with multiple teams from multiple schools within a district. Training of multiple teams at once is, of course, much more cost effective for a school district. Chapter 8 provides extensive detail on one training model that can be implemented at the district level.

Leadership Models In Chapter 6, we outlined the roles that will need to be filled for each individual behavior support team: coordinator, referral liaison, and behavioral expert. Each team may choose to use a different leadership model to fill these roles. The team’s choice will be based on the school’s resources, individual preferences, and the internal skill capacity of the school. Leadership within a team is often an evolutionary process. As the individual team members become more skilled in FBA-BSP, they are more likely to change from an individual-­based to a teambased model of leadership. In the following sections, we identify three possible leadership models and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Model 1 In the first model, the roles of coordinator, referral liaison, and behavioral expert are all served by the same person. This model may be common in a school that has little or no internal capacity for behavioral support. In this situation, the school is likely to contract for the services of an outside behavioral expert. This person is contacted about individual children with behavior problems, conducts the FBA, and develops a BSP. Team members may be included, but their participation is usually peripheral, limited to minimal input at the assessment and intervention phases. For a school in the initial stages of developing a system of individual behavior support, this may be the best place to start. The primary advantage of this model is that one person is accountable for all activities related to FBA-BSP. Increased accountability may increase the likelihood that FBA-BSP tasks are completed in a timely manner. In addition, the system is likely to be more organized. Without division of responsibility there is no opportunity for miscommunication among team members. There are several limitations to this model:

130

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

1.  In a school with a moderate to large number of students, one person will not be sufficient to serve the school’s individual behavior support needs. The individual will have to spread his or her time so thin that he or she will not be able to do an adequate job with any individual student. 2.  Relying on one person to manage individual problem behaviors tends to breed a sense of separation of responsibility from problem behavior. Problem behavior becomes “somebody else’s problem.” 3. The sustainability of the school’s individual behavior support system becomes dependent on the continued employment of one person. There are a number of reasons why the behavioral consultant may be available to the school for only a limited time. For example, the consultant may choose another job or become ill or financial support may run out. Individual behavior support is too critical to a school’s success to depend on the uncertainty of individual employment. 4. An outside consultant is unfamiliar with the day-to-day changes that occur within a school. Outside consultants are less aware of practical limitations within a school. In addition, they have less opportunity to foster the working relationships with teachers that are critical to the success of BSP implementation. 5.  Hiring an outside consultant can be quite costly. 6.  An outside behavioral consultant can be frequently unavailable to staff.

Model 2 In the second model, two individuals share most of the workload. The role of coordinator and referral liaison is filled by a member of the school staff, while someone with behavioral expertise conducts the FBAs and designs BSPs. In the initial stages of individual behavior support, the person with behavioral expertise is likely to be an outside behavioral consultant. However, as individuals from the school receive training in FBA-BSP and develop internal capacity for doing FBA-BSP, the behavioral consultant may come from the school staff. Because the work is divided between two people, this model may be more stable than the first model. In this model, the school would be better equipped to handle more referrals. The coordinator/referral liaison would be much more accessible to the school staff. As a result, the behavior support “team” would be more responsive to teacher requests for assistance. The advantages and limitations of hiring an outside behavior consultant apply to this model as well.

Model 3 The third model reflects a true team-based approach to individual behavior support. In this model, there are multiple individuals on the individual behavior



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 131

support team with competency in FBA-BSP. These individuals share the workload on different action teams for different referrals. The coordinator/referral liaison is a within-­building staff member. In this model, an outside behavior consultant becomes necessary. This model can be achieved after a school has invested the time and resources to increase within-­building capacity for FBA-BSP. The major disadvantage to this approach is the increased likelihood of disorganization and miscommunication as responsibilities are shared by multiple individuals. In this model, the coordinator must be very efficient and well organized. This team-based approach has several advantages. Because multiple individuals share the workload, the team can respond to more requests for assistance. Also, by sharing the workload, no single person should become overwhelmed. With a team-based approach, the school is more likely to feel responsible for managing problem behavior rather than thinking of problem behavior as someone else’s domain. Because this model is more resilient to staff turnover, the individual behavior support system should be easier to sustain. SUPPLEMENTARY SECTION References on Schoolwide Discipline and Behavior Support (Original List Compiled by George Sugai, PhD) Battistich, V., Watson, M., Solomon, D., Schaps, E., & Solomon, J. (1991). The Child Development Project: A comprehensive program for the development of prosocial character. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development, Vol. 3: Application (pp. 1–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Bear, G. G. (1990). Best practices in school discipline. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 649–663). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists. Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). School-wide and classroom management: Reconceptualizing the integration and management of students with behavior problems in general education. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 361–381. Colvin, G., Sugai, G., Good, R. H., III, & Lee, Y. (1997). Using active supervision and precorrection to improve transition behaviors in an elementary school. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 344–363. Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Kame’enui, E. (1994). Curriculum for establishing a proactive schoolwide discipline plan. Eugene: Project Prepare. Behavioral Research and Teaching, College of Education, University of Oregon. Gottfredson, D. C. (1987). An evaluation of an organization development approach to reducing school disorder. Evaluation Review, 11, 739–763. Gottfredson, D. C., Gottfredson, G. D., & Hybl, L. G. (1993). Managing adolescent behavior: A multiyear, multischool study. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 179–215. Gottfredson, D. C., Gottfredson, G. D., & Skroban, S. (1996). A multimodel school-­based prevention demonstration. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11, 97–115. Gottfredson, D. C., Karweit, N. L., & Gottfredson, G. D. (1989). Reducing disorderly

132

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

behavior in middle schools (Report No. 47). Baltimore: Center of Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, Johns Hopkins University. Gresham, F. M., Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Quinn, M. M., & McInerney, M. (1998). Classroom and school-­wide practices that support children’s social competence: A synthesis of research. Washington, DC: American Institutes of Research and Office of Special Education Programs. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Horner, H. F. (2000). A schoolwide approach to student discipline. School Administrator, 57(2), 20–23. Hyman, I., Flanagan, D., & Smith, K. (1982). Discipline in the schools. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 454–480). New York: Wiley. Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Applying behavioral principles in the schools. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 501–529). New York: Wiley. Knoff, H. M. (1985). Best practices in dealing with discipline referrals. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (pp. 251–262). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists. Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior support: A systems approach to proactive school-­wide management. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31(6), 1–24. Lewis-­Palmer, T., Sugai, G., & Larson, S. (1999). Using data to guide decisions about program implementation and effectiveness. Effective School Practices, 17(4), 47–53. Martens, B. K., Peterson, R. L., Witt, J. C., & Cirone, S. (1986). Teacher perceptions of school-­based interventions. Exceptional Children, 53, 213–223. Mayer, G. R. (1999). Constructive discipline for school personnel. Education and Treatment of Children, 22, 36–54. Mayer, G. R., & Butterworth, T. (1979). A preventive approach to school violence and vandalism: An experimental study. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 57, 436–441. Mayer, G. R., Butterworth, T., Komoto, T., & Benoit, R. (1983). The influence of the school principal on the consultant’s effectiveness. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 17, 274–279. Mayer, G. R., Butterworth, T., Nafpaktitis, M., & Suzer-­A zaroff, B. (1983). Preventing school vandalism and improving discipline: A three year study. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 355–369. McCrary, D., Lechtenberger, D., & Wang, E. (2012). The effect of schoolwide positive behavioral supports on children in impoverished rural community schools. Preventing School Failure, 56(1), 1–7. Morrissey, K. L., Bohanon, H., & Fenning, P. (2010). Positive behavior support: Teaching and acknowledging expected behaviors in an urban high school. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(5), 26–35. Muscott, H. S., Mann, E., Benjamin, T. B., Gately, S., Bell, K. E., & Muscott, A. (2004). Positive behavioral interventions and supports in New Hampshire: Preliminary results of a statewide system for implementing schoolwide discipline practices. Education and Treatment of Children, 27(4), 453–475. Short, P. M., & Short, R. J. (1987). Beyond technique: Personal and organizational influences on school discipline. High School Journal, 71(1), 31–36.



How Do You Generate within‑Building Capacity for FBA? 133

Strein, W. (1988). Classroom-­based elementary school affective education programs: A critical review. Psychology in the Schools, 25, 288–296. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (1999). Discipline and behavioral support: Preferred processes and practices. Effective School Practices, 17(4), 10–22. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-­to-­intervention and school-­wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-­tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17(4), 223–237. Sugai, G., & Pruitt, R. (1993). Phases, steps, and guidelines for building schoolwide behavior management programs: A practitioner’s handbook (Behavior Disorders Handbook No. 1). Eugene: Behavior Disorders Program, University of Oregon. Sulzer-­A zaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1986). Achieving educational excellence: Using behavioral strategies. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Sulzer-­A zaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1994). Achieving educational excellence: Behavior analysis for achieving classroom and schoolwide behavior change. San Marcos, CA: Western Image. Taylor-­Greene, S., Brown, D., Nelson, L., Longton, J., Gassman, T., Cohen, J., et al. (1997). School-wide behavioral support: Starting the year off right. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 99–112. Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1999). Individualizing schoolwide discipline for students with chronic problem behaviors: A team approach. Effective School Practices, 17(4), 72–82. Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Sprague, J. R. (1999). Effective behavior support: Strengthening schoolwide systems through a team-based approach. Effective School Practices, 17(4), 23–27. Vincent, C. G., Randall, C., Cartledge, G., Tobin, T. J., & Swain-­Bradway, J. (2011). Toward a conceptual integration of cultural responsiveness and schoolwide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(4), 219–229. Weissberg, R. P., Caplan, M. Z., & Sivo, P. J. (1989). A new conceptual framework for establishing school-­based social competence promotion programs. In L. A. Bond & B. E. Compas (Eds.), Primary prevention and promotion in the schools (pp. 255–296). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Chapter 8

Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support Kathleen Strickland‑Cohen, Sheldon L. Loman, and Robert H. Horner

Introduction Schools throughout the United States are adopting multi-­tiered systems of academic and behavior support (Sugai & Horner, 2009). The compelling logic of adopting multi-­tiered approaches is that schools become both better able to support the range of students in their districts and to do so with less expense. We further argue here that adopting multi-­tiered approaches to education will include re-­examining how districts organize behavior support. As discussed thus far in this book, behavior support is frequently conceived as starting with schoolwide efforts and shifting to individual student support teams that include highly trained behavior specialists (Scott, Alter, & McQuillan, 2010). A significant proportion of students who need behavior support can benefit from reasonably simple adaptations based on an assessment of the function of their problem behavior that are implemented locally by school and district level staff. Our goal is to show how investment in building “basic behavior support capacity” is feasible and effective at both the school and district level.

The Challenge It has been more than 15 years since the 1997 amendments to IDEA explicitly recommended that schools use FBA in their behavior management and disciplinary 134



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 135

practices. In that time, FBA-guided behavioral interventions have been well documented as effective for producing positive behavior change for students with persistent behavioral concerns (Conroy, Dunlap, Clarke, & Alter, 2005; Epstein, Atkins, Cullinan, Kutash, & Weaver, 2008; Ingram et al., 2005; Marquis et al., 2000; Newcomer & Lewis, 2004; Payne, Scott, & Conroy, 2007; Strickland-­Cohen & Horner, in press). Yet in current practice FBA continues to be significantly under­utilized, and schools still struggle in their efforts to establish effective supports for students who engage in persistent problem behaviors (Cook et al., 2012). One reason for this research-­to-­practice gap is a tendency for schools to consider FBA as a “last resort” to be used by district-­level behavior specialists or outside experts to create complex, time-­intensive BSPs only when problem behavior has escalated to a point where educational success is being seriously impeded (Scott, Alter, & McQuillan, 2010). For students who demonstrate less severe challenging behaviors, valuable resources are often underutilized, implementing less effective interventions that are not consistent with the function of the problem behavior. If FBA-BSP is used only as a response to serious problem behavior, schools (1) perpetuate the perception of FBA-BSP as a laborious set of procedures that are infeasible for use by typical school personnel and (2) lose the opportunity to develop function-­based interventions to address less severe challenging behaviors that often precede more serious problems. Although a small proportion of student behaviors will require intensive or “complex” interventions guided by individuals with expertise in developing and implementing function-­based supports (Bradshaw, Reinke, Brown, Bevans, & Leaf, 2008), all student problem behaviors (regardless of complexity) can benefit from a function-­based lens. This concept was initially addressed in Chapter 2 of this book. In fact, by using efficient function-­based supports to address less severe or “basic” problem behaviors, schools can help to minimize the number of students needing more complex, resource-­intensive supports and interventions (Renshaw, Christensen, Marchant, & Anderson, 2008). However, many schools do not have readily available access to personnel with sufficient training and lack the necessary resources to effectively utilize FBA-BSP methods to address recurrent problem behaviors. They may require support from their school district. The current challenge is to extend the function-­based support logic well-­ documented for complex FBA-BSP efforts to efficient practices that meet the needs of those students with less complex, but equally important behavior support needs. We need a support model for “basic” behavior support challenges. This model was introduced in previous chapters. In the current chapter, we offer greater detail on the logistics of achieving this important goal, especially from the perspective of the school district. Making this proactive approach to behavior support feasible in school settings requires providing training and coaching to typical school personnel on practical FBA-BSP methods that can be efficiently implemented in everyday school contexts. To that end, school districts will need effective and efficient tools for providing systematic and focused training on how

136

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

best to collect and utilize basic FBA information to create the most parsimonious BSP procedures possible that will produce improved student outcomes.

Basic versus Complex Assessment and Behavior Support In this section we describe a continuum of behavior support we label basic versus complex. This is compatible with the brief versus full FBA-BSP approach described throughout the rest of the book. In this chapter, we choose to use the terminology basic and complex, rather than brief and full, as this corresponds with our (the chapter authors) recent work and publications, including a set of FBA-BSP training modules that are described later in this chapter. One important factor we highlight is that in some cases, student behaviors are so severe, chronic, or dangerous that a behavioral expert with extensive education and training is needed to provide effective assessment and response. This is the type of behavior support we label “complex.” In this chapter, we describe in more detail how school districts can provide suitable training in FBA-BSP in order to build the school’s and district’s capacity to implement an effective and sustainable system of basic individualized behavior support. As schools and school districts work to generate capacity to implement function-­ based supports, they often face obstacles related to the time and resources required to implement the FBA-BSP process and a lack of personnel with the necessary expertise to create behavioral supports for students with serious problem behaviors (Ducharme & Schecter, 2011). As mentioned in earlier chapters, two ways for schools to overcome these challenges are to (1) conceptualize the FBA-BSP process in varying “degrees” or levels of complexity and (2) train typical school-­based personnel to implement basic FBA-BSP procedures for students who exhibit less severe or nondangerous problem behaviors. Serious behavior problems often start out as persistent low-level problem behaviors that escalate over time. The rationale behind the basic FBA-BSP approach resides with the idea that while serious, chronic problem behaviors may require timeand resource-­intensive procedures led by an “expert” with extensive behavioral training, recurrent mild to moderate behavior problems can be effectively and efficiently remediated using relatively simple function-­based behavior support strategies designed by a team of typical school-­based professionals. Although the core concepts of prediction, function, and prevention remain constant for both basic and complex behavior support, planning, the way in which function-­based supports are designed and implemented, can vary considerably depending on the nature of the target behavior (Scott & Caron, 2005). For the most complex student behaviors (e.g., aggression toward teachers and/ or peers, self-­injurious behaviors, behaviors that are pervasive across the school day), the FBA process is likely to include multiple direct methods of observation and data collection across a number of settings, days, and times. This process



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 137

then results in a complex BSP, including specific safety/crisis intervention procedures and wraparound supports developed by a team made up of (1) school staff who work most closely with the student, (2) members of the student’s family, (3) any relevant community members, and (4) an individual with extensive behavioral training (e.g., district behavior specialist or outside behavioral consultant). In contrast, a student who exhibits mild to moderate problem behaviors (e.g., talk-outs, off-task behaviors) that occur most often during a limited number of school routines may benefit significantly from a simplified FBA process (i.e., the brief or basic FBA) utilizing both direct and indirect data collection methods, resulting in relatively straightforward and practical BSP procedures developed by a team of typical school-­based professionals with guidance from a team member who is knowledgeable about basic FBA-BSP methods (Park, 2007). For a complete description of basic versus complex behavior support procedures, as defined by the authors of this chapter, see Table 8.1. A primary purpose for training typical school-­based staff to implement basic FBA-BSP is to allow schools to use the technology more efficiently by intervening when behavior problems first become apparent. School districts can support this training. Research has shown that function-­based behavior supports are most likely to result in significant decreases in student problem behavior and the acquisition of new appropriate behaviors when implemented early, before problematic patterns of behavior are strengthened (Dunlap & Carr, 2007). When schools and school districts invest in training typical staff members to utilize basic FBA-BSP procedures for students exhibiting mild to moderate problem behaviors, they improve their ability to support students using evidence-­based interventions at the first signs of problem behavior. Therefore, by increasing school and district capacity to proactively design and deliver efficient function-­ based supports, schools and districts can (1) improve equitable student access to effective interventions and (2) decrease the number of cases for which more complex and resource-­intensive supports are necessary (Scott & Caron, 2005).

Organizing a District to Deliver Basic Behavior Support Although necessary, it is insufficient for districts simply to provide school staff members with the “FBA-BSP technology” to assess and manage problem behavior. Full implementation of a continuum of individualized behavior supports in schools also requires dedicated resources and the district infrastructure necessary to ensure its successful and sustained implementation. Several conditions and commitments must be made concurrently at the district and school level, including establishing a context that supports a function-­based approach to behavior support and developing the capacity to support implementation at both the district and school level (see Table 8.2 for a list of specific conditions and commitments).

138

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

TABLE 8.1.  Basic versus Complex FBA‑BSP Basic FBA-BSP

Complex FBA-BSP Students for whom FBA-BSP is appropriate

•• Those who exhibit high frequency behaviors that are not dangerous (e.g., talking out, running, not following directions, not completing work), for which universal and/ or group-level targeted interventions have been ineffective •• Those who exhibit behaviors that occur in one to two school routines (e.g., when asked to work independently, or during transitions between activities and group lecture)

•• Those who exhibit dangerous behaviors (e.g., hitting, throwing objects, property destruction, self-injurious behaviors) •• Those who exhibit problem behaviors that serve multiple functions (i.e., problem behaviors that are multiply controlled by both escape and social attention) •• Those who exhibit behaviors in three or more school routines or pervasively across the school day

FBA-BSP procedures •• Brief interview (20–30 minutes) with staff most familiar with student, using an FBA format •• Additional interviews with teachers, parent, or student, as necessary •• ABC observation of student/individual in prioritized setting (record at least five incidences of the problem behavior described during interview) •• Develop testable hypothesis •• Develop competing behavior pathway and select replacement behavior •• School-based team develop and implement BSPs that identify antecedent interventions, behavior teaching interventions, and reinforcement strategies

•• FBA interviews with multiple staff members and parents of student •• Archival records review •• Direct observations of multiple instances of student problem behavior across various school settings (until convinced that the FBA summary is accurate), direct observations conducted in settings where problem behavior is least likely to occur •• Develop competing behavior pathway and select replacement behavior (may require multiple prioritized pathways to address multiple functions of problem behavior) •• Multidisciplinary team, including behavioral expert as the lead, identifies antecedent, behavior teaching, reinforcement, and crisis response strategies •• Person-centered planning with student/ individual and significant others •• Wraparound interventions that include family and community supports

Suggested skills/training required to lead the FBA-BSP process •• Completion of district trainings on basic FBA-BSP methods •• Experience conducting basic FBA under the supervision of personnel with expertise in both complex and basic FBA •• Experience leading the design of and evaluating basic BSPs with coaching and feedback from personnel with extensive behavioral expertise

•• Graduate degree in fields such as behavior analysis, special education, or school psychology •• Trained to facilitate person-centered planning and wraparound supports •• Trained to conduct experimental functional analyses •• Trained in crisis response management

FBA-BSP team members •• The referring teacher or staff member(s) most familiar with the student •• The school-based “team leader” (i.e., staff member who has received training in basic FBA-BSP)

•• A representative sample of staff, including those most familiar with priority student •• Pertinent support staff •• Parents/family •• Behavioral expert trained to develop and implement intensive interventions for students with severe problem behaviors (e.g., school psychologists, behavior specialist, behavior analyst)



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 139

TABLE 8.2. District‑ and School‑Level Conditions for Implementing Basic FBA‑BSPs Conditions

District level

School level

Establishing context

•• Improving behavior support systems is one of the top three district priorities •• Investment in schoolwide preventive approach to behavior support •• Investment in effective and efficient data systems •• A staff member or team of personnel with expertise in FBA-BSP is established to assess and assist school-based teams in developing supports for students with serious problem behavior •• Investment in team-based approach to decision making

•• Improving behavior support systems is one of the top three school priorities and is backed by administrative support •• Time and resources are allocated for training team members and regular team-based decision making (team meetings held at least monthly) •• Each school should make a commitment of at least 3 years to improving individual behavior support systems

Building capacity

•• Personnel with expertise in FBA and behavior support planning have time allocated to train and support schoolbased personnel in basic FBA-BSP methods •• Efficient and effective tools and resources are provided for training school personnel to conduct basic FBA-BSP

•• At least two personnel with flexibility in their schedule are trained to conduct basic FBA-BSP •• Additional staff (i.e., plan implementers, team members) are trained in general function-based approach to behavior support •• Effective and efficient tools for conducting basic FBA-BSP are available for trained staff

Establishing a Context to Deliver Individualized Behavior Supports Without the conditions and commitments listed in Table 8.2, efforts to implement and institutionalize a districtwide hierarchy of individualized supports will likely be less successful and any improvements may fail to be sustained over time (Bambara, Goh, Kern, & Caskie, 2012; McIntosh et al., 2013).

Investing in Schoolwide Prevention As discussed in previous chapters, schools will set a strong foundation for implementing effective individualized behavior supports through establishing a continuum of schoolwide behavioral supports with an emphasis on early identification and prevention. Implementing universal and targeted group interventions reduces the number of referrals for individualized supports received by school behavior support teams, making the caseload more manageable and allowing team members to be more effective in addressing the needs of students who require some level of individualized support. Multi-­tiered systems of schoolwide support also help to create a school context or “climate” that is more likely to support and maintain changes in individual student behavior that result from the implementation of function-­based interventions (Sugai & Horner, 2008).

140

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

Investing in Data Systems Districts seeking to fully implement a hierarchy of individualized behavior supports must also invest in effective and efficient data systems that can be used to monitor and evaluate district, whole-­school, and individual student-­level data. Districts and schools use effective data systems to guide decision making to develop short- and long-term goals, recognize the strengths of current intervention practices, monitor the fidelity of current interventions, determine whether to modify or discontinue a specific practice, and identify new interventions to address current needs. The efficiency of a data system is essential to ensure that data are useful rather than a burden on personnel time and resources. Data systems should be both easy to use and time saving (e.g., entering, storing, retrieving, and displaying data should require less than 1% of staff time; Sugai & Horner, 2006). Schools should also design and document a specific plan for regularly entering, analyzing, and presenting data to school- and district-­level decision makers. When evaluating behavior support systems at both the district and school levels, pertinent sources of student outcome data include rates of ODRs, rates of exclusion due to behavioral problems (e.g., suspension, expulsion, more restrictive placements), and measures of student achievement (e.g., statewide testing scores, course grades, graduation rates). School teams can utilize Web-based data systems such as the School-wide Information System (SWIS; May et al., 2013a) to monitor and evaluate whole-­school data and identify (1) the types of problem behaviors that are occurring most often, (2) when and where those behaviors are most likely to occur during the school day, and (3) any students who may need more intensive interventions. For students who are found to require more targeted supports, data systems can be used to track individual student and group-level behavioral and academic data. For example, for students receiving CICO support, staff can use CICO-SWIS (May, Talmadge, Todd, Horner, & Rossetto-­Dickey, 2013c) to enter student goals and track points on daily behavioral report cards. For students who require individualized supports (i.e., those students not sufficiently benefitting from universal and secondary supports), the Individual Student Information System (ISIS-SWIS; May et al., 2013b) provides a way to collect, store, and monitor student outcome data on individualized goals; upload and store student plan documents (e.g., FBA, BSP) needed for planning and decision making; and summarize effectiveness data for problem solving and decision making. To access more information related to CICO-SWIS and ISISSWIS go to www.pbisapps.org. This system is also discussed in a bit more detail in Chapter 11. School teams should also develop a formal protocol to assess the fidelity of BSP implementation for students, which can be easily monitored using a data system such as ISIS-SWIS. Using summarized data from ISIS-SWIS, school teams can identify the critical features of individualized BSPs and consistently monitor



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 141

the implementation of these plan components for all students requiring individualized support within their regularly scheduled team meetings. For example, using ISIS-SWIS data, the team can see the agreed-­upon start date for individual BSP strategies, as well as look over staff reports of implementation fidelity and student progress data. If the BSP is not being implemented as designed, the team can then use these data to make decisions related to the need for additional coaching for plan implementers or specific plan components that may need to be revised to improve contextual fit (i.e., the extent to which the plan matches the skills, values, and resources available to plan implementers; Albin et al., 1996). In addition to evaluating student-­level outcomes, the ability to collect information regarding the fidelity of implementation of interventions is critical to the utility of data systems. Data should be collected regularly to assess implementation fidelity at the level of plan implementers, school-­based teams, the whole school, and the district. The Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT; Anderson et al., 2012) and the PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (Tier 3; Algozzine et al., 2014) are fidelity measures that can be used by school teams to self-­evaluate targeted and individual behavior support systems within their school. The BAT allows team members to assess the systems and practices used at Tiers 2 and 3 of SWPBIS (e.g., faculty commitment, student identification, monitoring and evaluation, strategy implementation, assessment, and plan development). Team members rate items as “fully in place,” “partially in place,” or “not yet started,” then use these data to guide the development of an action plan to improve the implementation of targeted and individualized support in their school. The PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory is a similar self-­assessment tool for assessing Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 PBIS core features. It uses the same scoring structure and protocol in which a school team working with their district coach can self-­assess based on examination of their local materials and uses the resulting report to formulate an action plan for improving implementation of PBIS core features. For example, schools and districts can use these data to identify specific professional development and technical assistance needs. Another benefit of regular monitoring and evaluation of schoolwide, targeted groups and student-­level data is that it can allow staff to experience highly valued outcomes that can lead to the sustained implementation of effective practices over time. For example, outcomes resulting from the effective systems-­wide implementation of graduated individualized behavior supports may include decreased referrals for resource-­intensive FBA-BSPs, decreased time in delivering behavior supports to students in need, decreased ODRs and suspensions, increased student academic achievement, and decreased referrals of students to more restrictive educational placements (Renshaw et al., 2008; Scott, Liaupsin, Nelson, & McIntyre, 2005). Using efficient data systems to regularly evaluate schoolwide, targeted group, and individual student outcomes, schools and districts will have the opportunity to celebrate successes and identify areas for further growth and adaptation of practices.

142

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

Investing in a Team‑Based Decision Model within a Multi‑Tiered Framework Another component of the schoolwide prevention framework that is essential to making a multi-­tiered model of individualized support feasible in schools is an established team-based decision-­making process in which teams meet regularly to share and evaluate data. (Refer to Chapter 6 for a detailed description of school-­based teams, team member roles, and procedures for conducting effective team meetings.) Within the multi-­tiered framework, the schoolwide or “core” team meets regularly to evaluate behavioral data and is well positioned to recognize early signs of persistent problem behaviors and to identify and refer to the action team any students whose problem behaviors have not been sufficiently addressed using universal or group-based targeted supports. Upon receiving a referral, action team members consider the nature and severity of the problem behavior being referred (i.e., whether the problem behavior presents an immediate danger to the student or others, the pervasiveness or number of school routines in which the behavior occurs) to decide whether the behavior of interest will require basic or complex FBA-BSP procedures and how to best structure the FBA-BSP team. (Refer to Table 8.1 for criteria that staff members can use to determine whether basic FBA-BSP is appropriate for addressing student problem behavior.) Specifically, the team decides whether the involvement of a district-­ level specialist with expertise in designing and implementing function-­based support is required, or if the school-­based team members led by a school team member with training in basic FBA-BSP can address the problem behavior without calling on someone from outside the school.

Building Capacity: Investing in Training School‑Based Personnel In developing their capacity to effectively and efficiently implement individualized behavior supports, districts must be willing to invest in training school-­ based personnel to utilize basic FBA-BSP methods and procedures for students exhibiting nondangerous challenging behaviors. Specifically, districts should ensure that at least two to three individuals per school are provided with the tools, resources, and training needed to conduct basic FBAs and to lead a team of school-­based professionals in designing basic function-­based support plans. To maximize efficiency and staff buy-in, it is important for districts to identify local personnel (i.e., an individual or small group of individuals who work at the district level) with expertise in designing and delivering intensive behavior supports who can act as basic FBA-BSP trainers. We recommend that, at a minimum, district-­level trainers should have experience in the following areas: • Conducting FBAs for students with significant behavioral challenges. • Designing, implementing, and evaluating the effects of BSPs. • Leading teams in the development of function-­based support.



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 143

• Implementing individualized supports in general education settings. • Utilizing data-based decision making. Most districts will find that they have at least one person with extensive knowledge related to developing and implementing function-­ based support (e.g., district behavior specialist, school psychologists) currently working at the district level. Often it is this individual or small group of individuals who conduct and design most, if not all, of the FBA-BSPs for students within the district. As discussed previously, this model of behavior support often results in (1) spreading these individuals’ time so thin that they are not able to adequately address the behavior support needs of individual students and (2) a sense of “separation of responsibility” for addressing the need for individualized behavior support on the part of school staff. By contrast, within the proposed basic FBA-BSP framework, district-­level personnel with behavioral expertise and the responsibility for consulting with school teams when students require intensive behavior supports should also have a portion of their time (i.e., one-­quarter to one-third of their full-time employment) allocated to training school personnel to conduct FBABSP. By expanding the role of district specialists to include conducting training in basic FBA-BSP for typical school personnel, districts can both facilitate application of function-­based support to a wider range of students and needs and more effectively and efficiently utilize the skills of highly trained district personnel. Using district-­level personnel as trainers also creates district capacity for regular and continued basic FBA-BSP trainings within and throughout the school years. District-­level trainers will be able to deliver trainings with consistent information and messages to school-­based professionals on an annual or biannual basis as a way to (1) provide a “refresher” for continuing school-­based team members and (2) buffer against the negative impact of inevitable staff turnover. Maximizing the skills of personnel working within the district (as opposed to calling on outside “experts”) is also advantageous because of the need to prioritize ongoing coaching, modeling, and feedback to reinforce and maintain the use of the skills school staff acquire through training. A local trainer will have access to participant data from training sessions and more knowledge of day-to-day school and student activities and practical limitations within schools. Therefore, he or she will be well positioned to provide ongoing, in vivo coaching and feedback related to using practical function-­based strategies for school-­based personnel within the local contingencies of the typical educational settings.

Training School‑Based Personnel to Implement Basic Behavior Support To build district capacity to implement basic FBA-BSP, district personnel need training materials that are both effective and efficient. Given the limited time and multiple responsibilities of district and school-­based staff, it is critical that

144

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

training materials (1) allow for quick and thorough delivery of all pertinent content and (2) provide school staff with tools and strategies that are practical, user-­ friendly, and do not require extensive training to implement. There are several commercially available training packages designed to teach the FBA-BSP process. A few examples include Functional Behavioral Assessment: An Interactive Training Module (Liaupsin, Scott, & Nelson, 2000); Prevent–­Teach–­Reinforce: The School-Based Model of Individualized Positive Behavior Support (Dunlap et al., 2010); and the Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum (Loman, Strickland-­ Cohen, Borgmeier, & Horner, 2013). In this chapter we focus on the Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum (described in detail next), which is specifically designed to teach typical school-­based personnel to conduct FBA and develop function-­ based support plans for students with mild to moderate problem behavior.

The Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum The Basic FBA to BSP Training Curriculum is designed to be used by district-­level personnel with extensive behavioral training to teach two to three staff members from each school in the district. One benefit of the Basic FBA to BSP approach is that it is “resource efficient” in that it does not rely on outside consultants, but rather capitalizes on the expertise already present within a school district. Ideally, school-­based professionals who participate in the trainings will have flexibility in their schedules to conduct FBA interviews and observations (e.g., counselors, administrators, school psychologists). The curriculum is made up of the Basic FBA to BSP Trainer’s Manual and Participant Activity Guide and seven 1-hour training modules (i.e., training slides and activities) focused on the critical skills needed to conduct basic FBA and to lead a team through the basic behavior support planning process (see Table 8.3 for a description of the specific skills that are taught within each training module). The 1-hour trainings are designed to be delivered by the district specialist in a large-group lecture format, with approximately 1 to 2 weeks between each training session. The trainer’s manual provides a step-bystep description of how to deliver the training content, including instructions for how and when to conduct practice activities within each session (the complete ready-to-use Basic FBA to BSP curriculum can be accessed for free online at www. pbis.org or by contacting either of the first two authors of this chapter). Training module 1 focuses on environmental events (i.e., antecedents, consequences, and setting events) that affect problem behavior and how those events are used to determine the function of behavior. Modules 2 and 3 teach participating school-­based professionals to assess and understand problem behavior and the conditions under which it occurs by interviewing relevant school staff using a streamlined version of the Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS; March et al., 2000), and conducting confirmatory direct observations of student behavior in typical school contexts. Modules 4 and 5 focus on



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 145

TABLE 8.3.  Basic FBA to BSP Training Modules and Topics Covered Module 1. Defining and Understanding Behavior •• •• •• ••

Defining behavior in observable and measurable terms How antecedent and consequent events affect behavior How setting events can make problem behavior more or less likely Understanding the function of problem behavior Module 2. FBA: Conducting Interviews

•• •• •• •• ••

Using the FACTS to interview school staff Identifying problematic routines within the school day Identifying events that trigger and set the occasion for problem behavior Understanding the consequences for engaging in problem behavior Summarizing the results of the FBA interview

•• •• •• ••

Using information obtained from FACTS interviews to plan for observations Observing students within routines identified by staff as problematic Observing student behavior to test the FACTS “Summary of Behavior” Conducting student observations using the ABC Recording Form

Module 3. FBA: Observing and Summarizing Behavior

Module 4. Critical Features of Behavior Support Plans •• Replacing problem behavior with efficient, functionally equivalent appropriate behaviors •• Preventing problem behavior by modifying antecedent triggers and prompting replacement behaviors •• Reinforcing replacement and desired behaviors •• Using redirection as a consequence for problem behavior •• Minimizing the payoff for problem behaviors Module 5. Building Behavior Support Plans from FBA Information •• Selecting appropriate replacement behaviors and strategies for moving toward mastery of longterm goals •• Designing function-based prevention strategies to address antecedent triggers and setting events •• Teaching replacement behaviors and desired skills •• Designing strategies for reinforcing appropriate behaviors and minimizing reinforcement of problem behavior Module 6. Implementation and Evaluation Planning •• Designing implementation plans specifying who will implement which BSP strategies, and by when •• Developing evaluation plans for assessing fidelity of implementation and plan effectiveness •• Deciding on appropriate long- and short-term goals for student outcomes •• Designing effective, feasible data collection measures and procedures in schools Module 7. Leading a Team through the Behavior Support Planning Process •• The roles and responsibilities of the team members and team leader during the BSP team meeting and beyond •• Ensuring that team members select function-based BSP strategies •• Conducting regularly scheduled plan-review meetings •• What to do when the plan is not working and the next steps when the plan is successful



146

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

how to use the FBA information to (1) select replacement behaviors that are functionally equivalent to the problem behavior, easier to do than the problem behavior, and socially acceptable and (2) identify and generate practical function-­based strategies for preventing problem behavior, teaching and rewarding new replacement skills, and minimizing rewards for problem behaviors. Module 6 teaches school personnel how to design detailed plans for specifying who will be responsible for implementing each part of the BSP and by when, and documenting specifically how data will be collected to monitor implementation fidelity and the impact of the BSP on student behavior. Module 6 also stresses the importance of and provides strategies for ensuring that BSP strategies and interventions are contextually relevant (i.e., are aligned with the skills, values, and resources available to the implementers). Module 7 provides training in how to lead teams of school-­based professionals through the processes of basic FBA-BSP plan development and implementation, including reviewing and modifying the plan as needed. Throughout the training modules there is also an emphasis on training participants to evaluate the nature and complexity of student problem behavior (e.g., frequency and severity of problem behavior or whether the behavior is potentially dangerous) and to decide the type of FBA procedures needed (basic vs. complex) and whether a district-­level behavior specialist is needed for each case. The goal is to train school personnel to identify the most efficient procedures necessary to create an effective student BSP, but also to recognize those cases that warrant additional expertise.

Basic FBA to BSP Training Format As important as the content of the curriculum is attention to the delivery of this content. Beyond merely being exposed to information, effective professional development should involve using research-­ based principles of instructional design (Kame’enui & Simmons, 1990) and evidence-­based practices in professional development (Yoon, Duncan, Lee, Scarloss, & Shapley, 2007) including: • Chunking instruction into component parts. • Giving explicit instruction and demonstrations. • Providing opportunities for both acquisition and application of knowledge and skills. • Providing frequent opportunities for practice within trainings. • Providing opportunities to receive positive and corrective feedback. • Employing frequent, varied, and cumulative review of material throughout the training. • Providing opportunities to utilize skills learned and receive feedback and coaching in natural settings.



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 147

School staff must have explicit instruction paired with multiple opportunities to practice new skills and acquire fluency across a range of “real-world” examples. As part of participating in the Basic FBA to BSP training series, each school professional receives a copy of the Basic FBA to BSP Participant’s Guide. Along with copies of all training slides, the participant’s guide includes: (1) cumulative review activities that cover material learned in previous sessions; (2) guided notes that participants use in following along with the trainer; (3) practice activities that staff complete throughout the sessions, using various response formats (e.g., selecting multiple-­choice items, short-­answer questions, identifying missing or incorrect aspects of sample plan components); and (4) culminating activity assignments that are completed and turned in at the end of each session for the trainer to assess. In addition to practice activities completed during training sessions, the participant’s guide also includes an “application task” at the end of each module. These tasks allow participants to practice the skills learned in each module with a student with mild to moderate challenging behavior in their school. For example, at the end of Module 1 participating school professionals are asked to (1) operationally define a “basic” problem behavior for a student in their school; and (2) collect data on how often that behavior occurs, the environmental factors that appear to “trigger” that behavior, and the consequences that follow the behavior. The application activities are designed to ensure that, over the course of the seven-part training series, staff members practice all of the critical skills related to basic FBA-BSP (e.g., FBA interviewing, identifying function-­based behavior support strategies, leading a school-­based BSP team meeting) in their typical school context. Because the modules are delivered with at least 1 week between trainings, participating staff can complete the tasks in their schools with the opportunity to ask questions and receive feedback from the trainer between and during training meetings.

Basic FBA to BSP Tools for Trainers Along with an effective training curriculum, it is crucial for district personnel to have tools that guide the successful and sustained use of effective practices (Fixsen, Naoom, Blasen, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005). This includes providing trainers with a way of assessing the extent to which school-­based personnel are able to demonstrate proficiency in the key competencies needed to lead basic FBABSP. The Basic FBA to BSP Trainer’s Manual gives district trainers specific instructions and examples for how to conduct training sessions most effectively and efficiently for school-­based staff. The manual also provides tools for evaluating and providing feedback to training participants. One such tool is the BSP Knowledge Assessment (Strickland-­Cohen, 2011), which school personnel are asked to complete prior to and immediately following the training series. The BSP Knowledge Assessment evaluates understanding of critical BSP components and school

148

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

staff’s ability to identify function-­based and non-­f unction-­based interventions. It is used to assess gains in knowledge after completing the Basic FBA to BSP trainings and can also be used to identify any individuals who may require additional training on specific component skills.

Ongoing Coaching and Feedback Along with the practice and feedback that school personnel receive while completing the training series, it is critical that staff who will be leading the basic FBA-BSP process continue to receive coaching and feedback related to the individual student assessments and specific plan components. It is recommended that the district trainer observe school-­based team leaders conducting at least one FBA interview and leading at least one behavior support planning meeting. Continued opportunities to ask questions and receive feedback are particularly important as personnel lead the first two or three basic FBA-BSPs following the training. As the school-­based team leaders gain fluency with the basic FBA-BSP skills, coaching can continue less frequently or on an as-­needed basis.

Training Additional School Staff Another benefit of dividing the Basic FBA to BSP modules into discrete 1-hour training sessions is that this approach allows district-­level trainers to provide specific sections of the training to those school personnel for whom the information is most relevant and allows them to select the most efficient use of valuable time and resources. A common barrier to implementation and efficiency of FBABSP in schools is that the school personnel and instructional staff who are most often implementing student plans have a limited understanding of their underlying theory, principles, rationale, and processes (Scott, Bucalos, et al., 2004). A strength of the Basic FBA to BSP curriculum is that it can be used to influence the school context in which implementation of behavioral assessment and intervention will occur. For example, while it may be most efficient to select a small, core group of individuals to complete modules that provide explicit instruction on conducting FBA interviews and leading BSP teams, all school staff who might be involved in creating or implementing function-­based student supports (e.g., instructional staff) can benefit from general information related to function-­ based interventions. Modules 1 and 4 are specifically designed so that they can be delivered to all relevant school personnel. These two modules contain information focused on understanding and describing student problem behavior and the basics of behavioral function and intervention. The primary objectives of these modules are to (1) encourage general understanding and informal application of a function-­ based approach to classroom behavior, (2) increase efficiency of assessment and intervention planning through improved staff understanding of the FBA-BSP



Improving District Capacity to Deliver Basic FBA‑BSP Support 149

process, and (3) decrease any resistance to the application of FBA-BSP for students with mild to moderate problem behaviors through increasing understanding of the theory, principles, and processes of behavior support. The primary goal of teaching the logic and practices of basic FBA-BSP to a broader range of school staff is ultimately to set the stage for the successful implementation of both basic and complex FBA-BSP across a variety of school settings.

Empirical Support for Basic FBA‑BSP Basic FBA-BSP methods and tools have been empirically demonstrated as effective in training typical school-­based personnel to accurately assess the function of student problem behaviors and to lead school teams in designing effective function-­based supports. Loman and Horner (2014) demonstrated that after completing the four 1-hour training sessions focused on basic FBA methods and procedures, participating professionals (six school counselors, two principals, and two learning specialists) from 10 different elementary schools were each able to independently (i.e., without aid from the researchers) conduct an FBA for one student in their school who exhibited nondangerous problem behaviors. The data from the staff-­conducted FBAs were compared to those resulting from experimental functional analyses conducted by the researchers and were found to be accurate in their identification of the function of student problem behavior. In addition, participating school professionals completed social acceptability surveys at the conclusion of the study and reported that they found basic FBA to be an efficient, “teacher-­friendly,” and feasible process for understanding the function of student problem behavior in school settings. The encouraging results of this initial study led to a follow-­up study assessing the efficacy of the “Basic BSP” training curriculum (Strickland-­Cohen, Loman, & Borgmeier, 2012) for training school personnel to use FBA information to identify interventions that directly address the function of student problem behavior (Strickland-­Cohen & Horner, in press). The results of that study demonstrated that following the four 1-hour training sessions (delivered once a week over the course of 4 weeks), 13 elementary school professionals (four school psychologists, four counselors, and five special education teachers) ended the Basic BSP training series with knowledge of the core concepts and processes for building basic BSPs (based on data resulting from the BSP knowledge assessment pre/posttest surveys). Following the trainings, six of the participating personnel went on to lead school-­based teams in the design and implementation of function-­based BSPs for a student engaging in mild to moderate problem behaviors (e.g., talk-outs, out of seat, task refusal) from their respective schools. The team-­developed plans were shown to be effective in decreasing students’ problem behavior and increasing academic engagement. Like the participants in the Loman and Horner (2014) study, the participating school professionals reported

150

Building School‑Based and District‑Based Capacit y

the training methods and basic BSP tools and procedures to be acceptable and feasible for use in typical school settings. In a follow-­up interview, the participants in the “From Basic FBA to BSP” study also reported continued use of the skills they learned in the training series following the conclusion of the study (i.e., after all supports from the researchers were removed).

Implementing Basic FBA‑BSP within Tiered Systems of Behavior Support The multilevel model for providing effective individualized behavior support for students with persistent problem behaviors has a number of advantages. In this model there are multiple individuals within each school with the competency needed to develop FBA-BSP who are also knowledgeable about the specific conditions under which help from district or outside specialists is needed. Due to an emphasis on early identification of persistent problem behaviors, teambased planning, and frequent monitoring of schoolwide and student-­level data, school-­based team members are able to quickly and easily identify those students requiring individualized behavior support. Because the responsibility for assessment of and designing support for student problem behavior is shared by multiple individuals, schools can more readily respond to requests for assistance and more students can benefit from effective, evidence-­based supports and interventions before problem behaviors escalate and require more complex and resource intensive behavioral supports. Also, because the role of the district behavior specialist includes providing basic FBA-BSP trainings, school-­based staff have access to at least yearly training on FBA-BSP methods as well as coaching as needed. This results in a system for delivering individualized support that is resistant to the negative effects of staff turnover and is more likely to be successfully maintained over time.

Part IV Functional Behavioral Assessment as Applied to Specific Problems or Specific Populations

Chapter 9

Functional Behavioral Assessment for Academic Concerns Courtenay A. Barrett and Donna M. Gilbertson

Introduction Often, students present with both academic and behavior concerns, which may be difficult to disentangle from one another (Algozzine, Wang, & Violette, 2011). Students’ off-task behavior may increase when classroom work is either too hard or too easy (Treptow, Burns, & McComas, 2007). A student’s problem behavior may prevent the student from engaging in instruction and acquiring knowledge or the student’s problem behavior may be the result of academic difficulties. Students who are unable to complete their work may display problem behaviors, such as refusal to do schoolwork or off-task behavior that interferes with obtaining appropriate academic assistance. Disruptive behaviors, such as calling out or distracting peers, are particularly problematic because the behavioral excesses of one child may interfere with learning for the whole class. Behavioral deficits of an individual student, such as failure to complete assignments, are problematic because they may not accurately reflect what a child is capable of achieving. The classroom context and any academic performance issues should be taken into account when assessing the function of a behavior and designing or implementing a behavioral intervention. The relation between academic performance and problem behavior is most likely bidirectional or cyclical, such that problem behavior affects academic achievement, which in turn affects problem behavior. Well-­instructed and actively engaged students are less likely to be disruptive (Taylor, Pearson, Peterson, & Rodriguez, 2003). A substantial body of research 153

154

Specific Problems or Popul ations

outlines a set of effective teaching strategies, to engage students in academic activities that promote both achievement and appropriate classroom behavior (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Rosenshine, 2012; Sprick, 2009). The use of effective, research-­based instruction promotes successful student engagement and helps reduce behavioral problems in the classroom. In contrast, a student’s problem behavior may continue if effective instructional supports are not provided to address academic skill deficits that underlie behavioral issues. Assessment and manipulation of the instructional context can be used to decrease problem behavior and increase learning by effectively addressing skill deficits. Such an approach emphasizes the importance of adhering to an assessment process that identifies environmental and instructional factors related to problem behavior. An assessment process that examines both problem behavior and academic performance can inform an intervention that promotes both positive behavior and good academic outcomes. The objectives of this chapter are to (1) explain how the FBA process can include an examination of academic concerns and (2) use case examples to demonstrate the FBA process as applied to both behavior and academic concerns.

The FBA Process and an Examination of Academic Performance The goal of the assessment process described in the sections that follow is to generate a hypothesis about the function of problem behaviors that appear to be rooted in academic concerns. Following traditional FBA, reinforcing consequences for problem behaviors, such as escape or teacher attention, can be manipulated or eliminated to reduce or extinguish the problem behavior. Furthermore, alternative reinforcers that serve the same function can be used in an intervention to increase appropriate responses. In the context of academic performance issues, such interventions would be effective for a student who can complete the work but who is not motivated to do so. On the other hand, a student with a deficit in academic skills would be unable to earn reinforcement contingent on work completion without first receiving sufficient instructional support. Thus when designing effective academic interventions, it is essential to distinguish between problem behavior that results from lack of skills versus lack of motivation. In order to determine the function of problem behavior and/or the cause of academic concerns, it is important to gather multiple sources of data to develop a testable hypothesis about the student. This assessment process is very similar to the process described throughout this book for addressing problem behavior in general. The process begins with a Request for Assistance Form. The section below outlines the types of data gathered for the functional assessment of problem behavior and academic performance: teacher interviews, classroom observations, curriculum-­based measurement (CBM), and a review of permanent



FBA for Academic Concerns 155 Referral for Problem Behavior and Academic Performance Gather Data about Problem Behavior and Academic Performance to Conduct Functional Assessment

Classwide

Review Permanent Products

Interview Teacher

Observe Classroom

Individual

High Work Completion/ Accuracy

Low Work Completion/ Accuracy

Administer CBM

At or above Grade Level

Below Grade Level

Won’t Do / Can’t Do

Won’t Do

Can’t Do

Develop Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior Develop Initial Supports for Class or Individual

Brief Experimental Analysis

Implement Supports and Monitor Behavior Change and Academic Performance Are Supports Working?

N

Y Continue Plan or Modify for Efficiency

FIGURE 9.1.  Flowchart illustrating the FBA process with an examination of academic performance.

products. Figure 9.1 illustrates a multistep flowchart of the functional assessment process for academic concerns. The subsequent section describes how to develop supports for the class or student that target the cause of the concern. Finally, we use case examples to illustrate how to apply the process in a school setting.

Gather Data for Referral Teacher Referral and Interview The FBA process for problem behavior and academic concerns begins with a teacher referral, or a request for assistance, followed by a teacher interview. The general purpose and procedures for the teacher referral and teacher interview were described in more detail in Chapter 3. The problem behavior or academic concerns as described by the teacher in the referral may not be narrowed down

156

Specific Problems or Popul ations

to specific, observable, or measurable terms. One goal of the teacher interview is to work with the teacher to define the problem behavior and academic concerns in these terms. During the teacher interview, information is gathered to determine antecedents and consequences related to both problem behavior and academic concerns. The way teachers respond to a student’s misbehavior may unintentionally contribute to the problem behavior if academic ability is not taken into consideration. Prior to an FBA referral, teachers may have unrealistic expectations for a child’s behavior given the child’s current academic skill level. That is, if the academic work is too challenging for a student, the mismatch between ability and expectations is likely at the core of the child’s problem behavior. Another common occurrence is for teachers to reduce the workload or expectations (of appropriate instructional material) when a student becomes frustrated or aggressive, which effectively allows the student to escape from work she is able, but perhaps not motivated, to complete. By the time of the request for assistance, the teacher’s strategies to reduce problem behavior have not been successful. Additional data sources beyond the teacher interview may be needed to identify the function and current reinforcers of the problem behavior(s). These additional data sources are discussed next.

Classroom Observation(s) Conducting observations in the problem setting provides valuable information to further clarify the antecedents and consequences of both behavior and academic problems. Observing the setting(s) for the child’s misbehavior helps identify or rule out systematic, settings-­based issues. Classroom observations can be used to assess the problem behavior or academic performance of both the entire class and the referred student. If less than 80% of the class is performing as expected, then the issue may be better addressed with the teacher at the classroom level, rather than individually at the student level (Witt, VanDerHeyden, & Gilbertson, 2004). Review of gradewide, classwide, and subgroup progress monitoring data, such as ODRs or academic data (e.g., CBM), may also be useful in ruling out systematic concerns. When reviewing these data, it is useful to notice any gradewide, classwide, or subgroup patterns. For example, one classroom that has significantly higher ODRs (for multiple students) than other classrooms in the same grade level could suggest that the teacher who has requested assistance for one child would actually benefit more from classroom management support than from an FBA focusing on a single student. In another example, if one group of students (e.g., students in the below-grade-level reading group) has more ODRs than other groups of students (e.g., students in the at- or above-grade-level reading groups) in the same classroom, the teacher may need additional support in tailoring instruction for struggling learners.



FBA for Academic Concerns 157

Direct observation of teaching strategies and student completion of classwork offers an assessment of the degree to which instruction has supported learning. Identifying teaching strategies used during a lesson helps pinpoint whether insufficient instruction is part of the student’s academic concern. If a high percentage of students are struggling with a concept or showing low rates of accuracy on classwork, then the lesson or content should be retaught to the entire class to increase retention and understanding of concepts. On the other hand, if only a few students’ scores indicate lack of learning, then those students would benefit from a targeted academic intervention. Observations may also offer insight into how to improve the quality of the instructional environment or tailor instruction to the child in the specific context where the child is exhibiting off-task or problem behavior. Some strategies to improve instruction include prompting, reteaching, error correction, and feedback (Archer & Hughes, 2011). This is especially important when observation and review of data indicate a classwide or subgroup, rather than individual, problem. With classwide or subgroup issues, intervening with the teacher is more efficient than intervening with each child individually. An improvement in instruction should improve the behaviors of all the students in the group at the same time. Once systematic issues are ruled out (or effectively addressed), classroom observations should focus on the individual child who was referred. The purpose of these observations is to collect data about the function and reinforcers of the problem behavior. Logistically, it can be challenging for a teacher to observe and collect data on one of her students, as he or she needs to simultaneously attend to other students in the class. Therefore, it is useful to have an outside observer, such as the school psychologist, counselor, or an administrator, conduct classroom observations. Identifying the antecedents and consequences of disruptive behavior through observation will inform the choice of BSP interventions for both problem behavior and academic concerns. For example, after the teacher presents a difficult question, one student may act out aggressively to avoid giving an answer while another student may act out emotionally to get the answer from the teacher. The first student is acting in a way to escape a negative situation, while the second student’s behavior appears to serve an attention-­based function. In both of these examples, if the teacher continues to provide the reinforcer (i.e., allows the first child to escape from the academic task or gives the second child the answer and attention), then the problem behavior will be maintained in the classroom.

Curriculum-Based Measurement Once high-­quality classwide instruction has been established, some students may still struggle with behavioral and academic concerns. In these cases, CBM probes or other progress monitoring data may be useful in ruling out systematic

158

Specific Problems or Popul ations

issues or in assessing the individual student’s academic skills. CBM is a standardized, reliable, and valid assessment method for monitoring student progress in the basic skill areas (i.e., reading, math, writing and spelling; Stecker, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). Systematic, rather than individual, issues are evident if the entire class is scoring below expected performance levels on CBM. Rates of learning, based on progress on CBM probes over time, can be used to identify students who are not demonstrating adequate progress and to evaluate growth over time with modified instruction (Eckert, Codding, & Dunn, 2011).

“Won’t Do” versus “Can’t Do” A CBM assessment can also be administered to students performing below an expected level on academic assessments that are used to identify academic performance deficits in reading, math, or writing (Duhon et al., 2004). Individual students’ poor academic performance typically stems from one of two types of deficits: performance/motivation deficits—­that is, “won’t do” problems—­or skill deficits—­that is, “can’t do” problems (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008). Performance deficits may be caused by a lack of motivation by the student, in which the behavioral effort needed to complete assignments is not adequately reinforced or maintained by the typical classroom rewards provided for all students. In this situation, the child is able to complete the tasks, but the tasks may be boring, uninteresting, or too easy for the student. When engaging in an academic task is not sufficiently rewarding, some students choose to engage in disruptive behaviors to escape work or to gain peer attention (Skinner, Pappas, & Kai, 2006). Skill deficits, on the other hand, are defined as low rates of accuracy and/or fluency (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008). For example, a student with a skill deficit in reading may not be able to read a high proportion of the words in a passage accurately or fluently. Students who cannot successfully complete an academic task may engage in disruptive behaviors to escape those difficult tasks or gain teacher (or peer) assistance to complete the task. Differentiating between skill-based and performance-­ based deficits has proven useful in identifying effective interventions in several studies (e.g., Duhon et al., 2004; Eckert, Ardoin, Daisey, & Scarola, 2000). If the student is at or above grade level on CBM benchmarks, it is assumed he or she can complete the assigned work. If the student scores below grade level on CBM benchmarks, an additional “won’t do versus can’t do” assessment is needed to determine whether the student is capable of doing the work yet not motivated to complete the CBM to his or her best ability or if the student lacks the skills to complete the CBM at or above grade level. To conduct a “won’t do versus can’t do” assessment, prior to CBM administration, the student gets an opportunity to earn an incentive if he or she performs at a specified level on the CBM assessment. If a student demonstrates an appropriate skill level with incentives, then this result suggests the child is exhibiting a performance deficit and would most likely benefit from



FBA for Academic Concerns 159

an intervention providing rewards (e.g., teacher or peer attention, or a tangible reinforcer) for academic improvements. When a student’s performance does not respond to incentives, it is hypothesized that he or she is exhibiting a skill deficit and would benefit from an instructional intervention. Alternatively, it is possible that the chosen incentive did not function as an effective reinforcer for that particular student (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008).

Permanent Product Review Reviewing permanent products, such as tests or other written assignments, may be useful in assessing task completion and comprehension of material, as well as for conducting an error analysis. In error analysis, the team member examines the type and frequency of errors the student made in order to identify patterns that indicate gaps in learning. These patterns can also help distinguish between performance and skill deficits. If the student has low work completion or poor accuracy, then a “won’t do versus can’t do” assessment may be useful (see Figure 9.1). In addition, permanent product review, task analysis, and error analysis may inform the behavior support team about the type and intensity of intervention needed. For example, poor accuracy in math assignments could be due to small procedural mistakes that are easily remediated, limited knowledge of relevant math facts, or larger procedural mistakes made throughout the problem-­solving process. Task analysis and error analysis of writing tasks can identify areas for targeted intervention, such as spelling, grammar, punctuation, structure, or content (Howell & Nolet, 1999). For a deeper review of task and error analysis and a review of permanent products, we refer the reader to Howell and Nolet (1999).

Develop a Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior After assessment data have been collected, the next step in FBA is to develop a testable hypothesis. A hypothesis about when, where, and why the problem behavior is occurring is developed on the basis of information gathered from the teacher interview, classroom observations, CBM assessments, and a permanent product review. The validity of the testable hypothesis can be verified using brief experimental analysis (BEA; see section on page 162) to systematically test the treatment effect on behavior change, prior to training the teacher to implement the intervention (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008). The function of behaviors may differ depending on the setting, resulting in different hypotheses. For example, similar behaviors may serve different functions in math, reading, and recess. Aggressive behavior can be an effective way for a student to escape from work (i.e., avoidance or negative reinforcement) and to obtain coveted equipment at recess (i.e., positive reinforcement). Even though this chapter focuses on academic concerns broadly, it may be necessary

160

Specific Problems or Popul ations

to differentiate between the function of a student’s behavior for different academic subjects, classes, or settings.

Develop Initial Supports for Individual Intervention Interventions designed for the individual should match the function of the behavior identified in the assessment process. If a classwide concern is identified, a clear function of the problem behavior may not be identified, as there may be different functions and reinforcers for different students in the class. In this case, the teacher should be supported to improve classwide or groupwide behavior or academic performance. Figure 9.2 provides a list of intervention options that can be used to address performance deficits (“won’t do”) and two types of skill deficits (“can’t do”): (1) low accuracy and (2) high accuracy with low fluency. When a “won’t do” problem is identified, BSPs should be designed to reduce problem behaviors and increase appropriate behaviors. A function-­based behavioral approach is incorporated when selecting motivational strategies to improve academic performance. One example of an intervention for a performance deficit is to set a daily academic goal such as completing work correctly within a set time limit (goal setting) and earning points toward a reward for meeting daily goals (i.e., contingency management; Codding et al., 2009). Reinforcer(s) should be selected based on the hypothesized maintaining function of the problem behavior, such as teacher attention, peer attention, or escape from work. If a “can’t do” problem is identified for the referred child, instructional support or academic intervention, rather than behavioral support, is appropriate. Skill deficits are addressed by supplemental instruction, modification of instruction to incorporate different methods to deliver information, or altering assignments to better reflect the student’s current achievement level. For students with low-­accuracy skill deficits, providing a checklist of steps within a skill or having the student compare completed work to an answer key helps students develop a new skill. For students with high accuracy combined with low fluency, interventions may include brief, timed working sessions with goal setting to increase motivation and fluent performance. Reinforcers that occur within the classroom naturally (e.g., teacher attention or breaks) may be strategically incorporated into the intervention plan, contingent on achieving predetermined goals or demonstrating a sufficient amount of student effort. Older students may also benefit from explicit instruction on study skills, note taking, self-­questioning, and summarization (Scruggs, Mastropieri, Berkeley, & Graetz, 2010). Similar to BSPs, academic interventions are developed to include positive supports and replacement behaviors for inappropriate behaviors, while considering contextual fit, at the same time. BEA can be used to design effective instructional support. As illustrated in Figure 9.1, if the concern is determined to be a



FBA for Academic Concerns 161 WON’T DO

Antecedent   Tell, show, guide

Feedback Consequence

Goal setting Choice (of tasks, odd or even) Spaced work sessions with breaks Task variation Timed work

Points earned toward reward based on correct and error criteria Reinforce intermittently for meeting a goal   Mystery motivator    Lottery, Token economy, Spinners Graph progress Overcorrection (practice each error three times the correct way) Response cost (lose points for incorrect response) Earn teacher attention (help), peer attention, or break from work

CAN’T DO with low accuracy Antecedent   Tell, show, guide

Feedback Consequence

Use a help signal Model one step at a time Checklist of small steps Give examples and nonexamples Guided practice at each step Organizers or text outlines

3-second time error correction (give answer after 3 seconds then fade) Feedback each time, then fade Reinforce with praise, points Group gives answers on erase board Cover–copy–compare with answer key Overcorrection (practice each error three times the correct way) Earn teacher attention (help), peer attention, or break for small amounts of effort Graph progress against student’s own baseline

CAN’T DO with high accuracy but low fluency Antecedent   Tell, show, guide Goal setting Brief timed practices Increase paced instruction

Feedback Consequence Reward for meeting a goal Points toward reward based on correct and error criteria Graph progress Overcorrection (practice each error three times the correct way) Group gives answers on erase board Earn teacher attention (help), peer attention, or break for increased rates of performance

FIGURE 9.2.  Intervention options to support performance and skill deficits.

162

Specific Problems or Popul ations

“can’t do” through CBM data, the review of permanent products, or error analysis, then BEA is appropriate.

Brief Experimental Analysis (BEA) Researchers have employed BEA to explore which antecedents and consequences should be in place to increase behaviors that are not occurring as expected (Daly, Bonfiglio, Mattson, Persampieri, & Foreman-­Yates, 2006; Daly, Martens, Dool, & Hintze, 1998). Diverse student needs make it difficult to predict which intervention would be most effective for each individual. One solution is BEA, a method to briefly apply a number of different treatments in quick succession in order to estimate what type of instructional treatment produces the greatest gains on academic performance. BEA involves implementing a series of interventions, including contingencies based on academic improvement, modeling with guided practice, fluency practice, or providing work at an easier skill level. BEA helps determine which treatments, in combination or separately, may best improve a particular student’s reading, writing, or math performance relative to a baseline (no treatment) assessment. Treatments are applied in brief 10- to 15-minute treatment trial sessions. At the end of each session, CBM is administered to assess which intervention resulted in the most improved performance relative to a no-­ treatment CBM assessment (i.e., baseline). In essence, conducting a BEA allows teachers and researchers to identify which treatment will produce the greatest academic gain for an individual student over time. Studies have shown that using BEA leads to the identification of effective instructional interventions for students whose problem behavior reflects deficits in reading, math, and/or writing performance (Daly, Persampieri, McCurdy, & Gortmaker, 2005). Moreover, the use of BEA to identify interventions that improve academic performance has also corresponded with improved on-task behavior (Gilberston, Witt, Duhon, & Dufrene, 2008).

Implement Supports and Monitor Change After the team identifies an intervention approach, it should develop a written plan that outlines steps for implementing the intervention and progress monitoring. Behavioral teaching strategies should be employed as part of the plan to teach appropriate ways to request help, respond to feedback, and solve problems to replace interfering problem behaviors. Behavior support team members can support teachers by organizing materials, training students, and providing coaching during initial classroom implementation and problem solving. Interventions must be designed to complement the values and skills of the individual who will implement the intervention and the characteristics of the



FBA for Academic Concerns 163

student. Essentially, there must be “buy-in” from all the individuals involved. If the teacher finds a behavioral reward system to be too cumbersome or in opposition to personally held beliefs, then he or she is unlikely to implement the intervention, no matter how effective it could be. The intervention design and implementation phase is best completed in collaboration with the teacher, family, and student. It is challenging to develop intensive interventions that teachers can actually implement, consistently and effectively, in a busy classroom. One alternative to consider is the use of peer tutors or cooperative learning groups. Both are resources that can increase efficiency while improving student achievement, motivation, and peer social interactions (Ginsburg-­Block, Rohrbeck, & Fantuzzo, 2006; Ginsburg-­Block, Rohrbeck, Lavigne, & Fantuzzo, 2008; Slavin, Cheung, & Lake, 2008). Evaluation of an intervention plan requires frequent progress monitoring. Examples of progress monitoring data may include percentage of accurate classwork completed, teacher estimation of task engagement, or academic growth on weekly CBM probes. Problem behavior such as time off-task or disruption should also be monitored and graphed to determine progress. Often, the teacher completes a tracking chart to report on-­target behaviors. Graphing data from behavior charts gives a visual presentation that allows quick examination of the change in performance trend or level following intervention. Aimlines, or goal lines, are drawn on the graph by connecting the initial level of performance for the first teaching session to the performance level to be met after a certain number of sessions (Burns, Scholin, Kosciolek, & Livingston, 2010). Aimlines are used to gauge whether a student’s rate of progress is above, below, or on target toward meeting the goal (Wolery, Bailey, & Sugai, 1988). If the student’s problem behavior and/or academic performance do not improve sufficiently to meet goals, treatment integrity should be investigated. Treatment integrity measures whether the teacher is actually implementing the intervention as planned. If the treatment is being implemented with integrity, then alternative hypotheses about the function of the behavior or determination of “won’t do versus can’t do” should be investigated (see Figure 9.1).

Case Examples In this section, we provide two case examples that demonstrate how the FBA process can be used to improve problem behavior associated with academic issues. First, we provide general descriptions of the case examples. Then we walk through the assessment and intervention process presented in Figure 9.1 to illustrate specific points. These case examples are fictitious, but are drawn from our experience across a range of students in elementary and middle school and represent common behavioral and academic issues seen in this age group of children.

164

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Case Example 1: Ava Ava is a seventh grader referred to the behavioral support team because of her frequent disruption during seatwork that results in low work completion. When teachers prompt her to work, she refuses to follow directions, talks out, gets angry, or pushes away her work. Although she is doing well in choir, fitness, and math classes, she turns in about 40% of work in other academic courses. She often fails to turn in work requiring reading or writing, and her handwriting is difficult to read.

Functional Assessment for Ava After reviewing the Request for Assistance Form (see Figure 9.3), the behavior support team notes that Ava is most frequently off-task when she is asked to work independently in specific subjects (i.e., language arts, history, and science). The team determines that further intervention is warranted, and an interview with Ava’s teacher (Figure 9.4) is conducted by the school psychologist. The teacher reports that Ava is most likely to be disruptive when working on writing tasks. Several strategies have been attempted to increase student compliance (e.g., prompts, changing seat, sending notes home) but few of these strategies have addressed potential academic deficits. Two different testable hypotheses are (1) Ava acts resistant or disruptive when given reading and writing assignments to get teacher attention or (2) the work is too difficult for her to complete. Two classroom observations of Ava in history and in language arts classes indicate she was on-task 10% of the time, although her peer comparison was ontask for 92% of the time. Ava disrupted class activities (i.e., talking out) 20% of the time. Ava’s teachers also provided attention by responding to her disruptions and by prompting her to complete her work. Ava wrote only about 20% of the number of words written by her classmates in language arts. She completed 30% of her history worksheet, and of that work, 65% of her responses were correct. These observations and a review of permanent products support the hypothesis that Ava’s disruptive and noncompliant behaviors may be maintained by teacher attention as well as escape from seatwork. However, at this point, it is difficult to ascertain Ava’s ability to independently complete the work. Figure 9.5 shows Ava’s CBM results. Ava’s initial reading and writing performance are below the grade-level median score (peers) and a national normed benchmark (Hosp, Hosp, & Howell, 2007). To determine whether Ava would increase scores with an incentive, a second CBM is administered with Ava in reading and writing. Scores improved when she was offered incentive choices (e.g., helping her teacher in class, earning a break from work) on CBM reading and writing assessments but remained below expected levels. Based on these results it is hypothesized that Ava’s difficulties in the classroom are due to a skill deficit, and she may respond to a combined instructional and motivational strategy,



FBA for Academic Concerns 165

Request for Assistance Form Date:  11/7/14

Teacher/Team:  Davenport

IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Ava Situations

Grade:  7

Problem Behaviors

Independent seatwork in language arts, history, science

Frequently off-task, fails to complete work, and poor handwriting skills. Refuses to do work and gets frustrated or angry when prompted to work.

Most Common Result A lot of prompts to do work.

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

She often has to come in at lunch or misses fun activities to complete work. This has not improved her work completion though.

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  Stay on-task and turn in 70% or more correct work.

What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified assignments to

     Changed seating

 X   Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

     Changed curriculum

     Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

Other?

activities

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

 X   Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

     Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely

expected behavior about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class

student

contract with the student

Other?

behaviors in class

program

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?  X   Loss of privileges (fun activity or lunchtime)

 X   Note or phone call to the      Office referral

    Time-out

    Detention

Other?

student’s parents

     Referral to school counselor      Meeting with the

student’s parents

 X  Reprimand      Individual meeting

with the student

FIGURE 9.3.  Request for Assistance Form—Ava. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin (1999). Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.

166

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Ava   Age:  12    Grade:  7   Date:  11/14/14 Person(s) interviewed:  Ms. Jordan (language arts teacher) and Mr. Coates (history teacher) Interviewer:  Mr. Lopez (school psychologist) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Ava is a very sweet and quiet student when not upset.

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? During class, Ava completes work or turns in work approximately 40% of the time. She has poor use of class time, doodles, just watches peers, seldom answers questions, and hesitates to speak up or ask for help. She prefers to do the work alone and has verbal outbursts or argues when she is prompted to work on her own or in groups. She even pretends to work to be left alone. Her written work is very difficult to read. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Daily, since written work is required in most classes. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? She is on-task about 20% of the time during independent seatwork. Her verbal outbursts are brief, but she just gives up and refuses to do anything. How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? It is not a dangerous problem, but she needs constant prompting.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

9:00–9:05

Homeroom

9:05–9:55

Math

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur? Low        High 1  2  3  4  5  6

Off-task, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers, teacher

10:00–10:50 Science/Social Studies Off-task, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers, teacher

11:00

Lunch

1  2  3  4  5  6

12:00

Reading

1:00

Gym

1  2  3  4  5  6

Specials

1  2  3  4  5  6

Off-task, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers, teacher

(continued)

FIGURE 9.4.  Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—­Ava. The form itself is adapted from March et al. (2000). Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Adapted by permission.



FBA for Academic Concerns 167

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.) Independent and group seatwork.

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) During reading and writing tasks, which is almost always required in her classes.

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Recess or gym time—nonacademic times.

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) She has difficulties with peer relationships/has very few friends.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Ava escapes completing seatwork on her own or completing work with peers, she sometimes misses recess, and she has never earned the “Fun Friday” activity.

FIGURE 9.4.  (continued)

contingent on improved work performance, when given writing tasks in class. Analysis of Ava’s written responses on the CBM assessments shows that she writes fewer words than her classmates and provides few details or ideas regarding the main topic. Error analysis further revealed she incorrectly uses capitalization and punctuation and has poor word spacing. Given that these errors were also noted in the incentive condition, the results of the CBM assessments further confirm that Ava has writing skill deficits that may improve with more intensive instructional support.

Develop Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior As illustrated in Figure 9.1, a series of assessments, a teacher interview, class observations, a review of permanent products, and CBMs have been conducted to gather information to develop a hypothesis explaining Ava’s classroom behavior. In summary, during seatwork requiring writing tasks, Ava is noncompliant, off-task, and disruptive, resulting in low writing productivity with few relevant details and many punctuation errors. Given that Ava’s performance remained lower than that of her peers when attempting to earn teacher attention or a break for improved performance, it is hypothesized Ava’s problem behavior is due to a skill deficit that requires instructional support for writing fluency and content. This conclusion is presented in Figure 9.6.

168

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Correct writing sequences per 3 minutes

Writing 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Ava

Reward contingent on increased score

Peers

Benchmark

Peers

Benchmark

Words read correctly per minute

Reading 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Ava

Reward contingent on increased score

FIGURE 9.5.  CBM results—­Ava.

Develop Initial Supports for Ava Because Ava is exhibiting a “can’t do” problem, a BEA is conducted to test hypotheses regarding the specific type of instructional support needed to improve writing outcomes. Three instructional strategies are given to Ava prior to administration of a CBM writing task to evaluate changes in writing compared to the no-­treatment CBM outcome. First, Ava spends several minutes brainstorming and jotting down two main ideas and three details for each main idea to include in the writing task to promote writing fluency and the use of supporting details. Second, an editing checklist, which includes checking for capitalization, spacing, and punctuation is provided. Ava reviews this checklist as she completes the writing task to check whether she properly uses capitalization, spacing, and punctuation in her writing. And finally, a contingent reward is used to motivate efforts to improve writing production. That is, Ava is given a goal (e.g., number of correct writing sequences



FBA for Academic Concerns 169

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

In-seat work. Expectation to work 1. Refuses to do work. quietly in seat, raise hand, and wait quietly for help.

Teacher prompts; misses recess and weekly fun activities.

Teacher prompts to do work.

Escapes work

Expectation to comply with directions.

2. Pouts or gets verbally angry and pushes papers away.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  During seatwork Ava is escaping from completing work by getting teacher attention and     avoiding work that she is unable to do. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

2

Not at all sure 1

FIGURE 9.6.  Propose a testable explanation—­Ava.

Correct Writing Sequences per 3 minutes

per minute) before completing the writing task. After completing the writing task, Ava earns points toward a preferred reward (e.g., teacher attention or a break from work) when the writing goal is met. Results of the BEA to select a writing intervention are presented in Figure 9.7. The BEA began with the administration of all three strategies—­brainstorming main ideas, self-­monitoring checklist, and the contingent reward—­as an intervention package together to determine the effect on Ava’s correct writing sequence performance. Next, strategies were

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 No intervention

Outline + Checklist + Reward

Checklist + Reward

FIGURE 9.7.  BEA—Ava.

Reward

170

Specific Problems or Popul ations

removed one by one to determine the simplest but most effective intervention on the writing outcome. A comparison of the two interventions to improve writing outcomes shows that the most effective intervention included all three strategies: the outline, the writing and editing checklist, and the contingent reward.

Intervention Design for Ava The initial hypothesis indicates Ava’s problem behavior is maintained by teacher attention and escape from work that she is unable to do. Ava needs instructional support to complete writing tasks that are frequently given in class. Thus an intervention that includes an outline, the self-­monitoring checklist, and the contingent reward is implemented. This combination of elements increased Ava’s writing during the BEA. The behavioral support team member and classroom teacher decide to collect progress-­monitoring data using correct word sequences (CWS; two adjacent, correctly spelled words acceptable within the context of the phrase to a native speaker of the English language) at least four times a week during a writing task in Ava’s language arts and history classes. The degree to which the treatment was accurately implemented in the classroom (fidelity) is estimated by having the teacher check off steps used on the teacher’s intervention script, outlining intervention steps, and a review of the written work produced when the intervention is used. Ava’s goal is set at 50 CWS. In order for the goal to be obtained after one month, an aimline was drawn that connected the mean of the baseline points (9) and the goal (50). Figure 9.8 outlines the plan.

Implement Supports and Monitor Behavior Change and Academic Performance Ava’s teacher implements the intervention during language arts and history. Ava’s progress during baseline and intervention are shown in Figure 9.9. In order to determine whether Ava is on her way to meeting her goal, a trendline is drawn for baseline and treatment on a graph (Parker, Tindal, & Stein, 1992). As shown in Figure 9.9, Ava’s trendline has improved with intervention, and she is making steady gains toward meeting the goal of 50 CWS by the end of the month.

Case Example 2: Lucas Lucas, a second grader, was referred by his general education teacher to the behavior support team because of frequent noncompliant and disruptive behavior during class, especially being out of his seat. He frequently distracts other students by trying to talk with them when they are supposed to be doing independent seatwork, which prevents them from completing their work. Lucas frequently completes less than 50% of his work, and the work he does turn in is difficult to read. He often misses recess as a consequence for engaging in problem behavior and not completing his classwork.

Sample TEACHER INTERVENTION SCRIPT The purpose of this intervention is to provide the student with a brainstorming task—the Written Work and Editing Checklist—and motivation to help the student toward completing written work well on her own.

Materials Needed: Written Work and Editing Checklist Tracking Chart

Procedures: 1. Prewriting support a. Tell the student to read the questions or think about the writing topic for 1 minute. b. Tell the student to write down two main ideas. c. Prompt the student to write at least three details under each of the main ideas. d. Prompt or ask questions to expand on content needed to complete the writing task. 2. Give the student her goal (beating her previous score or benchmark). 3. Prompt the student to use her editing checklist during the writing time. 4. Time the writing session (10–15 minutes). 5. At end of writing session, count the correct number of writing sequences and write the number on the chart. 6. Praise the student for successful writing and give feedback on how to increase her low writing score. 7. Give a reward when the goal is met.

WRITTEN WORK AND EDITING CHECKLIST     Write about main topic that needs to be answered.     Add at least three details that fit topic or answer questions.     Ask teacher or peer for help when unable to write answer or details.     Check for capitalization after every period.     Check for punctuation.     Check for legible handwriting and spaces between words.

FIGURE 9.8.  Sample intervention script for Ava’s teacher including Written Work and Editing Checklist. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

171

172

speciFic proBlems or popUl Ations 100

Fidelity as percent steps used Correct word sequences

90

Number or Percent

80 70 60

Intervention trendline Goal line

50 40 30 20

Baseline trendline

10 Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan 21-Jan 22-Jan 26-Jan 27-Jan 28-Jan 29-Jan 3-Feb 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 10-Feb

0

FIGUre 9. 9. Intervention results—Ava.

Functional Assessment for Lucas After receiving the Request for Assistance Form (see Figure 9.10), an interview with Lucas’s teacher (Figure 9.11) is conducted. The referral indicates Lucas is off-task and engages in behaviors that prevent him from completing his work and disrupts his classmates. Lucas’s teacher has tried several strategies for managing his behavior, specifically giving reminders about expected behavior, making oral agreements with the student, and implementing consequences (e.g., loss of privileges, phone calls home, reprimands, and office referrals). The teacher interview suggests that Lucas is more likely to be off-task (e.g., out of his seat, talking with peers) during academic subjects, specifically math, science/social studies, and reading. Lucas is at his most disruptive during independent seatwork in academic classes. Lucas was observed once during math class and once during reading. He was observed to be on-task 50% of the time and disruptive (out of seat, talk-outs, and bothering peers) 45% of the time. He only completed 65% of his work, although all the work completed was accurate. A peer comparison observation showed his classmates were on-task 89% of the time and completed the work with 90% accuracy, on average. Lucas received teacher attention and peer attention for 20% and 30% of the observation period, respectively, typically occurring after exhibiting disruptive behavior. These results support the hypothesis that Lucas engages in problem behavior to gain attention from the teacher and his peers. Furthermore, Lucas is able to do the work when he remains on-task, but he chooses to engage in problem behavior for attention.



FBA for Academic Concerns 173

Request for Assistance Form Date:  10/30/14

Teacher/Team:  Taylor

IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Lucas Situations



Grade:  2

Problem Behaviors

All day, but major times are during seatwork and when given directions

Out of seat, disruptive outbursts (e.g., noncompliant, and not working on his own.)

Most Common Result Prompt to follow direction and then ignore disruption until he complies. Misses recess almost daily and sent to office once a week.

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

When he gets one-on-one attention he does more work. If he earns 10 stickers for following instructions, then he gets to go to the principal’s office for a prize. This intervention has not been very successful. Sometimes, he is off-task on purpose just to get instructions to follow and then earn a sticker.

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  Stay seated and work on worksheets with few reminders (two or fewer) to stay on-task.

What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified assignments to

 X   Changed seating

     Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

     Changed curriculum

 X   Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

activities

Other? Rewards such as stickers and snacks

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

 X   Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

 X   Reward program for

     Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely expected behavior

about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class

student

contract with the student

Other?

behaviors in class

program

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?  X   Loss of privileges  (recess)  X   Note or phone call to the  X   Office referral

Other?

student’s parents

    Time-out

    Detention

 X  Reprimand

     Referral to school

     Meeting with the

     Individual meeting

counselor

student’s parents

with the student

FIGURE 9.10.  Request for Assistance Form—Lucas. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin (1999). Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.

174

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Lucas   Age:  8      Grade:  2    Date:  11/06/14 Person(s) interviewed:  Ms. Hart (general education teacher) Interviewer:  Ms. Ellis (action team member) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  Lucas’s strength is in a desire to please. He enjoys one-on-one attention.

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? During class, Lucas wanders around, gets into my materials, bothers other students, and stands by other classmates’ desks. He does not start on his work until other students have almost finished theirs. Then he hurriedly finishes it, doing sloppy work and sometimes copying directly off of his neighbor. He refuses to sit down or complete work when told to and sometimes yells, cries, or hits his head against his desk. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Throughout the day, but particularly when he has to complete work on his own. His outbursts are about once or twice a week. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? The entire work time. How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? I need Lucas to be on-task and complete his worksheets so that I can focus on other students without having to constantly remind him to stay seated and work on his assignment.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

9:00–9:05

Homeroom

Out of seat

Low       High 1  2  3  4  5  6

9:05–9:55

Math

Out of seat, bothers peers, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers

10:00–10:50 Science/Social Studies

Out of seat, bothers peers, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers

11:00

Lunch

12:00

Reading

1:00

Gym

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

1  2  3  4  5  6 Out of seat, bothers peers, incomplete work

1  2  3  4  5  6 Peers 1  2  3  4  5  6 (continued)

FIGURE 9.11.  Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—­ Lucas. The form itself is adapted from March et al. (2000). Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Adapted by permission.



FBA for Academic Concerns 175

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

He often gets out of his seat when asked to complete individual seatwork during math, reading, science, and social studies.

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) During math and writing tasks.

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) He does better when he is working in a group.

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) He frequently appears tired at school and the principal and I have tried to build relationships with the family to see if there are needs at home that could be met.

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.) Lucas is sent to the office almost weekly for behavior outbursts. He is also sent to the office during recess every other day to complete work or because of noncompliance issues.

FIGURE 9.11.  (continued)

A permanent product review of 2 weeks of worksheets in math, science/ social studies, and reading classes showed that Lucas correctly completed the work he attempted 75% to 100% of the time, but he seldom completed more than 50% of the required task. This analysis provides additional support that Lucas has the academic skills to complete work but is not staying engaged long enough to do so. As shown in Figure 9.12, Lucas performed above grade level in CBM reading but scored below the class median and grade level benchmark (Hosp et al., 2007) in CBM math and writing. When given the opportunity to earn an incentive (e.g., helping his teacher or doing an activity with a peer) contingent on increasing his score on a second math and writing CBM assessment, Lucas’s scores improved to the expected benchmark level. Given that Lucas’s on-task behavior was very low compared to peers but improved with incentives, Lucas’s difficulties in the classroom are likely due to a “won’t do” performance issue. Thus, when given work in class, his academic performance and class behavior may improve when provided with a motivational strategy contingent on improved work performance.

176

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Words read corect per minute

Reading 100 80 60 40 20 0 Lucas

Reward contingent on increased score (not conducted)

Peers

Benchmark

Correct word sequences per 3 minutes

Writing 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Lucas

Reward contingent on increased score

Peers

Benchmark

Digits correct per minute

Math 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Lucas

Reward contingent on increased score

Peers

FIGURE 9.12.  CBM results—­Lucas.

Benchmark



FBA for Academic Concerns 177

Develop a Testable Hypothesis for Function of Behavior When asked to do independent seat work, Lucas is off-task and exhibits disruptive behavior, which results in low rates of work completion. It is hypothesized that he has a “won’t do” problem in reading and math, and his work completion would increase if offered an effective motivational intervention. Classroom observation data suggest Lucas may be motivated to work for positive teacher attention. Finally, Lucas’s teacher reports that he is capable of doing the work, but he rushes to complete work at the end of a working period because he has spent most of his time out of his seat and interrupting his peers. The testable hypothesis generated for Lucas is that, during seatwork, Lucas gets out of his seat to get peer and teacher attention (see Figure 9.13). In summary, his off-task behavior is reinforced by teacher and peer attention, while task completion is not reinforced by teacher or peer attention. Although Lucas’s peers and teachers do not always give him (positive) attention when he is disruptive, he receives positive attention on a variable, intermittent reinforcement schedule, which maintains his problem behaviors. Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

In-seat work. Expectation to work 1. Gets out of his seat, quietly in seat, raise hand, talks with peers, and wait quietly for help. incomplete and sloppy work. Teacher prompts to sit and do work.

2. Yells, cries, or hits

Expectation to comply with directions.

desk.

Consequence Teacher prompts; able to copy work from peers; peer attention; sent to office. Sent to office.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  During seatwork, Lucas is escaping from completing work on his own and gains teacher     reprimands (attention) and peer attention by getting out of his seat, talking to others,     copying other’s work, or going to the teacher’s desk. 2.  When the teacher pushes with several prompts to sit and do work, Lucas escapes work by     yelling and getting sent to the office. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

2

FIGURE 9.13.  Propose a testable explanation—­Lucas.

Not at all sure 1

178

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Intervention Design for Lucas One hypothesis developed from the results of the FBA indicates that Lucas’s problem behavior is maintained by social attention (from his teacher or peers). Because Lucas has the academic skills to complete his classwork, an intervention can be designed to minimize the teacher and peer attention associated with problem behavior and instead provide attention contingent on work completion. Lucas will be given the chance to earn time to work with a peer after completing work quietly on his own and receive teacher praise contingent on meeting an academic goal. As shown in Figure 9.14, a point and lotto system was included as part of the intervention. Specifically, Lucas earns teacher praise and one point for “staying on-task” for a certain amount of time and one point for completing 70% or greater correct work. He will earn a certain number of points to select a paper from a lotto jar to reveal the reward he has earned. Together, the members of the behavior support team and the teacher who referred Lucas decide both academic and class behavior will be monitored. Specifically, progress monitoring data will be collected daily to assess the teacher-­rated percentage of on-task behavior and the percentage of work completed correctly on two worksheets a day. The intervention goal is determined to be 80% or greater for on-task behavior and 80% or greater for work completed correctly within 3 weeks. Finally, the teacher will gather intervention fidelity data by reviewing completed work and recordings on a behavior chart as the intervention is used in the classroom (see Figure 9.15).

Implement Supports and Monitor Behavior Change and Academic Performance The graph in Figure 9.16 depicts the data collected for Lucas’s classroom performance. Treatment fidelity is estimated by having the teacher check off steps used on the teacher’s intervention script and review of the behavior chart and work completed when the intervention is used. Using the same procedures described in Ava’s case study, an aimline was drawn connecting baseline data and the goal (i.e., 80% or greater on-task and 80% or greater for work completed correctly within 3 weeks). Baseline and intervention trendlines for work accuracy percentages were also drawn to estimate progress toward the goal within 3 weeks. As shown in Figure 9.16, results on worksheets completed during reading and math assignments with intervention produced improved work completion at 80% or more, relative to the median baseline score of 40% of work completed on independent seatwork prior to intervention.

Summary of Case Examples These two case examples illustrate the importance of gathering information about both problem behavior and academic performance. These procedures can be used to develop a testable hypothesis that describes why problem behaviors

Sample TEACHER INTERVENTION SCRIPT This intervention is designed to provide motivational rewards to increase independent work completion and on-task behavior during independent seatwork.

Materials Needed: Weekly Work Tracking Chart and lotto jar with numbers that represent different rewards (1 to 6)

Procedures: In the morning and afternoon 1.  Place the Weekly Work Tracking Chart on the student’s desk. 2.  Prompt behaviors: Tell the student that 1 point is earned for “staying on-task” for “almost all the time” (>80%) rating. Staying on-task looks like (a) pockets stay on seat, (b) doing the task as directed quietly on his own, or (c) raising hand quietly when he needs help. He will also earn 1 point for completing >70% correct work. 3.  Tell goal: Tell the student how many points he must earn to choose a reward from the lotto jar.

During independent seatwork (repeat steps for each worksheet) 4.  Give time limit and reminder: Tell the student the time to complete the work and that he may earn points for staying on-task and completing work. 5.  Estimate the percentage of work correct and percentage of time on-task on the student’s chart after work time. 6.  If points earned:

Praise and give points. When the student has met the goal, let him quietly select one number from the lotto jar to reveal the reward he has earned. Determine the best time during that day for him to receive the reward.

7.  If no points earned:

Give constructive feedback on how to earn points on the next worksheet.

FIGURE 9.14.  Sample intervention script for Lucas’s teacher.

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

179

180

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Worksheet subject

Staying on-task

Correct work

New points total

Reading 0% Not at all

50% Some

0 point

0 point

70–100% A lot

1 POINT!

1 2 3 4 0%

50%

0 point

0 point

70–100%

1 POINT!

Math 0% Not at all

50% Some

0 point

0 point

1 POINT!

0% Not at all

50% Some

70–100% A lot

0 point

0 point

Reward Lotto number selected

70–100% A lot

0%

50%

0 point

0 point

70–100%

1 2 3 4

1 POINT!

History 0% Not at all

50% Some

1 POINT!

0 point

0 point

1 POINT!

70–100% A lot

0% Not at all

50% Some

70–100% A lot

0 point

0 point

70–100% A lot

1 2 3 4

Science 0% Not at all

50% Some

0 point

0 point

1 POINT!

1 2 3 4

1 POINT!

Goal: ___ points to pick a Reward Lotto number. Rewards: 1 = Computer time with friend 2 = Help teacher 3 = Work with a classmate 4 = Help a classmate

FIGURE 9.15.  Lucas’s tracking chart for staying on-task and accurate work completion. From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

occur and why academic behaviors are not occurring as expected. Engaging appropriately in academic instructional tasks and in problem behaviors at the same time are incompatible behaviors. Therefore, positively reinforcing completion of academic tasks that provide the same reinforcer that previously maintained problem behavior may be effective in decreasing off-task problem behavior. At the same time, it is essential to identify when students need additional instructional support to successfully complete tasks that produce reinforcement.

Conclusion This chapter outlined the FBA process for academic concerns and provided case examples in order to illustrate the process. The concept of BEA was introduced and illustrated. It is important to note that academic concerns do not occur solely

181

FBA for Academic Concerns 120

100

Intervention trendline

Percentage

80

Goal Percentage on task

60 Percentage work accuracy 40

Fidelity as percentage of steps used

20

Baseline trendline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline 15-Oct 16-Oct 17-Oct 18-Oct 19-Oct 22-Oct 23-Oct 24-Oct 25-Oct 26-Oct 29-Oct 30-Oct 31-Oct 1-Nov 2-Nov 5-Nov

0

FIGUre 9.16. Intervention results—Lucas.

when work is too hard or when the child is below grade level. Instead, academic concerns can be more broadly defined as times when the task at hand and instructional strategies in the classroom do not maximize the child’s on-task behavior and learning. These classroom components might vary for different academic subject areas or even for topics within an academic subject. For example, within the subject of writing, the instructional environment may differ when the curriculum covers creative writing versus persuasive writing. The FBA process is most effective when conducted in accordance with the school and classroom culture and in collaboration with the teacher, family, and students. The case examples illustrate how behavioral concerns exist within the instructional environment and how the teacher can engage in the FBA process with the behavior support team member to help improve both the behavior and academic success of students.

Chapter 10

Functional Behavioral Assessment with Preschool‑Age Children

Introduction The focus of this book thus far has been on FBA-BSP with students in K–12 education, with an emphasis on elementary and middle school. Early childhood education staff also often struggle with behavior challenges in their classrooms or childcare settings. In this chapter, we examine whether and how FBA-BSP can be used with very young children (2 to 5 years of age) to alleviate problem behavior and teach appropriate replacement behavior. We discuss findings from relevant studies, the types of behaviors and circumstances in which FBA-BSP is warranted for this age group, how the multi-­tiered SWPBS approach described in Chapter 2 would be applied in early childhood education (ECE), unique considerations, and issues of contextual fit for FBA-BSP in ECE, as well as provide a case example.

Is the FBA‑BSP Process Warranted in Early Childhood Education? Developmentally, we expect young children to engage in “problem” behaviors. At this age, they are often impulsive, disruptive, easily distracted, and challenging to adults (Campbell, 1995). The same behavior in a middle school student that would be highly problematic for his daily functioning (such as moving quickly from activity to activity, having a difficult time sitting still while an adult teaches a lengthy lesson, or crying in response to a peer taking his pencil) is developmentally appropriate for the typical preschooler. Thus, does it make sense to suggest behavioral assessment and intervention with very young children? In this chapter, we argue that, for some children, it does. 182



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 183

With a supportive context, predictable routines, and consistent, appropriate consequences, most young children should be able to consistently follow behavioral expectations. Problem behaviors should typically be short term. For some young children, however, problem behavior will be meaningfully discrepant from same-age peers in severity, frequency, and duration. Chronic or severe problem behaviors in young children bode poorly in terms of negative short- and long-term consequences for the child and his/her family. Sadly, these children are at risk for social isolation; poor adjustment and achievement in school; ongoing negative interactions with parents, teachers, and other adults; and even challenges with employment as adults (e.g., Campbell, 1995; Reid, 1993). An estimated 10–15% of preschool-­age children consistently exhibit problem behavior that puts them in peril of being diagnosed with an emotional or behavioral disorder in later childhood (Campbell, 1995). At the same time, research shows that identifying and intervening early with these young children significantly reduces the impact of problem behavior later in life (Dunlap et al., 2006). A number of studies have expressly demonstrated that FBA-BSP is an effective methodology for responding to problem behavior in young children, at home or in their ECE settings (e.g., Blair, Fox, & Lentini, 2010; Duda, Clarke, Fox, & Dunlap, 2008). The critical importance of early intervention for these children is recognized and underscored by the Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Early Childhood (DEC) who state, in their position statement, “DEC strongly believes that the early identification of children with serious challenging behavior is critical to providing effective interventions that will decrease the likelihood of poor academic and social outcomes” (2007, p. 1). The DEC advances this position further in their most recent publication of recommended practices, in which they state, “Practitioners use functional assessment and related prevention, promotion, and intervention strategies across environments to prevent and address challenging behavior” (2014, p. 10).

Multi‑Tiered SWPBS and ECE Multi-­tiered SWPBS, employed within a functional framework, can be applied in ECE settings, not just in K–12 settings. For the purposes of the following discussion, we limit ECE settings to classroom- or center-­based contexts, and not to home-based daycare or other small-group childcare settings. Theoretically, the principles of SWPBS could also be applied in those settings, but the logistical parameters of center-­based settings (e.g., larger groups of children, multiple staff, greater accessibility to team-based collaboration and behavioral expertise) make those settings more closely aligned with the SWPBS approach to preventing and responding to problem behavior discussed in this volume. Thinking and responding functionally to problem behavior across hierarchical tiers of behavior support can be applied in preschool in a similar manner to

184

Specific Problems or Popul ations

that for K–12 education. A multi-­tiered model for ECE, based on key concepts in SWPBS, has been proposed by Hemmeter and colleagues (The Teaching Pyramid; Hemmeter, Ostrosky, & Fox, 2006) and also by Conroy and colleagues (Conroy, Davis, Fox, & Brown, 2002). In both conceptual models, and similar to the model discussed in Chapter 2 of this book, behavior support strategies that promote positive behavior through proactive prevention strategies are implemented universally for all classrooms, groups, and children. At the next tier of support, children identified in need of additional support or at risk for social or communicative problems receive targeted interventions. At the final tier, children who continue to display chronic or severe problem behavior despite effective universal and targeted group supports, are referred for more intense and individualized assessment and intervention, often through FBA-BSP. Similarities and key concepts in implementation across these models, as applied to ECE, are discussed in greater detail in the rest of this chapter.

Tier 1 The first tier in a SWPBS approach in ECE would set out to examine and improve variables that affect the learning environment and the daily interactions among children and adults. Developmentally, preschool-­age children are active, curious, impulsive, and self-­ focused (Campbell, 1995). A classroom of 10 to 20 children between the ages of 3 and 5 can hum along like a bubbly, active, but well-­controlled beehive, or it can descend into daily chaos and noisy behavior with frequent aggressive or negative interactions between peers. The behavioral barometer of a classroom or daycare center depends much more on the behavior management skills of the adult staff than on any combination of children or child characteristics. This is good news! With some forethought, clarity of expectations, and consistency of consequences, adult staff can create an ECE environment in which the majority of the children are happily, actively, and appropriately engaged in the day-to-day learning activities. As in Tier 1 applied in K–12, staff should identify three to five positively stated expectations to govern child behavior (such as “Be Kind,” “Be an Active Learner,” and “Be Safe”). These expectations and the corresponding behavioral expectations should be actively and repeatedly taught to all of the children along with examples and opportunities to role-play expectations in each of the different routines during the day (e.g., outside play, mealtime, circle time, choice time). Teachers should consistently reinforce children for following the expectations and provide frequent reminders throughout the year about the rules and behavioral expectations. Giving children clear feedback when their behavior is appropriate or inappropriate will help the children learn the behaviors and social skills that they should be using. When a new child is enrolled in the classroom or daycare group, the teacher should take the time to teach the expectations to the new student. Peers can be recruited to help demonstrate appropriate behavior



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 185

for the new student. As with K–12 classes, having a clear, foundational set of behavioral expectations that is known and understood by all the children in the classroom and reinforced by the adults will go a long way toward reducing many of the problem behaviors that could occur in a classroom where children do not understand the teacher’s expectations or where appropriate behavior is not consistently reinforced. In addition to establishing clear behavioral expectations, staff can promote a learning environment with fewer behavioral disruptions by preparing: (1) how the classroom is laid out; (2) the quality, type, and availability of materials accessible to children; (3) the daily schedule and routines; and (4) developmentally appropriate instruction that is well matched to children’s current skills (Conroy et al., 2002).

Physical Environment and Materials Poorly planned physical environments or material accessibility can create a noisy, overcrowded environment in which children frequently walk into or trip over each other and fight over materials. Well-­planned environments, on the other hand, provide enough space for children to move around and work on their own projects and activities without the impulse to grab or take materials away from others. Multiple books and educational resources have been devoted to this topic. Montessori preschool classrooms, in particular, attend to the physical environment and the availability, accessibility, and quality of materials, and their corresponding impact on children’s behavior and learning (e.g., Lillard, 2007). In terms of preparing the physical environment, furniture should be sized appropriately. There should be clearly demarcated spaces for different activities (quiet zone, active zone, dramatic play, etc.) so that children can engage in one activity without being interrupted by noise or presence of children working on another activity. There should be clear paths for walking from one area to another so that children don’t have to step over each other to get to the bathroom or other corners of the room. Children should also be able to easily reach or put away materials on their own so they do not need to compete for teachers’ attention to get the materials they need (Lillard, 2007). Finally, materials should be in good condition, and there should be an adequate amount available so that children do not tussle with peers to access the items they need or want.

Daily Routines and Schedules The daily schedule can set the classroom up for failure or success. Children of this age cannot be expected to sit still for long periods of time listening to an adult delivering academic content as they might in upper elementary or middle grades. Young children are active learners. Preschool classroom schedules should allow for discovery and opportunities for children to explore their own

186

Specific Problems or Popul ations

interests at their own pace (Lillard, 2007). The day should include time for active play, quiet work, meals, activities in small and large groups, and rest. At the same time, staff should consider how one routine might affect the next (Conroy et al., 2002). For instance, the schedule should not require children to come in from a highly active outdoor playtime and go immediately into rest or naptime. Such a schedule will set the staff up for daily struggles with getting children to meet behavioral expectations. Rather, a schedule that allows children to easily transition from one activity to the next will more likely result in effective classroom behavior management.

Developmentally Appropriate Practice Finally, teachers and assistants should consider the extent to which early childhood instruction is developmentally appropriate and well matched to the children’s current age and skill levels. If it is too difficult or too simple, children will be inattentive, bored, or unhappy, which will create behavioral issues. If it is on target and delivered well, children will be engaged, active learners and behavioral issues will be much less likely. For more information on developmentally appropriate practice, see Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8 (Copple & Bredekamp. 2009). Each of these elements (expectations, physical environment, materials, instruction, and schedule) is critical for effective classroom behavior management in ECE and also fit into a functional behavioral framework (Conroy et al., 2002; Hemmeter et al., 2006). When each of these elements has been well considered and delivered, there will be fewer inappropriate bids for teacher attention and less need for children to act out to escape negative interactions, difficult instruction, or loud, chaotic environments. Rather, by providing a peaceful, predictable, and effective learning environment, the majority of children will follow expectations and engage in appropriate behavior most of the time. These Tier 1 universal preventive measures will significantly reduce the number of children who will need additional behavioral support from the staff or an outside behavioral consultant. Conroy et al. (2002) created a checklist called the Environmental Functional Assessment, which lists a series of probing questions addressing each of the areas discussed above. ECE staff could use such a checklist to assess the extent to which their current environment is set up to create a well-run classroom free of behavioral challenges as well as to identify areas for improvement.

Tier 2 An estimated 10–15% of preschool-­age children will continue to demonstrate challenging behaviors that are significantly discrepant from their same-age peers (Campbell, 1995). As with K–12 students, many of those children will respond



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 187

well to Tier 2 interventions targeted at the group level or at specific skill deficits. In preschool-­age children, behavioral issues often arise from an inability to effectively communicate needs and wants or from a lack of understanding of appropriate social behavior and interaction. Thus research suggests focusing on communication and social skills issues at the Tier 2 level in preschool (Conroy et al., 2002; Hemmeter et al., 2006). An assessment tool, such as the Behavior Assessment System for Children—­Second Edition (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004), or any other reliable, valid tool that the behavior specialist is familiar with, should be chosen to screen eligible students to identify problems in communication or social skills. At this age level, screening tools typically consist of a parent and/or teacher report. Those students who appear to have a deficit in communication, social, or behavioral skills could be further assessed to identify their specific skill deficit(s). A targeted intervention (e.g., functional communication training or social skills play group) could be implemented to address the child’s specific areas of concern. Hemmeter and colleagues list a number of evidence-­based interventions that can be implemented at this tier of intervention (Hemmeter et al., 2006). The child’s progress should be regularly monitored, and the intervention should be maintained or adjusted as needed until the child’s goal is reached. Alternatively, teachers and parents may hypothesize that the child engages in problem behavior in order to receive adult or peer attention. In that case, the child may be an appropriate candidate for a CICO intervention, described briefly in Chapter 2. In Crone et al. (2010), one chapter is dedicated to how CICO can be modified to be used in preschool-­age populations. The reader is referred to this resource for further information on how to implement CICO within a preschool setting.

Tier 3 Some preschool-­age children may not respond to behavioral supports at either the Tier 1 or Tier 2 level. Alternatively, their behavior may be so significantly discrepant from same-age peers it is immediately apparent that they require additional, individualized behavior support. These children may be at risk for developing an emotional or behavioral disorder and for experiencing a host of negative life consequences, from peer rejection to school failure. These children will likely benefit from a FBA-BSP. The remainder of this chapter is dedicated to describing the FBA-BSP process as applied to children in ECE.

Problem Behavior in Young Children First, we discuss the type of problem behaviors that are likely to be the focus of a FBA-BSP in ECE and distinguish these behaviors from that of typical, developmentally normal behavior for 2- to 5-year-old children. Anyone who has worked

188

Specific Problems or Popul ations

with or spent a lot of time with preschool-­age children knows that the behavior of a typical young child can be challenging. Children of this age are just beginning to learn to share. It is not uncommon for two 3-year-olds to get in a “tugof-war” over a preferred toy or to hear indignant assertions such as “It’s mine!” or “He stole it from me!” on a frequent basis. To the adults in their life, young children may seem emotionally overreactive. Temper tantrums and tears are not uncommon. How should parents or teachers determine whether one child’s behavior exceeds that of the typical young child and whether individualized assessment and intervention are needed? If a child is in an environment with established Tier 1 systems of universal PBS and has also received a targeted intervention at the Tier 2 level, but she continues to exhibit chronic or severe problem behavior, the investment of time and effort for a FBA-BSP is likely well warranted. Behaviors can range from noncompliance, frequent disruption, aggression toward peers or adults, and refusal to participate, to self-­injury. Internalizing behaviors, such as excessive shyness, isolation from peers or adults, or selective mutism have received less attention in the literature, but are also problematic for children and the adults in their life. A number of researchers have conducted single-­subject studies with young children to assess the extent to which a BSP based on FBA was effective in reducing problem behavior and teaching children effective, alternative replacement behaviors (e.g., Blair et al., 2010; Duda et al., 2008; Nahgahgwon, Umbreit, Liaupsin, & Turton, 2010; Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). These included mild to moderate problem behaviors, but they occurred with such frequency that it was disruptive to learning for both the target child and his preschool classmates or siblings. Behaviors included talking out of turn and calling out; refusing to listen to or respond to adult directions; getting out of seat and walking aimlessly around the room; self-­injury; ruining classroom materials; teasing or touching other children; crying and screaming while lying on the floor; hitting, scratching, or biting other children; and yelling, pushing, and grabbing materials away from others. For children with severe or self-­injurious behaviors, behavioral expertise from a psychologist or other qualified professional should be sought to increase safety for the child, family, staff, and other children in the classroom or daycare. A crisis plan should be in place to manage serious incidents. Once cautionary steps have been taken to respond to the child’s most serious or dangerous problem behaviors, an FBA-BSP can be included as part of the child’s overall intervention plan, as a means to better understand, intervene with, and ameliorate the child’s problem behavior. Some children may already have diagnoses of early developmental or emotional challenges or have problem behavior that is so different from same-age peers that FBA-BSP is clearly necessary, regardless of the extent to which Tier 1 and Tier 2 supports are already in place. FBA-BSP has been conducted with children (between the ages of 2 and 6) at risk for or already diagnosed with



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 189

emotional or behavioral disorders (e.g., Nahgahgwon et al., 2010; Stage et al., 2006), language development delay or pervasive developmental disorder (Blair et al., 2010), and expressive language delay and failure to thrive (Duda et al., 2008). Many of these children had already been diagnosed and thus were eligible for special education services. FBA-BSP is one aspect of intervention that can (and should) be provided to these young children.

Functions of Problem Behavior in Young Children What functions does problem behavior serve for young children? For the most part, the behavior serves the same functions that were previously discussed for older children. Challenging behavior in young children can serve the function of obtaining attention (from peers or adults), obtaining some item the child wants, obtaining sensory stimulation, escaping unwanted attention, escaping a difficult task, or escaping sensory stimulation (Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). The functions of obtaining attention or a preferred item and escaping attention or a difficult task are often understandable to parents and ECE staff. It makes sense that a child might have a tantrum if another child takes the materials she was working with, or that the child might talk out or be disruptive if he didn’t understand or enjoy “calendar time.” The functions of obtaining or escaping sensory stimulation may be less well understood. An example of a behavior to obtain sensory stimulation might include a child who hums loudly to himself during naptime. The behavior does not result in a consequence such as attention from the teacher. In this example, the child hums because she finds it soothing, yet it is likely disruptive and therefore problematic to the children trying to rest in her vicinity. An example of avoiding sensory stimulation may be a child who rocks and hums to herself when the classroom noise level gets too loud and she begins to feel overwhelmed by the excess auditory stimulation. She may rock and hum as a means of drowning out the noise around her and reducing the sense of overstimulation. If a thorough FBA results in an unclear testable hypothesis regarding the function of the problem behavior, it is possible that the function of the behavior is driven by a desire to obtain or escape sensory stimulation (Shore & Iwata, 1999). Sensory stimulation behaviors might include rocking, hand flapping, and some self-­injurious behaviors and may be exhibited by children with an autism spectrum disorder. Sensory stimulation is also sometimes referred to as automatic reinforcement because it is not mediated by any kind of social reinforcement (Shore & Iwata, 1999). As with older children, some behaviors may serve multiple functions. For example, a child might struggle with the task of using snap-on cubes to count and measure the length of his own foot. The child becomes frustrated, throws down the cubes, kicks them across the floor mat, and begins to cry. The teacher

190

Specific Problems or Popul ations

comes over to calm the child and says he does not need to finish the measurement activity today. In this instance, the child has obtained teacher attention and escaped an aversive task. It is likely that he will repeat similar behavior the next time he encounters a class activity that he does not yet have the skills to complete.

Can FBA‑BSP Be Implemented in Typical ECE Settings with ECE Professionals? There is some debate in the literature about whether school-­based staff possess the resources and skills necessary to implement FBA-BSP effectively and with fidelity (Fox & Davis, 2005). Without adequate training and coaching, this undertaking is very difficult, and teams may be more likely to choose interventions with which they are most familiar or that are available from a standard list of options, rather than interventions that involve thoughtful reflection on an individual student’s testable hypothesis (Scott, Liaupsin, et al., 2005; Van Acker et al., 2005). At the same time, other studies have demonstrated that with appropriate training and coaching, school-­based teams and individuals can be very effective in contributing to FBA (Loman & Horner, 2014; Strickland-­Cohen & Horner, in press; see Chapter 8 for a fuller description). Staff in ECE, such as preschool and daycare, typically have less postsecondary education than licensed teachers in K–12. Whereas a bachelor’s degree and licensure is required for most K–12 teaching positions, postsecondary education needed to qualify to teach in preschool or provide daycare to large groups of children is less likely to be required. Instead the focus may be more on regulatory issues such as hygiene, physical environment, safety, and child-to-adult ratios. As a result, some may question whether ECE professionals could successfully contribute to and participate in the FBA-BSP process. One purpose of this book has been to make FBA-BSP procedures and processes more accessible and understandable for school-­based staff, and this aim should apply to ECE staff as well. ECE professionals and family members are often highly capable of making valuable contributions to the assessment process. These individuals know the child well, have the child’s best interests at heart, and are motivated to improve the child’s behavior, not only for the child’s sake but also for the sake of the parents, siblings, teachers, and classroom members who are all affected by the child’s disruptive or aggressive behavior. Implementation of BSP strategies is, however, more difficult. ECE professionals and family members may need ongoing support or coaching from a behavioral expert (Blair et al., 2010). This issue has been addressed empirically. Wood and colleagues (Wood, Blair, & Ferro, 2009) reviewed the FBA-based intervention research conducted with children ages 7 or younger and published between 1990 and 2007. They report on the extent to which family members and staff members were involved



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 191

in both the assessment and intervention portions of the process, as well as the types of routines and settings for which FBA-BSP was conducted. The majority of the studies (57%) were conducted in the typical environment with normal routines (as opposed to a clinic or analogue setting). Parents participated in the assessment portion for almost half (46%) of the studies, while teachers (37%) or childcare center staff (9%) also participated in studies. Additional family members or support staff were included in 11% of the studies. In terms of behavioral interventions, a family member was involved in implementation for 37% of the studies, while a teacher or other childcare staff member was involved in 37% and 9% of the studies, respectively. Blair and colleagues (2010) demonstrated that not only can ECE professionals effectively implement a function-­based BSP, they can also generalize their new behavior management skills to different settings, routines, or teachers, as well as maintain behavioral changes over time. This study also underscored that it is critical to understand teachers’ (or family members’) current skills in relation to antecedent, behavior, and consequence strategies as well as their beliefs and attitudes about the strategy options proposed. If staff or family members lack the necessary skills, they will need training and support. If they fundamentally disagree with a specific strategy (e.g., ignoring a tantrum or providing rewards contingent on appropriate behavior), they will not implement the strategy, regardless of how agreeable they may seem during initial discussions to develop the BSP. It is important to develop a trusting, cooperative relationship between the consulting staff and the teachers and parents in order to develop a realistic BSP that is agreeable and feasible for all.

What Does FBA in ECE Look Like? For the most part, the procedures and protocols described throughout this book for conducting FBA with elementary and older children are also applicable for conducting an FBA with young children (see, e.g., Blair et al., 2010; Conroy et al., 2002; Duda et al., 2008; Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). That is, the FBA is conducted using a combination of interviews with key adults, such as a parent or primary caretaker and a lead teacher or caregiver, and observations of the child across multiple routines or settings where the problem behavior is most likely to occur. Unlike in upper elementary and secondary grades, however, the child is too young to be interviewed. Information collected through the observations and interviews with adults is distilled to: (1) create an operational (i.e., measurable and observable) definition of the child’s problem behavior(s); (2) identify the typical setting events and antecedent conditions that trigger the problem behavior; and (3) identify typical consequences that occur in response to the problem behavior. At that point a testable hypothesis is developed to identify the function served by the child’s problem behavior. Intervention strategies are proposed to

192

Specific Problems or Popul ations

alter the setting events, antecedents, and consequences, as well as to teach alternative replacement behaviors that serve the same function as the target problem behavior. The intervention strategies can be implemented by key adults in the child’s life—­parents, grandparents, teachers, and caregivers. The impact and implementation of the behavior support plan is monitored, and adjustments are made as necessary to increase the effectiveness or improve on the contextual fit of the chosen intervention. We provide a case example of an FBA for a 3½-yearold child, using the same or slightly modified forms that have been used throughout this book (see pages 200–203).

What Is Unique about This Population That Needs to Be Considered for Both Assessment and Intervention? There are some elements critical to FBA-BSP with young children that deserve additional emphasis. While these elements are important in FBA-BSP with older children, they are especially important to the success of FBA-BSP with children at this stage of development: (1) meaningful involvement of the family in the assessment and intervention process (Harrower, 1999; Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004); (2) addressing problem behavior across multiple settings (e.g., childcare, home, preschool) and multiple routines (e.g., bathtime, mealtime at home, large and small groups in preschool) (Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004); (3) ensuring contextual fit between the BSP and the skills, resources, and beliefs of the individuals implementing the BSP (Harrower, 1999); and (4) considering whether a local team approach is a viable option or whether FBA-BSP support and expertise must come from outside resources (e.g., early intervention [EI] or early childhood special education [ECSE] services within the local school district).

Family Involvement When conducting FBA-BSP with young children, practitioners should consciously and responsibly make comprehensive efforts to meaningfully include family members throughout the assessment, intervention design, implementation, and evaluation/modification aspects of the FBA-BSP (Harrower, 1999; Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). In their position statement, DEC underscores the family’s key role: “DEC strongly believes that partnerships between families, service providers, and caregivers in which each family’s unique strengths, concerns, and responsibilities are fully recognized are critical to the design and implementation of interventions to prevent and remediate challenging behavior and to support appropriate behavior” (DEC, 2007, p. 1). Family members will be privy to critical historical information about a child’s development and behavior that staff members or behavioral consultants cannot be expected to know. In particular, family members may be able to help identify



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 193

key information about setting events and antecedents that trigger problem behavior. For example, they may note that on afternoons when the family has several visitors to the house, the child is more likely to exhibit disruptive behavior, or may mention that because there is often a rush to the morning’s routine, the child occasionally comes to school without having had breakfast. Harrower (1999) notes that families are often so adept at recognizing setting events and antecedent conditions (although they are unlikely to use this terminology) that they frequently go out of their way to avoid situations that are likely to turn into a temper tantrum or be publicly embarrassing. For example, a family may buy two of every toy so that one child does not argue with her sibling over whose turn it is to play, or another family may only go to the grocery store when the child is completely rested after a 2-hour nap. Families with a child who exhibits frequent disruptive or inappropriate behaviors are likely to feel sensitive about discussing these issues, especially with a behavioral consultant whom they have just met. They may not feel comfortable sharing a lot of information at first, and the consultant or behavior support team member will need to be patient and supportive in gleaning information from the family. Families are vulnerable to feeling blamed for their child’s problem behavior, so it is critical that the individual leading the FBA-BSP establish a trusting, collaborative relationship with the family, in which they feel that they are equal partners in resolving the problematic behavior (Harrower, 1999).

Multiple Settings and Routines The young child is likely to experience several distinct and disparate settings throughout his daily routine. These can include home, daycare or preschool, and after-­school care with a neighbor, family member, or other childcare provider. Each setting can have different rules, expectations, routines, and adults. Adapting to such variability within the day can be challenging for a young child, especially a child with behavioral, social, or communication skill deficits. The child will need support in learning to understand the behavioral expectations for each setting (Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). If consistency in expectations can be employed for all of the child’s primary settings (e.g., via a well-­defined BSP), this will facilitate the child’s ability to understand and demonstrate appropriate behavior as she goes from home to preschool to aftercare each day. FBA-BSPs should be developed for, and implemented in, the child’s natural environments (as opposed to an analogue setting). In their review of the literature on FBA-BSP with young children, Wood et al. (2009) note a number of settings and routines in which FBA-BSP has been successfully applied. Settings included the classroom, childcare, home, and clinic. Routines included circle time, table activity, centers, free play, transitions, naptime, mealtime, and bedtime. By simultaneously implementing behavior support strategies in multiple settings, the child will have more opportunities to rehearse newly acquired skills

194

Specific Problems or Popul ations

and generalize these skills to new routines (Harrower, 1999). Harrower further notes that in order to understand the child’s behavior in these multiple settings and routines, the practitioner must be available to observe and assess the child’s problem behavior across multiple environments and at times that do not necessarily fall within the normal business day (e.g., bedtime or on a trip to the grocery store). Furthermore, the BSP that is developed for any setting in which problem behavior occurs must fit within the contingencies of that setting and with the attitudes and beliefs of the adults involved. This is an issue we turn to next.

Contextual‑Fit Considerations Albin and colleagues (1996) have defined the concept of contextual fit as “the congruence or compatibility that exists between specific features and components of a behavioral support plan and a variety of relevant variables relating to individuals and environments. These variables fall into three general classes: (1) characteristics of the person for whom the plan is designed; (2) variables related to the people who will implement the plan; and (3) features of the environments and systems within which the plan will be implemented” (Albin et al., 1996, p. 82). Getting contextual fit “right” is critical to the success of any BSP, but is especially relevant in ECE settings for several reasons. There is likely to be more variability in professionals’ preparation and skills to manage classroom and individual behavior than in a K–12 setting; there may not be an existing team with experience in FBA-BSP to rely on; the BSP may need to address challenging behavior across multiple settings; and it is critical to meaningfully involve family members in the assessment and intervention process. The success of any BSP depends on teachers, parents, or other key adults implementing the proposed strategies consistently and with fidelity to the plan. Most of the BSP strategies involve the adult changing his or her behavior (e.g., providing additional instruction to the child, altering the typical consequences given when the child exhibits problem behavior, or making changes to routines or the environment to eliminate triggers for problem behavior). The adults who will implement the plan must be willing to do so and believe that the outcomes that can be achieved will be worth the effort required. If they do not, there will be very little incentive for them to put time and energy into carrying out the BSP strategies. Furthermore, the BSP must be congruent with the resources and skills of the staff and family members (e.g., Blair et al., 2010; Duda et al., 2008; Harrower, 1999). Adults may initially resist or be reluctant to implement a strategy included in the BSP because it may be time or effort intensive. For example, teaching a child to ask for attention at appropriate times (as a replacement for inappropriate bids for attention) requires that the adult be available and willing to provide that positive attention. Alternatively, an adult may not understand that the child’s misbehavior is a manifestation of a different problem that can be resolved through instruction or modification to expectations. For example, a young child may be



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 195

expected to work with others on cutting out shapes at a small table in preschool each morning, but lacks the fine motor skills necessary. The child may respond in frustration, by throwing materials to the floor, crying, or grabbing an item away from a peer. Once classroom staff understand the reason for the child’s problem behavior, they are likely to also understand and support the proposed strategies to ameliorate the behavior. At the same time, staff should be made aware that an intervention may be time intensive and effortful at first, but as the child begins to learn replacement behaviors, implementation of the plan will become easier. After a period of successful implementation, modifications can be made to the plan to make it fit easier within the daily routine or classroom environment. It is critical that staff and family members be willing to stick through the difficult times of initial implementation. Family and staff should be forewarned that problem behavior will continue to occur, at least in the beginning. In some cases, it may even get worse for a period of time. The BSP should include a plan for responding to ongoing problem behavior, so that adults do not inadvertently reinforce the problem behavior through the consequences that they give. Blair and colleagues (2010) provide an excellent example of the research team going to extensive lengths to develop a BSP with good contextual fit. During the development stage, they held multiple lengthy brainstorming sessions to collaboratively choose compatible and effective BSP strategies. As a result of these efforts, not only were the teachers able to implement the initial plan, they also generalized the strategies to new settings. In addition, a different staff member (i.e., assistant teacher) was also able to implement the strategies in a new classroom.

Team Structure The administrative structure and resources available to preschool and childcare settings are usually much different than that of typical K–12 education. While it should be straightforward to access a behavior support team in K–12, the concept of established team approaches to behavior support may be foreign or even unattainable in ECE and daycare settings. Depending on the setting, there may be just one or two classrooms that are housed in a K–12 building but act autonomously from the school, or a small preschool with just one or two teachers and classrooms, or even a small daycare setting that serves 10 to 15 children, but only has one or two adults on staff. Under such circumstances, it is difficult to imagine how an ongoing, established team structure would be available. Of course, there are some large preschool and daycare centers with enough staff to create a representative team, but again, this arrangement may be atypical for them and they may lack training in behavior management. Furthermore, many ECE settings are not under the auspices of the local K–12 district and are unlikely to benefit from district capacity or training that may be afforded to their K–12 colleagues.

196

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Under such circumstances, how should ECE professionals proceed with FBABSP? First, they should have strong Tier 1 systems in place. This should significantly reduce the number of children with behavior support needs and free up time to concentrate on children who need Tier 2 or Tier 3 support. The ECE setting will likely have to rely on outside resources for support at both Tier 2 and Tier 3. Federal law (IDEIA, 2004) mandates that children as young as age 3 with developmental delays or diagnosed with certain disabilities, including autism and emotional disturbance, are eligible for special education services. These services often come from the local school district. In addition, many states also legislate early intervention services for eligible children between the ages of 0 and 3. The school district may have someone with behavioral expertise on contract. Thus, as a starting point, we recommend that families and/or ECE settings seek out special services from their local school district. Head Start classrooms may have access to additional resources. In ECE then, the FBA-BSP “team” is likely to be more individualized than in K–12 education. A new group of collaborators may be formed for each identified student. This group should consist of the behavioral expert, members of the child’s family (inclusion of the primary caretaker is essential, be that a parent, grandparent, babysitter, etc.), members of the child’s teaching or caregiving staff, and any other key adults in the child’s life. For example, if the child receives outside services from a physical or speech therapist, it would be wise to include those individuals. If the child regularly sees a pediatrician for related issues, that person should, at the least, be kept informed and invited to contribute as much as possible. This is especially important if the child receives daily medication of any sort. The behavioral expert will take the lead in conducting the assessment, synthesizing results, developing the plan in collaboration with all the key stakeholders, and coordinating and monitoring implementation of the plan for all of the settings and for all contributing adults. We now present a case example to illustrate the FBA-BSP process with a preschool-­age child. While it is fictitious, the example represents a good amalgam of the typical problem behaviors, resources, and procedures one might find while implementing FBA-BSP in an ECE setting.

Case Example Lena is a 3½-year-old child in a Head Start classroom that serves 3- and 4-year-old children. There are 18 children in her class, one lead teacher, an instructional assistant, and a classroom assistant. Six of the children in the class are English language learners with Spanish as their dominant language. The instructional assistant and classroom assistant primarily speak Spanish. The lead teacher, Mrs. Greene, speaks English only. Lena’s only language is English. This year is the first time Lena has been in a preschool or daycare setting outside of her



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 197

grandmother’s home. Prior to this year, she was cared for at her grandmother’s house while her mother, a single parent of three, worked during the day. She still stays with her grandmother after her morning preschool class is over. Lena does not know many of the basic skills that the other children know. For example, she cannot recognize or name shapes, colors, or any numbers. She is not yet able to recognize her written name or copy any of the letters in her name. She has difficulty sitting still when the teacher reads a story to the class. Lena’s teachers describe her as “in constant motion.” It is very difficult to get her to sit still for more than 5 minutes. She frequently gets up, walks around the room, and takes materials from other children. When the other children protest to the teacher, she may slap them or pull their hair. She often does not follow teacher directions, especially when given by one of the assistants. She ignores their requests, continues to play with materials, or gets up and walks away. Occasionally, Lena will scream unexpectedly. This happens most often during circle time or choice time, when children are expected to be working on one of three to four preplanned learning activities (typically involving shapes, colors, numbers, etc.). Lena was included in a Tier 2 CICO program for 4 weeks, but it has been ineffective in reducing the occurrences of her problem behavior.

Setting The Head Start classroom in this example is part of a larger center serving approximately 160 children distributed across nine different classrooms. Furthermore, the center is managed under the same auspices as two other moderate-­size centers within the same county. Thus this particular preschool program has access to expertise on behavioral issues that would be less likely to be available in a single preschool classroom or in a daycare center run privately by a single administrator. In this case, there is a behavior support specialist providing support and consultation across all three centers. In addition, as a Head Start classroom, family advocates are employed by the center to act as a liaison between the center and the family. These advocates have established a collaborative rapport with families over the course of the school year, making it easier to broach the sensitive topic of behavior problems at home and school. This Head Start center is in its third year of implementing SWPBS. The school has three rules: Be Kind, Be an Active Learner, and Be Safe. Teachers and assistants have been trained to teach behavioral expectations to the children in their classroom. The focus of the first week of each school year is devoted primarily to establishing routines and teaching behavioral expectations. In addition, a Tier 2 intervention, preschool CICO, is available for children who need additional behavior support. CICO is effective in reducing problem behavior driven by the function of obtaining teacher attention as well as other functions (Hawken, O’Neill, & Macleod, 2011).

198

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Functional Behavioral Assessment Request for Assistance The FBA-BSP in this Head Start center began with a request for assistance from the lead teacher, Mrs. Greene. In a setting that is smaller than the one in this example, there may not be a formal process for requesting behavior support for individuals. In that case, the ECE staff will need to determine what resources (e.g., behavior specialists or administrator) are available to them and begin by seeking assistance from them. In many cases, the most accessible support will come from the local school district in the form of EI or ECSE services. In some cases, the family, rather than the ECE setting, will have to initiate contact with the EI/ECSE provider. Once services have been requested, and the child is deemed eligible, the ECE setting can work in collaboration with the EI/ECSE provider or other behavioral expert (e.g., some Head Start centers may have behavioral consultants on contract) to complete the FBA and BSP. Figure 10.1 illustrates the Request for Assistance Form for Lena. Note that the form has been slightly modified from the form presented earlier in this book for elementary and secondary students to make it more appropriate for this age group. Typically, each center will create its own Request for Assistance Form, so this is just one example of what the form could look like. In the Request for Assistance Form, Lena’s teacher indicates that Lena’s problem behaviors include “unable to sit still, constantly moving around the class, does not listen to directions, screams unexpectedly, is aggressive toward other kids (slapping, pushing away, pulling hair),” and that the behaviors most often occur during circle time, choice time, and story time. The behavior is not considered dangerous, but it is highly disruptive, and does involve some mild to moderate aggression against same-age peers. Thus far, the majority of the teacher’s efforts to alter the behavior have included changing Lena’s seating arrangement, going over expectations with Lena and with the whole class, and being in contact with Lena’s grandmother (primary caretaker) regarding Lena’s problem behavior. Lena was also placed in the Preschool CICO program for 4 weeks, but it had no real impact on her problem behavior. Based on this initial information (and based on the fact that Lena’s behavior is discrepant from peers despite the well-­ established Tier 1 and Tier 2 support systems), the behavior support specialist for the Head Start center, Mr. Tebbs, determines that a FBA-BSP is appropriate. He begins by interviewing the teacher, Mrs. Greene.

Interviews Figure 10.2 illustrates the results of the interview with Mrs. Greene. The interview takes about 20–30 minutes to complete. It is important to begin the interview by having the interviewee identify some strengths that the child or family brings to the setting. These strengths may be capitalized on later during the BSP planning (text continues on p. 203)

Request for Assistance Form Date:  10/14/14

Teacher/Team:  Mrs. Greene

IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Lena

Grade:  3-year-old PreK Classroom

Situations

Problem Behaviors

Circle time Choice time (have to choose among three to four preplanned learning activities) Sometimes mealtimes

Unable to sit still, constantly moving around the class, does not listen to directions, screams unexpectedly, is aggressive toward other kids (slapping, pushing away, pulling hair)

Most Common Result Removed from activity; asked to sit on carpet square that is somewhat removed from rest of the class; sent outdoors with assistant till she “cools off”

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

At first, we try to ignore it, but then she gets louder or more disruptive to class. If the problem involves another child we have to do something right away. We usually remove her from the activity or the other child to give her a chance to cool off and be ready to rejoin the group. By the time she comes back, we’ve often moved on to another activity.

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  I want her to be able to sit still and listen to instructions just like the other kids. And I want her to do the activities that the rest of the kids do, without having a tantrum or being aggressive toward anyone else.

What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified activity to match

 X   Changed seating

     Provided one-to-one

     Changed expectations

the student’s skills

instruction to improve the student’s academic skills

assignments

for this child

 X  Check-In/Check-Out

     Changed schedule of

Other?

Sometimes my assistant takes her      Provided extra outside to get her out assistance or attention of the room and let her during activity run off some energy

activities

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?  X   Reminders about

 X   Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

     Taught child to request

     Taught child to ask for

 X   Immediate feedback

     Oral agreement with the

 X   Worked with parents

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely

expected behavior sticker chart about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class

help when needed

child

Other?

behaviors in class

a break when needed

to have them teach behavior at home

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?      Loss of privileges

 X   Note or phone call to the  X   Removal of an item that

 X   Removal from activity

 X   Removal from classroom

 X   Verbal reprimand

     Referral to ECSE

     Meeting with the

 X   Conversation with

services

student’s parents

student’s parents

Other?

the child has or wants to have

student to explain why problem behavior is not acceptable

FIGURE 10.1.  Request for Assistance—­Lena. The form itself is adapted from Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin (1999). Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon.

200

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:  Lena        Age:  3.5    Grade:  3 yr PreK   Date:  10/16/14 Person(s) interviewed:  Mrs. Greene (lead teacher) Interviewer:  Mr. Tebbs (behavioral consultant) Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school?  She has a lot of energy and enthusiasm. She loves to play outside and has very good gross motor skills for such a young child.    Her family brings her to school on time, every day. Her grandmother (primary caretaker) is open to suggestions and working with the school staff. (Mother works long hours, less available.)

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? She does not listen to instructions. She is very active during times she should sit still. She slaps or pushes other children. Occasionally she screams. How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? Daily, several times a day. How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? Slapping, pushing, and screaming are brief. Just a few seconds, but then there are the after effects. Not listening to instructions lasts as long as the adult tries to get her to follow directions. Getting up and moving around the room lasts a bit longer than the slapping/pushing, and she’ll go back to her spot, but then she’s up again a few minutes later. How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)? Very disruptive to the class, not dangerous, but the screaming, slapping, and pushing is upsetting to the other children.

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times) 8:30–8:45

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

Free play while children come into classroom

Pushes other child or grabs materials back

Low        High Any child near 1  2  3  4  5  6 to her

8:45–9:05

Breakfast

Generally no problem

1  2  3  4  5  6

9:05–9:20

Teeth brushing and sing-along while waiting for turn

Generally no problem

1  2  3  4  5  6

9:20–9:45

Circle time

Leaves circle, doesn’t follow directions, pushes other children, pulls hair

1  2  3  4  5  6 Any child near to her, ignores adults

(continued)

FIGURE 10.2.  Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—­Lena. The form itself is adapted from March et al. (2000). Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Adapted by permission.

Schedule (Times) 9:45–10:15

FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 201 Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur?

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Choice time (learning activity)

Leaves table, aggressive toward other children, occasionally screams, doesn’t follow directions

1  2  3  4  5  6 Any child near to her, adults, especially the assistants

10:15–10:45 Outdoor play

No problem

1  2  3  4  5  6

10:45–11:00 Story time (large group)

Leaves story area, leaves circle, doesn’t follow directions, pushes other children, pulls hair

1  2  3  4  5  6

Any child near to her, adults, especially the assistants

11:00–11:30 Rest time

Leaves her area, walks around

1  2  3  4  5  6

Any child near to her

11:30–12:00 Free play till parents pick up to go home

Pushes other child or grabs materials back

1  2  3  4  5  6

Any child near to her

Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

The most problematic situations are times when there is any kind of “academic” or quiet work expected from the children, such as circle time, story time, and choice time with learning activities. If teachers give her instructions to sit still and work on the small- or large-group activity, her problem behavior is likely. This seems to be even more true when one of the assistants (primarily Spanish-speaking) gives her directions. She may not understand them.

When is the problem most likely to occur? (times of day and days of week)

Any day, but Mondays and Fridays are most problematic. Circle time and choice time are the most problematic. Lena doesn’t seem to have a lot of the same skills or knowledge as others—she doesn’t know any numbers, shapes, colors, for example.

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of week)

Tuesday through Thursday are somewhat easier than the other days. She never has trouble during outside time. She rarely has trouble during the morning breakfast and teeth-brushing routines.

Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.) None noted in interview.

(continued)

FIGURE 10.2.  (continued)

202

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the problem occurs? If she slaps, hits, or pushes a child, she is removed from the group immediately. She usually has to sit on a chair (if she’ll stay put) or goes outside with an assistant to cool off. If she screams, an adult goes to see what is wrong, talks with her, and tries to calm her. If she doesn’t calm, she can leave the group until she cools off and returns. If she doesn’t follow directions, once the adult notices she is not doing the activity, the adult will repeat the instructions and try to get her to work. Often, she will stop doing the activity as soon as the adult leaves. This is more true for crayon/pencil/scissor type of tasks than if the kids are playing with blocks or clay, etc.

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

Monday (just coming back from less structured weekend?) or Friday (tired from long week?)

Lena is expected to do an activity that requires either fine motor skills, sitting still and listening, or doing something “academic” (colors, shapes, numbers, etc.).

1. Lena does not follow

Often not noticed by teacher right away. When it is noticed, there is a brief repetition of instructions, and then Lena is left alone to be nonparticipatory again.

Monday (just coming back from less structured weekend?) or Friday (tired from long week?)

Lena is expected to do an activity that requires either fine motor skills, sitting still and listening, or doing something “academic” (colors, shapes, numbers, etc.) with other children nearby who are able to do the activity.

2. Lena slaps, hits,

She is removed from the activity and expected to sit on a chair (usually doesn’t stay) or go outside with classroom assistant to cool off before returning to the classroom.

directions or gets up and moves around the room.

pushes, or grabs something from the other children or screams (briefly, but loudly).

(continued)

FIGURE 10.2.  (continued)



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 203

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  Lena is attempting to escape a task that is difficult or for which she does not understand what     she is supposed to do. 2.  Lena is attempting to escape a task that is difficult or not stimulating for her and uses     aggression toward peers as a way to be removed from the situation. How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

2

Not at all sure 1

FIGURE 10.2.  (continued)

process. Mrs. Greene notes Lena’s enthusiasm and skill level in gross motor play as important strengths. She also notes the willingness of her grandmother to collaborate as a significant strength. During the interview, Mr. Tebbs obtains more detailed information about Lena’s problem behavior. He notes that the problem behavior most frequently occurs during “academic” activities. The teacher also notes that Lena does not possess many of the same basic knowledge and skills that many of her classmates have in terms of recognizing numbers, shapes, and colors. The teachers provide a range of consequences for her problem behavior, all of which serve to allow Lena to escape a task she apparently finds aversive. These include ignoring the behavior, reminding her of expectations without any follow-­through, or removing her from the activity by having her sit someplace else or having her go outside (her favorite activity) with a teaching assistant. While these consequences may appear to her teachers to temporarily reduce their experience of her problem behavior, their actions are most definitely reinforcing the problem behavior. Mr. Tebbs develops two testable hypotheses, each of which posit the same function: 1. Lena engages in problem behavior to escape a task that is difficult or for which she does not understand what she is supposed to do. 2. Lena engages in problem behavior to escape a task that is not stimulating for her and uses aggression toward peers as a surefire way to be removed from the situation. He shares this summary and hypotheses with Mrs. Greene to determine whether he has understood her responses correctly and to assess the extent to which she agrees with his summary. Mrs. Greene is in strong agreement and so, together, they decide that they are quite confident in the accuracy of their testable hypothesis, and rate it a 5, on a scale of 1 to 6.

204

Specific Problems or Popul ations

A few days later, Mr. Tebbs arranges an interview with Mrs. Robbins, Lena’s grandmother. Because Lena’s mother works long hours she is not available to attend, although she would like to be present. Of all the adults in her life, Mrs. Robbins spends the most time with Lena, outside of her daily preschool experience, making her the best informant for this interview. The Head Start family advocate assigned to work with Lena’s family attends the interview as well, to facilitate and, they hope, to make Mrs. Robbins feel more comfortable with the process. They meet in Mrs. Robbins’s home. Prior to beginning the interview, Mr. Tebbs spends some time getting to know Mrs. Robbins, as well as explaining the purpose and process of the FBA interview. In this case, Mr. Tebbs uses a less formal protocol than was used with Lena’s teacher. Essentially, he asks a series of questions designed to identify problem behaviors, setting events, antecedents, consequences, and function, without the formality of a standardized protocol. The format and questions used are illustrated in Figure 10.3. In the interview, Mrs. Robbins notes that she does not experience very many difficulties with Lena unless she asks her to help out with some age-­appropriate chores. Mrs. Robbins also does not mention any behavior problems during typical routines such as mealtime, bathtime, or running errands or when Lena is watching TV or playing outside. It may be that there truly are no behavioral issues at these times, or that Mrs. Robbins is not yet comfortable sharing that much information with Mr. Tebbs. Mr. Tebbs may choose to ask about those specific routines in follow-­up visits or interviews with Mrs. Robbins. In the meantime, they can focus on the antecedent conditions for the problem behaviors that she does mention. Mrs. Robbins notes that if she asks Lena to engage in age-­appropriate chores, such as putting her toys away or helping to set the table by putting plates on the table, Lena will ignore her. She may run away if Mrs. Robbins persists. If Lena gets upset, she will have a tantrum when Mrs. Robbins insists that she clean up or help set the table. That is, she will kick furniture, cry loudly, or lie down on the floor and pound her hands and feet against the floor. Mrs. Robbins is unable to keep up with Lena if she runs away, so she ignores this behavior (unless Lena runs toward the street). Sometimes Mrs. Robbins does not push the request further because she does not want the tantrum to get worse. Sometimes, if Lena seems more calm, she will insist that she complete the task, but it always requires some involvement by Mrs. Robbins. That is, she has to work “hand over hand” with Lena to pick up the toys or to put the plates on the table. Mrs. Robbins also mentions that Lena’s behavior is worse when her allergies are bad or on days when she has not been able to get enough sleep the night before. In considering Mrs. Robbins’s responses, Mr. Tebbs notes some striking similarities between Lena’s problem behavior at home and school. First, it is significantly discrepant in intensity and frequency than that of other 3-year-old children. (Almost all 3-year-olds tantrum at some point, but not with the chronicity or aggression that Lena is reported to display.) Second, the behaviors at home and school are very similar in topography. They appear to be set off by similar



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 205

INTERVIEW WITH FAMILY MEMBER Student Name:  Lena   Date:  10/21/14 Person interviewed and relationship:  Mrs. Robbins (grandmother) Interviewer:  Mr. Tebbs 1.  What problem behavior(s) are you concerned about? If I try to get Lena to do something she doesn’t want to do, she will not listen. She runs away from me and I can’t move fast enough to catch her. I am afraid she will run into the street. She yells “I don’t want to!” If I try harder to get her to listen and do what I ask, her behavior gets worse. She will kick at furniture or lie down on the floor and pound her feet and hands against the floor or just sit on the floor and cry very loudly.

2.  When is the problem behavior(s) most and least likely to occur? If she’s not feeling well. She has allergies and on days with lots of pollen she feels miserable. If her mom has to work late the night before and she doesn’t come pick her up till late, she does not get enough sleep and then she’s more of a handful the next day. She’s totally fine if she can play in the backyard, especially if there is another kid to play with or if I’m out there watching her swing and run around. she’s also totally fine if she’s watching something that she likes on TV. But if I try to get her to help pick up her toys, or if I ask her to help set up the table (put some dishes on the table for me) or anything like that, she just gets really mad and starts having a tantrum.

3. How do you typically respond when your child exhibits this problem behavior? Well, at first I try to catch her if she runs away, but I can’t run that fast, so I just sit down and wait or let her go back to doing what she was doing before. If I want her to clean up or help set the table but she starts having a tantrum, I keep repeating to her what I expect. Sometimes I try to walk her through it, you know. Hand-over-hand picking up the toys or putting the dishes on the table. Sometimes I tell her that if she doesn’t clean up she won’t get to play outside anymore. That seems to be the only thing that gets her to listen to me a little better.

4.  What do you think your child may gain from the problem behaviors? I think she’s just trying to get out of something that she doesn’t want to do and she thinks she shouldn’t have to do it.

Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Feeling ill or tired from high pollen count or limited sleep.

Grandmother 1. Lena runs out of her asks her to grandmother’s reach, help clean up refuses to help, kicks or set table. chairs, has tantrum on floor or cries loudly.

Behavior

Consequence Grandmother either ignores the behavior or tries for a while to get Lena to listen, but usually ends up giving up and does it herself. Sometimes she does “hand over hand” to get Lena to help with a chore. (continued)

FIGURE 10.3.  Interview with Lena’s grandmother.

206

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  When Lena’s grandmother asks her to help with an age-appropriate chore, Lena runs away, has a tantrum, or refuses to help in order to get out of doing the chore she doesn’t want to do and to be allowed to continue watching TV or playing outside.

Rate Your Confidence in the Testable Explanation How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

Not at all sure 3

2

1

FIGURE 10.3.  (continued)

antecedents (adult request/instruction to perform an undesirable [to Lena] task). The consequences are also similar across settings. That is, the adults in both situations would rather accept or ignore the behavior than require Lena to follow directions or complete a task. In both settings, Lena has essentially learned that in order to get out of doing something that she does not like (seatwork, quiet work, chores) her most efficient and effective strategy is to throw a tantrum until she gets what she wants.

Observations Later that week, Mr. Tebbs schedules an observation in Mrs. Greene’s classroom. He plans his schedule so that he can be in the classroom for the entire morning session, as it is helpful to observe times when the behavior is likely to occur as well as when it is unlikely to occur. Mr. Tebbs completes a typical ABC observation to gather more information about the antecedents and consequences associated with each occurrence of a problem behavior. He also keeps a basic frequency count for every instance of problem behavior. Finally, he notes whether any of the other children display similar problem behaviors during the same time frame. The operational definitions of Lena’s problem behaviors are provided in Figure 10.4, as well as the first few lines of the ABC observation, to illustrate the ABC sequences that were observed. A histogram demonstrating the number of occurrences of problem behavior for each different segment of the daily schedule is presented in Figure 10.5. This figure also includes data from a composite of comparison peers.



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 207

1.  Does not listen to instructions—When an adult tells Lena to do something, she does not respond, verbally or in action, or she does something different than what she was told to do. When an adult tells Lena to stop doing something, she ignores the adult and continues with the initial behavior. 2.  Moving around the class—When Lena is supposed to be sitting or involved in an activity, she gets up or moves to a different part of the classroom without the purpose of getting something related to the activity or getting help from an adult. 3.  Aggressive toward other children—Lena engages in any negative physical activity toward another child, such as slapping, hitting, kicking the child’s chair, pushing the child away, pulling hair, pinching, yelling, biting, holding the child’s arm, or grabbing materials away from the child. 4.  Screams or yells—Lena screams or yells loudly during any activity where it is not expected (as in an outdoor game). The screaming and yelling can be very brief (a few seconds) or for a more extended amount of time. 5.  Uses materials inappropriately—When Lena is supposed to engage with classroom materials (e.g., books, crayons, a worksheet, craft materials), she acts aggressively toward the materials by throwing them to the floor, pushing them to the side, or crumpling papers. Time/ Activity

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

8:45/ Teacher asks her to put Free play materials away.

Does not listen to instructions.

Teacher has another child put materials away for Lena.

9:21

Teacher begins circle time activity.

Moving around the class.

Teacher tells Lena to return to circle. Lena continues to wander and eventually returns to circle.

9:28

Teacher leading calendar time with all children giving choral responses.

Aggressive toward other children (hits another child in the arm twice and pushes her away).

Assistant teacher has Lena stand up and leave the circle and sit at a table until circle time is over.

9:50

The rest of the class has settled down to tables and have started learning activity for circle time.

Moving around the class.

Teacher calls to Lena from across the room and tells her to go back to her seat.

9:55

Assistant teacher sits next to Lena in order to get her to work on activity (using scissors to cut out circle shapes).

Uses materials inappropriately (Lena throws scissors on the floor and crumples paper).

Assistant picks up scissors and gives Lena a new paper to work with and continues to sit next to her.

9:57

Lena seems frustrated that assistant expects her to stick with task. She plays with scissors and assistant asks if she needs help cutting out the circle.

Yells; uses materials inappropriately.

Assistant takes the materials away and tells Lena to find a different activity to work on.

FIGURE 10.4.  Operational definitions of Lena’s problem behavior and ABC observations.

208

Specific Problems or Popul ations 6 5 4 3 Lena

2

Peer Composite

1

Br

us

h

Te e

th

/S in g

0

FIGURE 10.5.  Number of behavioral problems during classroom observation.

The ABC sequences observed by Mr. Tebbs confirm the testable hypothesis generated from the teacher interview. That is, in situations when Lena is expected to sit still, follow directions, or engage in a learning activity, she engages in one of her typical problem behaviors in order to escape the activity that she finds to be aversive. Most likely, she finds these activities aversive because she does not possess some of the same basic knowledge as her peers and she may not have understood what is expected of her. Furthermore, the histogram confirms that her problem behavior is most likely to occur during circle time, choice time, or story time, and her problem behavior occurs significantly more often than that of her peers. Mr. Tebbs shares the observation data with Mrs. Greene and asks whether this day was a “typical” day for Lena. (Children will often react to being observed, either by increasing or decreasing their problem behavior.) Mrs. Greene confirms that the problem behavior observed was fairly typical for Lena. Given the convergence of information between the observation and interview, and given that Mr. Tebbs has observed at least five occurrences of problem behavior within the single 3½-hour session, he does not schedule a second in-class observation. Mrs. Robbins is uncomfortable scheduling a formal observation at her home, so this meeting is not set up. However, Mr. Tebbs and the family advocate hold a follow-­up meeting with Mrs. Robbins at her home to talk with her about the classroom observation. While he is there, Mr. Tebbs is able to informally observe Mrs. Robbins’s parenting style with Lena. Although it is likely affected by the presence of Mr. Tebbs and the family advocate, he notices that Mrs. Robbins is fairly passive with Lena. That is, she asks Lena to say hello to their visitors, but when Lena runs away into the backyard, she does not follow her. Later, she tells Lena to pick up her toys so they can begin to make dinner, but when Lena yells, “I don’t want to!”, Mrs. Robbins sighs and begins picking up the toys herself on the way to seeing her



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 209

guests to the door. Thus Mr. Tebbs’s informal observations align with the information obtained from the interview with Mrs. Robbins, as well as with his hypothesis that Lena engages in problem behavior in order to escape aversive tasks.

Development of BSP The next step is to identify specific strategies that can be implemented at home and school to reduce the problem behavior and increase appropriate behavior. The strategies will address antecedent and consequent conditions, as well as teach alternative behavior to replace the problem behavior. The alternative behavior must serve the same function as the problem behavior and be more “efficient” for the child to get what she wants than the problem behavior has been. Mr. Tebbs convenes a BSP planning session with Lena’s teacher, her grandmother, the family advocate, and Lena’s mother, who is able to attend this particular meeting. The meeting is held at the Head Start center after the children have gone home. In this initial session they agree on their behavioral goals for Lena and an anticipated timeline. Mr. Tebbs generates several antecedent and consequent strategies to consider, as well as options for teaching alternative replacement behaviors. Mrs. Greene and Mrs. Robbins are encouraged to talk about the extent to which they feel they have the skills to implement the proposed options, their attitudes toward these behavior management strategies, and their concerns, as well as provide suggestions of their own. One concern raised by Mrs. Robbins is that she feels uncomfortable pushing Lena to do something Lena doesn’t want to do, because she is her grandmother, not her mother—­a fact that Lena often reminds her of by saying, “I don’t have to, you’re not my mother.” Lena’s mother assures her own mother that she prefers Mrs. Robbins to be more firm with Lena and that it is OK to hold Lena accountable for picking up her own toys and helping out with other small chores. Lena’s mother agrees to talk to Lena about these new expectations. After the meeting, Mr. Tebbs uses the Competing Behavior Pathway to summarize the decisions they have made as a group, illustrated in Figure 10.6. They will begin by using these strategies. In class, antecedent strategies include having the teacher provide one-on-one time with Lena to practice learning shapes and colors in a game-like format. In addition, the teacher will help Lena choose an activity that is within her skill level and work with her for the first 5 minutes of choice time until she has a good start on the learning activity. Consequence strategies include earning a 10-minute break to play outside when she works appropriately for the first 20 minutes during choice time or circle time. Teachers will no longer allow her to escape completing or participating in the activity. Initially, the teachers will teach Lena to request a break, as an alternative to her problem behavior. When she feels overwhelmed, frustrated, or bored, she can raise her hand and request a 1-minute break to walk around the room. As long as she makes the request appropriately, she will be allowed to do so. This strategy will eventually be faded out so that she is only allowed to request one to two breaks per activity.

210

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway Desired Behavior Lena is able to stay in the activity, listen to directions, and complete the activity (with or without assistance)

Setting Event Not feeling well due to allergies or not enough sleep the night before

Triggering Antecedent Teacher or assistant expects Lena to participate in an activity that require listening, fine motor skills, or applying basic concepts such as knowledge of colors and shapes

Problem Behavior Ignores instructions, moves around room, acts aggressively toward other children, yells or screams

Maintaining Consequences Lena will learn the skills targeted in the activity and she will receive teacher attention through assistance and praise

Maintaining Consequences Teacher allows her to not follow instructions or move around or she is removed from the activity and sometimes goes outside to “cool off” with an adult

Function Lena escapes an aversive or difficult task

Alternative Behavior Lena will appropriately request a break when she doesn’t want to do the activity. Number of breaks allowed will be faded over time. (continued)

FIGURE 10.6.  Competing Behavior Pathway and Proposed Strategies for BSP. The form itself is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-­Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions.



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 211

Setting Event Strategies

Antecedent Strategies

Family will communicate with teachers if Lena is having a difficult day due to health or sleep issues, and teachers will allow for more flexibility in their expectations for Lena on those days. Lena will be given an opportunity to rest early in the class day if she needs to.

Teacher provides oneon-one time with Lena to practice learning shapes and colors in a game-like format. Attempt to do this at least three times per week for 10 minutes each. Immediately prior to each activity, the teacher or assistants will remind all of the children what the behavioral expectations are.

Behavior Teaching Strategies Mr. Tebbs will teach Lena to request a break, as an alternative to her problem behavior. Teacher and assistants will reteach as necessary. Lena can raise her hand and request a 1-minute break to walk around the room. As long as she makes the request appropriately, she will be allowed to do so.

At beginning of choice time, teacher will help Lena choose an activity that is within her skill level and work with her for the first 5 minutes of choice time until she has a good start on the learning activity. At home, Mrs. Robbins will support Lena’s ability to learn basic concepts by spending 10 to 20 minutes per day playing games that help her learn colors, shapes, numbers, and sounds.

FIGURE 10.6.  (continued)

Consequence Strategies Lena can earn a 10-minute break to play outside when she works appropriately for the first 20 minutes during choice time or circle time. Teachers will discontinue the practice of allowing her to ignore instructions, be removed from an activity, or be allowed to go outside after inappropriate behavior.

212

Specific Problems or Popul ations

At home, Mrs. Robbins will support Lena’s ability to learn basic concepts by spending 10 to 20 minutes per day playing games that help her learn colors, shapes, numbers, and sounds. These game-like activities will be provided by the Head Start center, via Mr. Tebbs. At home, antecedent strategies include reminding Lena that she will need to clean up her toys and giving her a 5-minute warning when it is almost time to clean up or set the table. Mrs. Robbins will make sure Lena knows what to do by giving her clear, one-step directions, such as “Bring the stuffed bunny,” “Put him in the toy box,” or “Put this plate on the table in front of your chair.” Consequent strategies include allowing Lena to play outside on the swingset for 10 minutes after her toys are picked up. Mrs. Robbins will not let Lena escape the activities of cleaning up or setting the table by doing that work for her. Mr. Tebbs agrees to model how these strategies should be implemented and to provide support and coaching for both the classroom staff and Mrs. Robbins in the first days of implementation. By being available during initial implementation, he will also be able to observe when and where Mrs. Greene and Mrs. Robbins struggle with the BSP strategies and will be able to offer tips, training, or modifications to the plan as necessary.

Outcomes Mrs. Greene and Mrs. Robbins begin implementing these strategies the day after Mr. Tebbs models the new strategies. On the first day of teacher-­led implementation, Mr. Tebbs attends the classroom during circle time and choice time. When implementing a new BSP, the first few days of implementation are critical, for both the adult and the child. The adult, with adequate support, begins to feel comfortable with the strategies and can rely on the behavioral expert as needed when questions or unexpected responses arise. The child will be more likely to learn and use the replacement behaviors and begin to reduce the problem behavior if the adult is implementing the new strategies consistently and in the prescribed manner. This also gives Mr. Tebbs the opportunity to note how well the child responds to the initial implementation. If strategies are consistently implemented as expected, but the child’s behavior does not change, it eventually may be necessary to modify the BSP. Modifications to the plan should not be made immediately. It may take a little time for some strategies to begin to have their intended effect. Furthermore, for some children and some behavioral strategies, the problem behavior may actually become worse for a short while before it begins to improve. On the next afternoon, Mrs. Robbins agrees to have Mr. Tebbs and the family advocate come to her home. Mr. Tebbs demonstrates the BSP strategies by working directly with Lena to pick up her toys. When Lena responds with her typical behavior to Mrs. Robbins’s attempts to get her to clean up, Mr. Tebbs provides some support and encouragement on how to respond. At the end of the first few



FBA with Preschool‑Age Children 213

days, both Mrs. Robbins and Mrs. Greene state that they feel comfortable implementing the strategies. Mr. Tebbs contacts them both by phone in the following days to follow up on Lena’s progress. One week after implementation begins, Mr. Tebbs attends circle time and choice time at school and collects frequency data on the occurrence of Lena’s problem behaviors. Lena has had a significant reduction in problem behavior incidents. Furthermore, data collected to gauge her level of engagement in class, as compared to a peer composite, demonstrated that her on-task behavior is closer to that of her classmates.

Conclusion In conclusion, FBA-BSP is appropriate for young children. Research has demonstrated that FBA-BSP can be used effectively with children as young as 2 to 5 years old, prior to entering typical K–12 education (Blair et al., 2010; Duda et al., 2008; Nielsen & Mcevoy, 2004). Furthermore, FBA-BSP is highlighted in the DEC’s (2014) recommended practices. Even though young children are typically more impulsive, disruptive, and self-­focused at this developmental stage than at older ages, FBA-BSP is still applicable for those young children whose problem behavior is meaningfully discrepant from their same-age peers. Furthermore, research demonstrates that early, effective intervention for these children is critical, as without effective intervention they are at risk for beginning a trajectory of negative life consequences including academic failure, social isolation, and escalating negative interactions with adults (Campbell, 1995; Dunlap et al., 2006; Reid, 1993). Research based on the implementation of FBA-BSP has demonstrated significant improvements in young children’s behavior, including children with diagnoses as varied as emotional–­behavioral disorders, pervasive developmental disorder, and expressive language disorder (Blair et al., 2010; Duda et al., 2008; Nahgahgwon et al., 2010; Stage et al., 2006). A multi-­tiered SWPBS framework can be applied with this age group, at least in center-­based care that includes multiple staff and groups of children. In general, the procedures and protocols for conducting FBA-BSP in early childhood are similar to those for children in elementary or secondary school. Data are collected through indirect and direct means, testable hypotheses are formed, and behavior support strategies are developed in response to the testable hypothesis. By identifying at-risk children and providing early intervention, FBA-BSP in ECE settings can be an effective tool for providing the necessary behavior support that these children, their families, teachers, and caretakers need to successfully adapt to the ECE classroom and home.

Chapter 11

Technology Trends in Functional Behavioral Assessment and Intervention J. Matt Jameson, Allison L. Bruhn, and Leanne S. Hawken

Introduction FBA is based on the ongoing use of data collection and analysis procedures (e.g., direct behavioral observations) to identify the function of problem behavior. Clinicians and researchers have used technology for recording “real-time” or direct observation data, and this use will certainly gain momentum in schools with the increased availability of computer technology and data collection software (Steege & Watson, 2009). Although a number of software programs (for a review, see Tapp & Wehby, 2000; Walker, 2011) have been created and used for FBA, thus far they have all required a cumbersome desktop/laptop computer or expensive and specialized personal digital assistants (PDAs), which limits the utility and feasibility of use in a classroom or other school settings. More recently, major advances in PDA software and broadband wireless connectivity have been driving the development of a new generation of software and apps for FBA. Despite these advances, identifying evidence-­based FBA tools that can capture accurate information that describes the problem behavior continues to be a major issue. It is critical that school personnel using these tools be able to conduct reliable FBA with a brief investment of time and effort (Horner, 1994). A clinical standard for conducting an FBA should guide the selection and use of these new “high-tech” tools and require the following components: (1) the problem behaviors can be operationally and objectively defined; (2) antecedent 214



Technology Trends 215

events that influence the problem behaviors can be identified, observed, and recorded; and (3) a hypothesis or summary statement(s) is developed and validated through direct observational data that identify the maintaining consequences of the problem behaviors (Horner, O’Neill, & Flannery, 1993). In this chapter we describe this new generation of apps and software that can assist school personnel in the FBA process. The description includes tools for both direct observation and data collection as well as apps that have the potential to be used as intervention components in a comprehensive BSP. We suggest three principles that must drive the application of FBA technology to classroom settings: 1.  First, the primary purpose of FBA technology is to be one part of a process of comprehensive SWPBS that will lead to meaningful outcomes for students with behavioral challenges (Reid, 2000). Technology is not a panacea but does have the potential to increase the sensitivity and utility of FBA processes in applied settings (Hastings & Brown, 2000). It can make data collection easier and more accurate, as well as provide a mechanism for intervention. Technology can be one tool for professionals to use to help students achieve meaningful behavior change through comprehensive positive behavioral supports. Thus FBA technology tools and their use must never be seen as an end unto themselves. Rather, lifestyle-­changing outcomes for students, at the core of a complex process that may or may not include the use of “high-tech” tools, is the desired outcome of the FBA process. 2.  Although analog or paper-based FBA in applied settings is arguably still the current benchmark supported by the evidence base in scholarly journals (Hastings & Brown, 2000) and there are numerous FBA techniques that can be used in applied settings (Horner, Vaughn, Day, & Ard, 1996; O’Neill et al., 2015), practitioners would be remiss to ignore the current and evolving FBA technology. It is critical to remember that developing the evidence base that supports the effectiveness of technology is a lengthy process that passes through distinct phases of exploratory, descriptive, and empirical research (Edyburn, 2013). FBA and BSP technologies are still in their early phases in the development of an empirical evidence base. At best, the evidence base for current handheld (e.g., PDA) technologies is, with a few exceptions of small, single-­subject designs (for a review see Mechling, 2011), still largely in its descriptive phase. 3. Finally, perhaps the most important technology skill or tool FBA team members can possess is the capacity to evaluate the critical features and feasibility, or “utility,” of FBA technology tools in relation to desired outcomes, student/ teacher–­technology interface, cost, and other salient features. With today’s technologies evolving at a dizzying pace, being able to evaluate confidently how the technology meets the user’s needs is increasingly important.

216

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Locating an App for Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior Today, technology has become a ubiquitous part of the lives of most teachers and students. By 2008, an estimated 100% of U.S. public schools had one or more instructional computers with Internet access, and the ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access was 3.1 to 1 (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, 2010). Within public schools, faculty, staff, and students use technology for standardized assessment, data collection to inform instructional planning, curriculum delivery, online assessment, and access to digital content. It is common today to see classrooms with desktop computers and overhead LCD projectors, SMART boards, document cameras, and other technologies. The decreasing cost and widespread availability of computers has stimulated the development of computer-­aided behavioral observation tools in the last several decades (Walker, 2011). During the 1990s, several such systems were described in the literature (Behavior Observer System, DATACAP, HARCLAG, etc.). These systems increased the accuracy of observations by allowing direct data entry into a computer with automatic time stamping and compatibility with other software programs (Kahng & Iwata, 1998). For many researchers and clinicians, this eliminated the time-­consuming and error-prone data transcription process from analog tools and increased the efficiency of data analysis and graphical representation (Noldus, Trienes, Hendriksen, Jansen, & Jansen, 2000). More recently, in perhaps the most rapid technological evolution, handheld touch-­interface devices with video capture capacity, such as the iTouch, iPad, and iPhone, are increasingly common for both student and teacher use (Jameson et al., 2012). Conservative estimates suggest more than 4.5 million iPads are currently being used in schools (Etherington, 2013). In October 2013, there were more than 1 million apps, with almost half being developed for the Apple iPad (Costello, 2013). To date, educators have their choice of more than 40,000 apps designated for educational uses. If this number included other apps used to access content, such as electronic books, organizational and productivity tools, reference tools, and search engine apps, then the total likely exceeds 200,000 apps (Walker, 2011) with almost 200 new apps being submitted for distribution each day. Simply locating and evaluating the quality of an individual app with a reasonable time investment becomes a daunting task. Carefully selected search keywords and strings, Google operators, and search filters can all be used to help practitioners to find effective and useful FBA and intervention tools. Tables 11.1 and 11.2 provide some tips and guidance for effective searching using both the Apple App Store and Google. The following three sections give practitioners an overview of technology tools for use in the FBA process and subsequent behavioral intervention planning. First, we describe existing FBA observational data collection technologies



Technology Trends 217

TABLE 11.1. Tips on Searching for FBA/Intervention Apps within the App Store (Apple iOS) 1. Define the keyword(s) used to locate your desired app and enter into the search field. 2. Search for similar keywords. Often the app keywords may be similar or synonyms to the word you are driving your search with. 3. Once you have found a relevant app you can often “see similar” or follow the link to the website of the developer where other relevant products might be accessed. 4. If you have found and downloaded functional behavioral assessment apps, you can use the Genius feature, which can identify the types of apps you have downloaded and find similar apps. Genius is not turned on by default. To turn on Genius for the App Store, you must go to the Settings app and navigate to the tab called iTunes & App Store. Click on the button to view your Apple ID (which you will have to enter at this step), and you’ll see a place to turn Genius on and off. If you don’t have very many apps or the majority are not related to functional behavioral assessment, then Genius will not be a helpful tool. If you do, however, have a device predominantly for functional assessment apps, then Genius can be a useful tool in finding similar apps. One drawback to note is that Genius typically only recommends apps that have been rated highly by other App Store users. In the case of functional assessment apps, currently many have few if any reviews. 5. Finally, don’t forget to toggle between iPad and iPhone Only apps on your tool bar. Many apps work on both platforms but are only listed in one or the other category due to Apple designation. So if your search has no results in the iPad Only mode, simply click the iPhone Only button, and pertinent and functional apps may be displayed that, while scaled for a smaller device, are still perfectly functional on tablets.

TABLE 11.2. Tips on Searching for FBA/Intervention Apps Using Google Search Operators (Apple and Android iOS) 1. Define the keyword(s) used to locate your desired app and enter into the search field. Choosing relevant keywords can make a big difference in the search results. 2. Use quotes to search for an exact word or set of words (e.g., “functional behavioral assessment apps,” although this may limit your search by unintentionally eliminating anything other than very precise words or phrases. 3. Google allows one to search for keywords that could be similar or synonymous to the ones you are using. Google will search for similar keywords like guides, how-to guides, manuals, and so on. You can do this by inserting a space and then a tilde between your keyword and general term (e.g., functional behavioral assessment ~apps). 4. Google allows one to eliminate a particular keyword from the search by putting a space and a hyphen between keywords and words you want to exclude from the search (e.g., ABC -network). This string will not include the ABC television network website. 5. To find sites that are similar to a URL you already know, use the word “related” followed by a colon (e.g., related:pbisapps.org). 6. Use an asterisk within a search as a placeholder for any unknown or variable terms (e.g., “functional behavioral *”).

Note. Based on Google (2014).

218

Specific Problems or Popul ations

that are linked with existing behavioral theories and are evidence based. Second, we describe setting event, antecedent, behavioral, and consequence intervention apps, as well as provide a framework for evaluating the utility of these apps. Finally, we provide an overview of a comprehensive Web-based program that allows one to store individual and schoolwide FBA data and assist school personnel in creating graphical representations of treatment fidelity and intervention outcomes.

FBA Observational Data Collection Apps/Technology Resources Direct observation and data collection are essential parts of the full FBA process. Direct observation procedures and tools should be structured to provide clear and useful information while their use should not be an excessive burden on practitioners in applied settings (O’Neill et al., 2015). This is of particular importance, as researchers have emphasized that it is critical to conduct naturalistic (i.e., conducted in the environment where the behavior occurs), descriptive observations (Chandler, Dahlquist, & Repp, 1999). This is because the contextual variables of where and when the behavior occurs will have a significant impact on the validity and reliability of the behavioral observation data and outcomes. Some researchers have suggested that a minimum of 15 to 20 behavioral occurrences over a period of 2 to 5 days be observed to ensure the validity of hypotheses formed (O’Neill et al., 2015). Conducting this number of observations for several days will be time consuming and can be challenging to accomplish in typical school settings. Use of observation apps and technology can reduce some of this time burden. Observational data, used in conjunction with archival reviews of existing data and FBA interview tools, can support practitioners in developing accurate behavioral hypotheses that identify the setting events, antecedents, behaviors, and maintaining consequences/functions of problem behavior, which in turn can be used to develop a functionally relevant intervention. In the following sections, we introduce the reader to (1) a number of “hightech” tools (e.g., iPhone and iPad apps) that can be used for FBA observations and (2) a checklist that school personnel can use to evaluate these apps, thus helping them select the most appropriate and useful app for them. Although there are numerous apps that can be used to track behaviors, the following sections focus on those that have been developed from existing evidence-­based practices or theoretical foundations in the FBA observation literature. While this section provides a comprehensive description of currently available observation apps (as of February 2014), the rapid development of apps will surely require practitioners to find and evaluate existing and new FBA observation apps. Although we have included a summary of apps and their features, not all features of all tools are listed. As a result, systematic, careful, and informed selection by the user is especially important to ensure the utility and functionality of the app.



Technology Trends 219

ABC Observation Apps The most basic form of descriptive observation is referred to as the ABC, or antecedent–­behavior–­consequence, assessment (Bijou, Peterson & Ault, 1968; Cipani, 2008; Zuni & McDougall, 2004). For each behavior observed, there is a record of the behavior and the events that occur long before or directly prior to the behavior (i.e., setting events and antecedents), the behavior (described in observable and measurable terms), and the events that follow the behavior (i.e., maintaining consequences or function; Kauffman, Mostert, Trent, & Hallahan, 1993). This ABC theoretical approach that focuses on identifying the antecedents and maintaining consequences, or functions, of a problem behavior encompasses the majority of currently available FBA apps. The following section is a comprehensive introduction to the currently available Apple iOS apps (e.g., iTouch, iPad, iPhone) that are based on the ABC theoretical framework and can provide a means for observational data recording and the design of comprehensive behavior support plans. ABC Data ($4.99), developed by CBTAonline (2009), is an app allowing professionals to collect data on the frequency of behaviors while also recording session duration. It has three configurable buttons that can be assigned any label. These three buttons could be assigned to potential antecedents, behaviors, and functions or assigned to three different behaviors. The limited number of configurable buttons does affect its utility for FBA observations, as individuals often have multiple antecedents, behaviors, and functions. It could be a very useful tool for behavior tracking especially if time or frequency is an important dimension of the target behavior. The app also has the ability to export data to team members through e-mail in CSV format. A more powerful tool, ABC Data Pro ($27.99) (CBTAonline, 2010), allows the user to configure many buttons for tracking more antecedents, behaviors, and functions and allows for behavior and/or event counting, partial interval recording, full interval recording, and ABC event recording. Automatic data summary is possible for frequency and interval data. Another powerful tool, iBAA ($129.99), developed by Future Help Designs (2012), is an FBA app for the iPhone designed for professionals to observe and record qualitative observations, develop cumulative tabulations of behavioral occurrences, conduct interval recording, and collect FBA data. The iBAA app compiles and summarizes the behavioral data and is one of the few apps that can calculate conditional probabilities, or the probability that a behavior will occur when an antecedent for the behavior is known to have occurred, within FBAs. Data can be presented graphically in the app and can be easily exported. The Functional Behavioral Wizard ($9.99), developed by WhizzWhatt Software (2014), allows practitioners to conduct FBAs for multiple behaviors at once using frequency or duration counts and allows for the individualization of each assessment to accommodate the observation of several individuals with the same app (which is a common feature in almost all of the described functional

220

Specific Problems or Popul ations

assessment observation [FAO] apps). The app can then be used to identify behavioral function(s) and generate graphical reports and summaries that can be shared with others via e-­mailed files. BehaviorSnap ($24.99), developed by SuperPsyched, LLC (2013), is a behavior observation tool created to identify the frequency, duration, and function of the targeted behavior(s) and can graph data within the app. Data outputs are in PDF format and can be e-­mailed as attachments to stakeholders. ABC Logbook ($27.99), developed by CBTAonline (2011), is a data collection app that allows for the concurrent observation of a large number of behaviors for many individuals. The app comes with built-in data analyses and the ability to calculate reliability data. It includes access to Web-based visual and pattern analysis, conditional probability analysis, and interobserver agreement including Cohen’s kappa calculations.

Competing Behavior Model App We identified one app that focused on the FBA step of identifying alternate and competing behaviors to be taught as a replacement to the problem behavior. Accurate functional observation leads to functionally relevant interventions. Well-­designed and -implemented BSPs make challenging behaviors irrelevant by changing the environment, inefficient through teaching easier replacement behaviors, and ineffective by altering the consequences that follow the behavior. At the core, one must identify an acceptable behavior that the student can engage in but that still serves the same function as the problem behavior. It is important that the replacement behavior be both socially appropriate and equally efficient as the problem behavior in achieving the desired consequences for the student (O’Neill et al., 2015). The FAO Observer Tool (free), developed by JBROS Software (2012), is basically an ABC recording tool, but with each behavioral incident a time-­stamped competing behavior summary pathway has been developed that prompts school personnel to teach competing and desired behaviors while honoring the function of the observed behavior. Like almost all the other functional observation apps described, the app can track multiple individuals and multiple behaviors that are prepopulated, or defined, by the practitioner. This app allows for unlimited prepopulation of students. Then individualized setting events, antecedents, behaviors, and functions can be entered with a single button click or individualized during each behavioral event. Behavioral incidents can be exported in CSV format for manipulation in Excel or other compatible software, and the competing pathway model can serve as a framework for developing interventions that address settings events, antecedents, teaching competing and desired behavior, and consequent interventions. This app prompts practitioners to address not only setting events and antecedents, but also to teach a competing behavior that honors the function, such as appropriately asking for a break from the task, as well as teaching the desired behavior (e.g., completing the task independently).



Technology Trends 221

Video‑Capable Functional Assessment Observation Tools Perhaps the most useful FBA tools are ones that incorporate built-in video recording of behaviors. This function allows individuals to not only record data in vivo, but to revisit the behavior to code at a later time, to obtain interrater reliability, and to reconsider the testable hypotheses derived during live observations. Tantrum Tracker ($1.99), developed by Grant Technology Services (2013), allows one to track multiple individuals and their behaviors on an ongoing basis. It allows professionals to add and remove defined categories for where the behavior occurred, the antecedent and/or setting events, and what the maintaining consequences were. It also can record video or take photos of behavioral incidents from within the app. However, the data collection and analysis is not linked directly to the recorded video, so one might argue that all the apps thus far described have the same capacity, given that all iOS devices have video capture capacity. Behavior Tracker Pro ($29.99), developed by Marz Consulting (2011), allows practitioners to track behaviors and automatically develop a graphical representation of relevant behavioral dimensions (e.g., ABC, frequency, and duration). This app has the option to record video and allows the user to e-mail CSV data for use in Excel or other spreadsheet software to create graphical representation of the data, as well as the capacity to graph internally. Perhaps the two most powerful FBA apps are the ABC Video Pro Lite (free, primarily an introduction to the ABC Video Pro) (CBTAonline, 2013b) and ABC Video Pro ($49.99) (CBTAonline, 2013a). Developed by CBTAonline (2013a, 2013b), these apps combine the capacity to analyze both video recordings and live observations. The ABC Video Pro app is the most powerful and has 30 configurable buttons that can be prepopulated to identify antecedents, behaviors, and functions of observed behaviors. As a result, data entry is quick and easy, which helps to maximize the reliability of the FBA data. Sharing the data with team members and other pertinent stakeholders is simple, as the user can easily e-mail the data from within the app. Data output is automatically organized by a time-based index of observed events. The apps also include measures to ensure the security and confidentiality of student data while facilitating sharing with pertinent stakeholders. A summary of FAO apps is provided in Table 11.3. Although the preceding section represents a comprehensive list of currently available ABC and competing behavior model-based FAO tools, because of the rapid pace of app development, one of the primary skills that practitioners will have to develop is the ability to evaluate the features and feasibility of any given app. To this end, we have adapted a checklist including the most basic to more advanced FAO app features in the FAO App Evaluation Rubric (see Figure 11.1). The ability to be able to locate apps through targeted searches for resources and the subsequent ability to evaluate the utility and feasibility of the app in applied settings is critical for practitioners who intend on using high-tech tools in the FBA process. In addition, the evaluation of the quality and feasibility of apps

222

Specific Problems or Popul ations

TABLE 11.3.  FBA Observation Apps App

Developer website

Key features

ABC Data

http://cbtaonline.com (CBTAonline, 2009)

•• Aids in the collection of data on the frequency of behaviors. •• Records session duration with three configurable buttons that can be assigned any label. •• Ability to export data to team members through email in CSV format.

ABC Data Pro

http://cbtaonline.com (CBTAonline, 2010)

•• Web-based analysis tools for both session analysis and reliability analysis. •• Behavior and/or event counting, partial interval recording, full interval recording, ABC (FBA) recording. •• Nine configurable buttons for tracking behaviors. •• Ability to export data to team members through e-mail in CSV format.

iBAA

http://futurehelpdesigns.com/ behavioralapps (Future Help Designs, 2012)

•• Records qualitative observations, develops cumulative tabulations of behavioral occurrences, interval recording, functional behavioral assessment data. •• Compiles and summarizes the behavioral data. •• Calculates conditional probabilities. •• Data can be presented graphically in the app and can be exported in CSV format.

Functional Behavioral Wizard

http://whizzwatt.com (WhizzWhat Software, 2014)

•• Observer tool for functional assessments for multiple behaviors. •• Records frequency or duration counts. •• Assists in identifying function of problem behavior and generates reports and graphs. •• Data can be presented graphically in the app and can be exported in CSV format.

Behavior Snap

www.behaviorsnap.com (SuperPsyched, LLC, 2013)

•• Allows for multiple behaviors to be counted simultaneously within one direct observation. •• Interval, ABC, frequency, and duration observations. •• Customizable for individual students. •• Quick start function. •• Produces graphs in PDF format to share by e-mail.

ABC Logbook

http://cbtaonline.com (CBTAonline, 2011)

•• Over 100 different behaviors or events per individual can be recorded in one session. •• Precise time logging of each event. •• Interobserver agreement (IOA) calculator, event, and interval. •• Identify observer, setting, context for observations. •• Adds notes and comments about session and/or behavior. •• Exports CSV data via e-mail. •• Includes access to a free Web-based visual and quantitative pattern analyses with conditional probability analysis. •• Automatically calculates traditional IOA and Cohen’s kappa.

(continued)



Technology Trends 223

TABLE 11.3.  (continued) App

Developer website

Key features

FAO Observer Tool

http://JBrosSoftware.com (JBROS Software, 2012)

•• Tracks setting events, antecedent events, behavioral incidents, and functions of the behavior. •• Easy data entry with prepopulated student data. •• Time-tagged behavioral records. •• Competing behavior pathway developed for school personnel. •• Single-click export of CSV data to e-mail or file. •• Hotlinks to additional resources.

Tantrum Tracker

http://granttechnologyservices. com/?cat=48 (Grant Technology Services, 2013)

•• Tracks multiple individuals. •• Tracks the locations of behaviors, the types of behavior, the causes, responses taken, what mitigated the tantrums, and the resolutions. •• Records video or takes photos of behavioral incidents within the app. •• Provides a full “notes” system, which is available for providing annotations on behavioral incidents. •• Statistics for any individual may be viewed through a visual charting/graphing feature. •• Exports data as a CSV file or e-mail media.

Behavior Tracker Pro

www.behaviortrackerpro.com (Marz Consulting, 2011)

•• Takes ABC data or only frequency and duration data. •• Graphs data. •• Graphs by ABC: choose antecedent, behavior, or consequence as graphing focus. •• Sends graphs from the iPhone as a picture to parents, teachers, or other team members. •• Video-records a behavior. •• Analyzes and graphs data by student. •• Supports multiple observers and multiple clients.

ABC Video Pro

http://cbtaonline.com (CBTAonline, 2013a, 2013b)

•• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••

Multiple recording modes. 27 buttons for tracking targeted behaviors. Partial and whole interval recording. Time-tagged events. Saves multiple sets of button labels. Identifies observer, setting, context for observations in e-mailed data. Ability to take and share notes about each observation. CSV data export. Count analysis matrix. Proportion, partial interval, whole interval, and duration analysis. FBA analysis. Conditional probability analysis. IOA calculations. Cohen’s kappa calculations. Video-records behavioral incidents.

224

Specific Problems or Popul ations

App feature

Yes No

App has multiple recording modes App has ad hoc recording feature App has several different items (behaviors or events) that can be recorded in one session App records individuals—video App can organize individuals within groups App has partial-interval recording capacity App has whole-interval recording capacity App has momentary time sampling mode App has precise time logging of each event App can set audio interval alerts App can set interval length timer to specified time periods App can set session length timer App has pause and can time duration of pause App has buttons that can be configured to relevant dimension of behavior App has user-defined button labels App will save button labels defined by observer App can save multiple sets of button labels/configurations defined by observer App can duplicate individual/group configurations App can share group and button configurations with another user via e-mail App has multiple user(s) “profiles,” each with data collection configurations composed of groups, individuals, and behaviors App can export observer, setting, context information for observations App allows user to add notes about observational sessions App allows user to add notes for each occurrence of behavior App can video-record group events for assessment App can delete mistakes in real time App can preserve a log of deleted items App allows users to review stored recordings App can store multiple individuals’/group’s recordings and data (continued)

FIGURE 11.1.  FAO app evaluation rubric. Adapted from http://cbtaonline.com with permission from Raymond Romanczyk (Romanczyk, Gillis, Callahan, & Kruser, n.d.). From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.



Technology Trends 225

App feature

Yes No

App has full data export—chronological order App has full data export—chronological order for all group’s events App allows users to select date and time range for data export for group/individual App has data output formatted for Excel (copy, paste, auto setup) App can export data via e-mail App allows users to export data as a CSV file that Excel can open App allows users to develop a count analysis matrix App allows users to develop rate and duration analyses App allows users to develop FBA analyses App allows users to develop conditional probability co-occurrence analysis App allows users to develop event-based interobserver agreement (IOA)

FIGURE 11.1.  (continued)

should be driven, at a minimum, by the five primary desired outcomes of the functional assessment process (O’Neill et al., 1997; Storey & Post, 2012): 1. The app should allow practitioners to develop a clear and objective description of problem behaviors. 2. The app should be able to record the events, times, and situations that predict when the behavior will and will not occur. 3. The app should help to identify the functions of the problem behavior. 4. The app should give practitioners a framework for developing hypotheses that describe the relevant aspects (i.e., setting events, antecedents, consequences) of the behavior. 5. The app should support the collection of direct observational data. Finally, based on our examination of the previously described tools, we have identified five key features that every FAO app should have: 1. The ability to track antecedents, behavioral occurrences, functions, and maintaining consequences of the behavior. 2. The ability to assign values to buttons/fields to simplify and streamline data collection that is automatically time tagged and organized. 3. The ability to track multiple individuals and have individualized assignable buttons for hypothesized or identified ABCs of challenging behavior. 4. The capacity to easily export data to other software for graphical representation or the ability to develop graphs within the app. 5. The ability to easily export data to relevant stakeholders via e-mail or other file formats.

226

Specific Problems or Popul ations

Intervention Apps/Technology Resources In addition to the various technology tools for collecting behavioral data in the classroom, multiple tools exist for developing interventions for students with challenging behaviors. Many of those tools involve apps for digital devices (e.g., iPads, smartphones). Again, the question is, how can educators navigate an app store with an enormous number of options without feeling overwhelmed? How can they make sense of and begin to determine which apps might be appropriate for a student with escape-­maintained off-task behavior or a student with attention-­ seeking inappropriate language? How do school personnel know whether the app will be user friendly and motivating to the student? In this section, we offer some guidance for selecting appropriate intervention apps. But first, we begin with an overview of several apps that can be used as one tool in developing BSPs for students with a range of behaviors maintained by various functions. These apps may be used to address setting events, or as proximal, antecedent-­based strategies for prompting desired behaviors. Others may be used to identify instructional options targeting deficits in specific skills or behaviors. Finally, some may be consequence-­based apps that address function through the use of reinforcement.

Setting Event‑Based Interventions As discussed previously in this book, setting events generally provide the environmental, social, or physiological context for behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2013). In other words, these factors can create the context for behaviors to occur or not occur, as well as alter the value of reinforcers (Kazdin, 2011). For example, a student may be tardy to school because he was up late the night before and overslept. This setting event may make it more likely the student will be defiant when presented with a task, as opposed to the day before when the student had plenty of sleep and arrived to school on time. Or perhaps a student misses a dose of medication, causing her to be more off-task than normal. Maybe the student is dealing with a death in the family, a fight with a friend, or a bad grade in a class. All of these setting events can help explain why antecedents (i.e., events immediately preceding behavior) trigger problem behaviors. Thus setting event-based interventions may be used to decrease the likelihood an antecedent will prompt negative behaviors. In Table 11.4 we describe several apps that can be used to address environmental, social, and physiological setting events. Many of these apps can be used to track what is going on in the setting at a specific time, which can be helpful to students, parents, and teachers if they use the data to better understand behavior. The TracknShare app (Track & Share Apps, 2013) allows users to input data about multiple physiological events such as how much sleep the student got the night before and what food was eaten that day. This information may be helpful



Technology Trends 227

TABLE 11.4. Setting Event‑Based Apps to Prevent Problem Behavior and Promote Positive Behavior Setting event category Environmental

Social

Description

App

Events associated with the immediate environment and activity (e.g., temperature, noise, people in the setting, instructional activity, time of day, schedule changes)

Day One ($4.99; Bloom Built, 2014) http://dayoneapp.com •• A journaling app that allows users to chronicle events each day. The app automatically records current data such as location, time and date, weather, music playing, etc. Users can create writing reminders and also share journal entries via social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, e-mail).

Events associated with interactions with others (e.g., fight with a friend, death of a loved one, divorce of parents)

Day One ($4.99; Bloom Built, 2014) http://dayoneapp.com •• A journaling app that allows users to chronicle events each day. The app automatically records current data such as location, time of day, weather, music playing, etc. Users can create writing reminders and also share journal entries via social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, e-mail).

Too Noisy (free; Walsall Academy, 2012b) http://toonoisyapp.com/features •• Displays a noise meter and graphics change as noise level fluctuates between acceptable and unacceptable levels (serves as a visual prompt to students).

Social media apps (free; e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Skype, Facetime) •• Social media apps are designed to allow users to connect instantly with others via text, photos, or live conversation. Physiological

Events associated with one’s physical or mental processes (e.g., allergies, sleep, illness, hunger, pain, mood)

TracknShare ($4.99; Track & Share Apps, 2013) www.trackandshareapps.com/Pro •• A self-management app for tracking various health-related items (e.g., mood, sleep, food intake, stress, weight, pain). Data can be tracked by day and users can set daily goals that can be viewed on graphs. My Autism Day (free; Little App Helpers, 2014) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/my-autism-day/ id509433467?mt=8 •• An app focusing on autism that allows users to keep a daily log of notes on multiple behaviors, record information about activities and goals, and keep data on health-related items like medication, sleep, and meals. The app can help users recognize how various setting events (e.g., sleep, food intake) affect behavior and learning. Pill Monitor ($1.99; Maxwell Software, 2013) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pill-monitor-for-ipadmedication/id566274100?mt=8 An app to help users manage medication usage (e.g., scheduling reminders to take pills, document side effects).

228

Specific Problems or Popul ations

in predicting behavior and thus can be used to set goals and decrease the likelihood of problem behaviors. Using the previous example, an adult (e.g., parent or school personnel) may look at the TracknShare data and find the student is consistently coming to school on Mondays tired from a lack of sleep over the weekend. This fatigue is leading to irritability and off-task behavior when the student is asked to complete a task. In practice, the adult could work with the student using TracknShare to set sleep goals and continually monitor his progress. The idea is that the app will serve as a reminder to parents and the teacher that the child needs to get more sleep. If they are working collaboratively to address the child’s behavioral issues, they can emphasize strategies that will help him get more sleep (e.g., maintaining a consistent bedtime routine during the weekends, reduced caffeine consumption) and increase the probability of appropriate behavior when presented with a task demand.

Antecedent‑Based Interventions Antecedent-­based interventions involve immediate changes in the student’s environment that will encourage her to perform the desired behavior rather than the problem behavior. Typically, antecedent adjustments may focus on the environment, scheduling and routines, organizational tools, visual or audio cues, securing student attention, methods of instruction, opportunities to respond, self-­management procedures (e.g., self-­monitoring, goal setting), sensory stimulation, and communication aids (Kern & Clemens, 2007). In Table 11.5, we provide a description of several antecedent-­based strategies and apps that support the use of these strategies. Although the vast majority of the apps do not have rigorous studies documenting their effectiveness in promoting behavioral change, the antecedent strategies themselves are research-­based. For example, increasing students’ opportunities to respond has been recognized as a way to improve their on-task behavior and decrease disruptive behavior (Sutherland, Alder, & Gunter, 2003; Sutherland & Wehby, 2001). This means that as students actively respond to academic content by writing an answer or making a statement, task engagement will improve. An app to support this strategy is eClicker (Big Nerd Ranch, 2012). In practice, a teacher can “poll” his/her students using nearly any mobile device. For example, the teacher may ask a question like, “Which one of these statements is a metaphor?” or “Find the square root of 64.” Students then respond using their own device (e.g., smartphone, iPad). With the teacher’s mobile device connected to a projector, the frequency of answers is projected onto a screen (e.g., 75% of students answered “c”). One benefit of this app is that students can respond anonymously, and the teacher can get a broad picture of classwide understanding. The teacher can also access student-­level data to determine who is mastering the content and who is not. For students whose behavioral function is to escape teacher attention, particularly when presented with academic prompts, the eClicker (Big Nerd Ranch, 2012)



Technology Trends 229

TABLE 11.5. Antecedent‑Based Interventions Focused on Prompting Desired Behaviors Antecedentbased strategy

Description

App

Physical environment

Creating a space that is free of distractions and promotes student learning

Too Noisy (free; Walsall Academy, 2012b) http://toonoisyapp.com/features •• Displays a noise meter and graphics change as noise level fluctuates between acceptable and unacceptable levels (serves as a visual prompt to students).

Schedules, routines, and organization

Breaking large tasks into small chunks with specific dates or times for completion, having consistent activities and procedures for completing activities and transitioning

Autiplan Pictoplanner (free—basic version; Autiplan, 2014) www.autiplan.com •• A planning tool that can be used to create visual schedules and task analyses. •• Pictures can be linked to specific times and days. iPrompts ($49.99 or $99.99; Handhold Adaptive, 2013a) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/iprompts-visual-supportsschedules/id410386084?mt=8 •• Research-based app for creating and presenting visual supports (e.g., visual schedules, task analyses) to help students make transitions, be prepared for what is to come, and learn various skills. My Daily Tasks ($4.99; Ablevox, 2013) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id554657914?mt=8 •• A versatile app used to create daily schedules, keep track of rewards/points, and provide a way for teachers and parents to communicate.

Visual/audio cues

Using visual or audio prompts to give notice of an activity about to occur, to provide direction, or to cue self-regulation skills

iPrompts ($49.99 or $99.99; Handhold Adaptive, 2013a) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/iprompts-visual-supportsschedules/id410386084?mt=8 •• Research-based app for creating and presenting visual supports (e.g., visual schedules, task analyses) to help students make transitions, be prepared for what is to come, and learn various skills. Classroom Timer (free; Walsall Academy, 2012a) •• A timer that can be visually displayed to inform students about how long they are working, when to stop, etc. Motivaider ($1.99; Behavioral Dynamics, 2012) http://habitchange.com/iphone_app.php •• A vibrating and/or audio prompting system for selfmonitoring behavior.

Instructional methods

Providing differentiated instruction and directions targeting the student’s needs, abilities, and interests

Vizzle (free 30-day trial; Monarch Teaching Technologies, 2011) www.monarchteachtech.com/vizzle •• Interactive, multimedia lessons supported by visual aids. •• Lessons can be teacher-created or Vizzle samples can be used. (continued)

230

Specific Problems or Popul ations

TABLE 11.5.  (continued) Antecedentbased strategy Securing attention

Description

App

A signal that cues all students to stop what they are doing and direct their eyes and ears toward the teacher

iPrompts ($49.99 or $99.99; Handhold Adaptive, 2013a) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/iprompts-visual-supportsschedules/id410386084?mt=8 •• Research-based app for creating and presenting visual supports (e.g., visual schedules, task analyses) to help students make transitions, be prepared for what is to come, and learn various skills. Too Noisy (free; Walsall Academy, 2012b) http://toonoisyapp.com/features •• Displays a noise meter and graphics change as noise level fluctuates between acceptable and unacceptable levels (serves as a visual prompt to students).

Opportunities to respond

Increasing the number of times students can actively respond or participate when prompted by teacher

eClicker Presenter ($14.99/audience—free; Big Nerd Ranch, 2012) http://www.bignerdranch.com/apps/eclicker-audience •• An app for “polling” the class using various question types (e.g., multiple choice, true/false). •• Immediate display of results, but student answers on display are anonymous.

Sensory stimulation

Allowing access or avoidance of sounds, visual cues, or actions that are comfortable or uncomfortable

Too Noisy (free; Walsall Academy, 2012b) http://toonoisyapp.com/features •• Displays a noise meter and graphics change as noise level fluctuates between acceptable and unacceptable levels (serves as a visual prompt to students).

Selfmanagement

A range of strategies used to help students be aware of their behavior and to set goals to improve their behavior

Motivaider ($1.99; Behavioral Dynamics, 2012) http://habitchange.com/iphone_app.php •• A vibrating and/or audio prompting system for selfmonitoring behavior. Percentally ($2.99; Expressive Solutions, 2010) http://expressive-solutions.com/percentally.html •• Students can count their behaviors and see tallies graphed as percentages. Habit Monkey (free; Boot Strapped Coffee, 2013) http://motivation-monkey.co.uk/habit-monkey •• Students can set goals for behaviors, count them, and track their progress.

Communication aids

Technology-based tools to improve student communication

ProLoQuo2Go ($219.99; Assistive Ware, 2013) www.assistiveware.com/product/proloquo2go •• An augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) app allowing users who cannot speak to use symbols or typed text that is projected as a voice.



Technology Trends 231

system allows the student to participate without garnering any immediate attention for the response. Another antecedent-­based strategy with a robust literature base involves teaching students to manage their own behavior. Self-­management strategies, which include a range of methods for helping students become aware of their own behavior and set goals for improving that behavior, have a long history of effectiveness in improving both academic and behavior outcomes. These strategies have been successful for students in a variety of educational settings, across multiple grade levels, and with a range of behaviors (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009; Bruhn, McDaniel, & Kriegh, in press; Carter, Lane, Crnobori, Bruhn, & Oakes, 2011; Joseph & Eveleigh, 2011; Mooney, Ryan, Uhing, Reid, & Epstein, 2005; Sheffield & Waller, 2010). A popular self-­management strategy is self-­monitoring in which students are taught to be aware of their behavior and then physically record whether the behavior is occurring. The idea is that this meta­cognitive process will serve as a prompt to the student to perform appropriate behaviors. In this way, self-­ monitoring can be used as an antecedent-­based strategy. Recently, Bruhn et al. (in press) examined the most current studies on self-­monitoring to see whether and how technology was being used in self-­monitoring interventions. In 22 of the 41 reviewed studies, technological devices such as kitchen timers and audio devices (e.g., iPod) with prerecorded beeps were used to prompt self-­monitoring. One tool often used is a Motivaider® (www.habitchange.com) (Behavioral Dynamics, 2012), a small, electronic pager that vibrates on a schedule set by the user (e.g., every 2 minutes). The device costs around $50–60 (depending on the version) and is relatively unobtrusive in the classroom, as it can be worn on a belt, a waistband, or even carried in a pocket. Teachers can use it to prompt them to prompt students to check their behavior. Or the students themselves can use it. Recently, the Motivaider® for Mobile (Behavioral Dynamics, 2012) became available as an app for use on iOS and Android devices. It works in the same way as the actual device—­that is, users decide on a desired behavior, come up with a “personal message” to think about when prompted, and set the app to deliver a vibration and/or tone at a certain interval for a specified time period. The app is available at a significant cost savings, only $1.99. Whereas technology is often used for prompting self-­monitoring, to date, there have been only a handful of studies in which students used technology as a medium for recording their behavior. In one study, an elementary-­age boy with an emotional and behavior disorder recorded his on-task behavior using a handheld mobile device (i.e., Palm Zire 72; Gulchak, 2008). In another study, two middle school students used cellphones to respond to text messages sent via Twitter asking them whether they were on- or off-task (Bedesem, 2012). In the most recent study, three elementary students used repurposed student response systems, like the eClicker (Big Nerd Ranch, 2012) to respond to the question, “Am I listening to my teacher and following classroom expectations?” 10 times

232

Specific Problems or Popul ations

during a 50-minute class period (Szwed & Bouck, 2013). In all three studies, students’ task engagement improved. That said, it was unclear whether these electronic self-­monitoring devices had data storage capabilities, so it is likely all behavioral data had to be manually analyzed and transferred to a graph. One app that does have data storage capabilities is Habit Monkey (Boot Strapped Coffee, 2013), a free, user-­friendly, intuitive app that allows users to track frequency data on their own behaviors. The key is to make sure the behavior being monitored is functionally relevant (Briere & Simonsen, 2011). For example, imagine a student, TJ, displays off-task behavior to escape schoolwork. TJ might use Habit Monkey (Boot Strapped Coffee, 2013) to track the number of tasks completed. He would enter a goal for the week (e.g., 10 math worksheets) and simply select the “+” icon each time he completes an assignment. He can see the running total as well as his average weekly completion rate. Although the running total is helpful, the downside is that the user cannot view data by day, only by week. Regardless of whether apps are used to prompt students to monitor their behavior or for recording their own behavior, the underlying theory for behavioral change is the same. As students learn to think about and record their behavior, they become more able to direct and set standards for their own behavior. The result should be an increase in displays of positive behavior.

Behavior‑Based Interventions In addition to self-­management being used as an antecedent-­based strategy to prompt positive behaviors, we have also included it as a behavior-­based strategy because the first part of any self-­management strategy (e.g., self-­monitoring, goal setting, self-­instruction) involves learning what the behavior is and is not. Before students can monitor and record their own behavior, they must learn what the behavior looks like and how to be aware it is occurring. Beyond self-­management, other strategies to teach students about behavior and improve their social and behavioral skills include social stories and video modeling. These strategies are described in Table 11.6 and are accompanied by a list of a few apps supporting these evidence-­based strategies. Video modeling, or observational learning, involves students using observation of desired behaviors to learn how to demonstrate those behaviors (e.g., positive social interactions, turn-­taking, requesting assistance). For example, a student watches a video demonstration of a behavior and then is given opportunities to imitate the same skill (Bellini & Akullian, 2007). Many skills including motor behaviors (e.g., gripping a pencil), social skills, communication, self-­ monitoring, functional skills (e.g., brushing teeth), vocational skills, athletic performance, and emotional regulation can be taught using video modeling (Hitchcock, Dowrick, & Prater, 2003; Starek & McCullagh, 1999) Researchers have suggested that video modeling is an effective way to intervene with various students, particularly those with autism spectrum disorder who are known to



Technology Trends 233

TABLE 11.6.  Behavior‑Based Interventions Focused on Skill Building Behaviorbased strategy

Description

App

Social stories

Stories designed to help students better understand behavioral expectations, others’ perspectives, and social interactions

Story Maker for Social Stories ($39.99; Handhold Adaptive, 2013b) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/storymaker-for-social-stories/ id570007786?mt=8&affId=2104148 •• Made by the same people who created iPrompts (Handhold Adaptive), StoryMaker allows users to create social stories with pictures, text, and audio. Stories can be e-mailed and printed.

Video modeling

Using videos to help students develop a mental model of appropriate behavior

My Daily Tasks ($4.99; Ablevox, 2013) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id554657914?mt=8 •• Users can generate content to create videos and teach various skills. My Pictures Talk ($4.99; Grembe, 2011) www.grembe.com •• Users input pictures and videos to teach behaviors or create social stories, which can be e-mailed for use on other devices.

Selfmanagement

A variety of strategies used to help students be aware of their behavior and to set goals to improve their behavior

Zones of Regulation ($4.99; Selosoft, 2014) www.selosoft.com/zones.html •• Students learn to regulate their emotions and behavior by participating in activities that build self-control and problem-solving skills. Self-Regulation Training Board ($4.99; Chapin, 2014) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/self-regulation-training-board/ id644011272?mt=8 •• An app for elementary-age (3–10 yrs) students to learn physical, emotional, and cognitive self-regulation skills by helping them recognize triggers, understand emotions, and problem-solve.

benefit from visually cued instruction (Bellini & Akullian, 2007). Students with autism spectrum disorder tend to respond positively to video modeling for two primary reasons. One, the anxiety often felt by students with autism spectrum disorder when interacting with other people is limited because they are interacting with technology instead. Two, they may find videos to be highly motivating and thus are able to focus their attention on the videos (Bellini & Akullian, 2007). An inexpensive ($4.99) app school personnel can use to create their own video models is called My Pictures Talk (Grembe, 2011). Users can input pictures and videos to teach behaviors or even create social stories. Pictures and videos can be created in real time, or they can be preloaded or stored on the device (iPhones only). The user then records audio to accompany the picture or video. “Stories” (i.e., videos or picture slideshows) can be e-­mailed for use on other devices. So, in practice, a student may use the video model at school. Then the teacher could e-mail the “story” to the student’s parents to reinforce the skill

234

Specific Problems or Popul ations

building at home. One important skill that students need to generalize for both home and school settings is sharing. The teacher could take pictures of the student sharing materials with a friend at school and then provide narration on how to share with others; why it is important to share; and how to practice sharing at home with siblings, friends, and parents. The parent and student can watch the video together and then talk about it.

Consequence‑Based Interventions Finally, consequence-­based interventions are those strategies used after a problem behavior occurs to increase the occurrence of positive behaviors. Of course, reinforcement should match the function of behavior. Several apps can be used to pinpoint singular functions. In addition, many apps developed for reward tracking can address multiple functions at once. One app that has received considerable attention in the press and the PBIS community is Class Dojo (Class Twist, 2014). This free app is touted as a proactive classroom management tool and in that way may be seen as an antecedent-­based strategy. However, we have included it as a consequence-­based strategy because it is used to apply a positive or negative consequence after a behavior has occurred. To run Class Dojo (Class Twist, 2014), one device (e.g., phone, tablet, iPod Touch, interactive whiteboard, computer) and an Internet connection are needed. Each student in the class chooses a monster-­like avatar. A chart of the names and avatars is projected onto a screen, and when a teacher catches a student engaging in positive behaviors like using kind words, raising a hand to ask a question, or completing a task, the teacher uses his/her device to select that student’s name and to click on a point. The student receives instant notification of earning a +1 for positive behavior. Conversely, teachers can note negative behaviors, which show up in red as deductions. Of course, before employing a response–­cost system like this, teachers need to ensure that the system aligns with the values of their classroom and schoolwide behavioral expectations (e.g., schoolwide PBIS). Class Dojo (Class Twist, 2014) keeps track of all the data so that teachers can easily print out behavioral reports for students, parents, and administrators. Although this is a classroom-­level tool, teachers implementing function-­based interventions can use it as part of an individual student’s BSP. For instance, if Ms. Krupke’s student, Annie, has attention-­maintained behavior, she can increase the rate of positive points delivered to Annie and accompany point delivery with behavior-­specific praise (e.g., “Annie, I really like how hard you are working right now. You’ve earned a point.”). Those points may then be exchanged for other attention-­related items like lunch with the teacher or time with friends. A different type of app is needed for students who are escape motivated. Many students with escape-­motivated behavior avoid tasks because they perceive them as being too difficult (McIntosh, Horner, Chard, Dickey, & Braun, 2008). So getting them to engage in difficult tasks is often a struggle and can result



Technology Trends 235

in a coercive cycle of interactions between students and teachers (McIntosh et al., 2008). For example, students who struggle to read often exhibit behavior problems, and this correlation tends to get worse as students get older (Fleming, Harachi, Cortes, Abbott, & Catalano, 2004). The free Scholastic Reading Timer (Scholastic, 2013) is an app that can help students with escape-­maintained behavior in the context of reading. Students create a profile for themselves and then set a goal for how many minutes they want to read. Then the app’s stopwatch keeps track of their time. Within the app, they can log their minutes read each day. In class, a teacher might use this app to say, “Once you’ve read for 5 minutes, you can take a 2-minute break from reading.” In this way, students can monitor their progress and are allowed to briefly escape the task of reading only after they have completed some of the expected task. On a side note, there is also a parental component of the app that allows parents to view a weekly progress report of their child’s reading, access a variety of tips and articles for teaching and encouraging reading, and select from a book list.

Next Steps We’ve highlighted only a few of the relevant apps available on the market, and Table 11.7 provides a brief overview of different strategies that can be used as part of a multicomponent function-­based intervention and the corresponding apps that could be used to support those strategies. With so many apps available, it may be overwhelming to identify which ones would be the best fit for a particular student. To aid in this process, we have provided a list of questions to help guide selection of the most useful and appropriate apps. There are numerous apps available and, unsurprisingly, there are also multiple app evaluation rubrics and checklists, including the one provided earlier in this chapter. In this next section, we have consolidated some of the rubrics into our top five most pertinent questions to consider when selecting an app to use for intervention: 1.  Is it user-­friendly and intuitive? By nature, apps should be simple to use and understand. If they require a certain skill set or need additional clarification, then follow-­up questions include: Is there an accompanying website the user can access for additional help or instructions? Alternatively, is there a FAQ list and user tips built into the app? If the app is not easy to use for teachers or other adults, then it will likely be more of a hindrance than a help and should not be used for intervention, especially if there are no additional supports to assist the user. 2.  Is it cost-­efficient? Everyone is well aware of the budget issues schools face. Of course, free apps are great when money is tight. That said, many apps that claim to be “free” allow the user only limited access to available features. To access the best the app has to offer, often the user has to pay to upgrade to more

236

Specific Problems or Popul ations

TABLE 11.7. Consequence‑Based Interventions Focused on Functional Reinforcement Function

Examples of consequence-based interventions using apps for reinforcement

Attention

Class Dojo—praise (free; Class Twist, 2014) http://www.classdojo.com •• Teacher uses app to deliver positive or negative points for behavior. Points can be displayed on whiteboards or projecter screens. Points are to be accompanied by specific praise. LiveSchool—praise ($99/user; LiveSchool, 2014) http://whyliveschool.com •• Teacher uses app to deliver positive or negative points for behavior. Points can be displayed on whiteboards or projecter screens. Points are to be accompanied by specific praise.

Tangibles

Class Dojo—points (free; Class Twist, 2014) http://www.classdojo.com •• Teacher uses app to deliver positive or negative points for behavior. Points can be displayed on whiteboards or projecter screens. Points can be exchanged for valued items. LiveSchool—points, tickets, bucks ($99/user; LiveSchool, 2014) http://whyliveschool.com •• Teacher uses app to deliver positive or negative points for behavior. Points can be displayed on whiteboards or projecter screens. Points can be banked, tracked, and made to align with schoolwide plan that may include bucks, tickets, or scholar dollars.

Activities/ tasks

Scholastic Reading Timer (free; Scholastic, 2013) www.scholastic.com/apps/scholasticreadingtimer •• A reading timer and reading log to help students keep track of how long and how much they are reading. •• Parents and teachers can also log in to track progress and get daily tips or articles to improve reading. First & Then ($1.99; Good Karma Applications, 2010) •• User-created visual schedules to encourage students to engage in nonpreferred activities before participating in preferred ones. A timer is included in the app to help students know how long to engage in an activity.

Sensory stimulation

Bubbles (free; Hog Bay Software, 2011) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/bubbles/id284288607?mt=8 •• This app was developed for young kids who may need stimulation or distraction. Users continuously “pop” bubbles, which make noises when popped. In-app purchases can be made for other similar games or objects to pop.

Multiple functions

Caught Being Good ($.99; Hyceit, 2012) www.caughtbeinggoodapp.com/index.html •• Parents and teachers can set goals for certain behaviors or tasks. Once they observe the child performing desired behaviors, they recognize the child with praise and allow him/her to “spin” the wheel to earn a reward. iReward Chart ($3.99; Gotclues, 2009) www.irewardchart.com/#home •• Parents and teachers can enter individual kids, tasks, and rewards. It functions like an electronic sticker chart, but with more customizability and a way to track rewards much like a bank account. Beep & Boop (free; JibJab Media, 2013) www.storybots.com/beep-boop •• Students receive “beeps” for positive behavior and “boops” for negative behavior. They can keep track of points, set goals, and earn rewards for so many “beeps.”



Technology Trends 237

robust versions. Unfortunately, in the case of many apps, the old adage is true— you get what you pay for. The key is to shop around, read the user reviews, and determine whether the app fits within the budget. 3.  Is it age- and socially appropriate? Not only must the apps used for intervention be easy to use and affordable, they should match students’ developmental stage as well. For example, early elementary students may have a difficult time using complex self-­management apps. At the same time, the sensory stimulation app Bubbles (Hog Bay Software, 2011) and the rewards app Beep and Boop (JibJab Media, 2013) are likely too juvenile for older students. Thus it is important to consider the student’s age and maturity. 4.  Does it truly support the intervention you are trying to implement and the behavior you are trying to change? Too often, schools purchase technology to “be on the cutting edge” of education. Unfortunately, when it is not clear how to use the technology, these tools often sit unused in classrooms or the tools are not used in a way that enhances instruction or intervention. Just because a teacher has access to an iPad does not mean it should be used at every turn. Rather, the iPad should be used thoughtfully to enhance what is already being done and to engage the student. It is important to “work smarter, not harder.” School personnel must ascertain that the app supports the strategies most likely to bring about behavioral change. For example, a student who has difficulty getting started with activities may not need a visual schedule to prepare for transitions, but rather a prompt to get started and continue working (e.g., Motivaider®; Behavioral Dynamics, 2014) as well as reinforcement for getting started in a timely manner (e.g., Beep and Boop; JibJab Media, 2013). 5.  Does the app and its intended use match the function of the behavior? It is imperative that the app matches the behavioral function. Students using self-­management strategies need to monitor and evaluate functionally relevant behaviors (Briere & Simonsen, 2011). For example, a student whose problem behavior consists of inappropriate language maintained by peer attention does not need to monitor task completion, as that would not be functionally relevant. Similarly, when using a consequence-­based app like iReward Chart (Gotclues, 2009) or Caught Being Good (Hyceit, 2012), the interventionist needs to ensure the rewards being offered address function. This means the user will need to adjust default settings or input information to customize rewards to the individual.

Web‑Based Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Technology: ISIS‑SWIS The apps discussed thus far address one or more aspects of the FBA-BSP process, which can be helpful in certain aspects of data collection as well as to BSP

238

Specific Problems or Popul ations

implementation. For school staff interested in a more comprehensive, Web-based system to assist in the FBA-BSP process, the Individual Student Information System (ISIS) portion of the many options offered by School-wide Information System (SWIS) should be considered (May et al., 2000). SWIS was initially designed to organize and summarize office discipline referral data for the purpose of examining and evaluating effectiveness of Tier 1, schoolwide PBIS implementation. Since its inception, several features have been added, including a system to evaluate data at the Tier 2 level of behavior intervention called Check-In, CheckOut or CICO-SWIS (see Crone et al., 2010, for additional information on CICO). This section of the website allows school staff to track data for students who are at risk of but not currently engaging in severe problem behavior by summarizing and graphing points earned on a daily progress report. More recently, the ISIS-SWIS program was developed to provide school teams with a system to progress-­monitor students needing intensive, Tier 3, FBAbased support. ISIS-SWIS allows school personnel to upload and store important information related to implementing BSPs such as record reviews, FBA observation forms, and meeting notes so that key information is available in one location and can be easily accessed by behavior support team members. A key feature of ISIS-SWIS is that it provides school staff with a time-­efficient means to graph individual student data. A sample graph for an individual student (fictional) named Carly Johnson can be seen in Figure 11.2. ISIS-SWIS is flexible and allows school staff to gather data on both academic and social behavior using a variety of metrics including but not limited to percent (e.g., percent of work completed, percent of points earned), frequency, rate, and duration. In Figure 11.2, Carly’s problem behavior is disruption, and the behavior that is graphed is the average rate at which she is disruptive per minute. School teams create goals for each behavior that are translated into goal lines on the graphs. As data are collected, each data point above the goal line is green and data points below the line are red, allowing school staff to readily see whether students are making progress. In addition, if the intervention is not working and needs to be modified, a straight line is inserted on the graph and noted in the key as a “support plan change.” From Carly’s graph you can see that there were two behavior support plan changes, one on 4/27 and one on 5/11. In addition to outcome data, ISIS-SWIS allows school teams to track intervention fidelity data using a 1 to 5 rating scale, with 1 indicating low fidelity and 5 indicating high fidelity (i.e., teachers rate the extent to which the intervention is being implemented as planned). On the right side of Carly’s graph you can see the 1 to 5 scale and the light gray data points are tracking fidelity of implementation. As can be seen in Carly’s graph, when the fidelity rating increased, Carly’s average rate of disruption decreased (see data following 5/11 behavior support plan change). To access the ISIS-SWIS program, school teams need to be trained by a person certified as a SWIS facilitator. For more information on ISIS-SWIS and how to receive training, go to www.pbisapps.org.



Technology Trends 239

FIGURE 11.2.  Sample student graph from ISIS-SWIS. Copyright by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Reprinted by permission.

Conclusion The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of some of the technology tools that can be used to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the FBA-BSP process. Because technology is changing so rapidly, the number of tools available may likely double in the next few years. For this reason, we included a list of guiding questions in this chapter for school staff to use to more easily determine whether an app is going to meet their needs. Today technology has the potential to improve school staff’s ability to gather FBA data and effectively implement BSPs. As detailed in this chapter, although there have been some studies evaluating the effectiveness of using technology during the FBA-BSP process, much more research is needed to determine how and when to use technology and what will be the most efficient way for schools to include technology as part of their overall system of behavior support. ISISSWIS is a recent addition to the SWIS Web-based system, and research is also needed to evaluate its effects on implementation of the FBA-BSP process.

Appendices

Appendix A

Request for Assistance Form Date: 

Teacher/Team: 

IEP: Yes No (Circle) Student Name:  Situations

Grade: 

Problem Behaviors

Most Common Result

What have you tried/used? How has it worked?

What is your behavioral goal/expectation for this student?  What have you tried to date to change the situations in which the problem behavior(s) occur?      Modified assignments to

     Changed seating

     Changed schedule of

     Arranged tutoring to improve

     Changed curriculum

     Provided extra

match the student’s skills

assignments

the student’s academic skills

Other?

activities

assistance

What have you tried to date to teach expected behaviors?      Reminders about

     Clarified rules and

     Practiced the expected

     Reward program for

     Oral agreement with the

    Self-management

     Systematic feedback

     Individual written

     Contract with student/

expected behavior when problem behavior is likely expected behavior about behavior

expected behavior for the whole class

Other?

behaviors in class

student

program

contract with the student

with parents

What consequences have you tried to date for the problem behavior?      Loss of privileges

     Note or phone call to the      Office referral

    Time-out

    Detention

    Reprimand

     Referral to school

     Meeting with the

     Individual meeting with

counselor

Other?

student’s parents

student’s parents

the student

(continued)

From Todd, Horner, Sugai, and Colvin (1999). Copyright 1999 by the National Institute for Direct Instruction, Eugene, Oregon. Reprinted by permission.

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

243

APPENDIX A.  Request for Assistance Form  (page 2 of 2) WHEN ADDRESSING THIS PROBLEM, PLEASE CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1. When is the problem behavior(s) most and least likely to occur? • On particular days of the week (e.g., Monday) or times of day (e.g., right after recess)? • During or after interactions with certain people (e.g., during small, cooperative group projects)? • During certain types of activity or tasks (e.g., during apparently difficult or boring work)? • In connection with particular features of the physical environment (e.g., noisy, crowded)? • Features of routine (e.g., when there are unexpected changes or when a preferred activity is canceled)? • Medical or physical factors (e.g., apparent hunger or lack of sleep)? • Other influences? 2. What do you think the student(s) may gain from the problem behaviors? • Attention? What kind of attention? From whom? • Avoid an apparently difficult or boring activity? • Avoid teacher interaction? • Get control of a situation? • Avoid embarrassment in front of peers? Summary of Behavior Setting Events and Predictors

Behaviors of Concern

Maintaining Consequences

3. Are there appropriate behaviors that the student could use that would make the problem behavior unnecessary? 4. Teacher support team decision ††Some suggestions regarding interventions to try. ††Referral to a different team for assessment (speech hearing, academic):            ††Formation of an action team to conduct a functional assessment and develop a plan of support. 5. Date for follow-up            

244

Appendix B

Functional Behavioral Assessment–Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol) Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent Student Name:    Age:       Grade: 

  Date: 

Person(s) interviewed:  Interviewer:  Student Profile: What is the student good at or what are some strengths that the student brings to school? 

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent Description of the Behavior What does the problem behavior(s) look like? How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior(s)?

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur? Low      High 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 (continued)

The “Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Teacher/Staff/Parent” and “Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview— Student” sections are adapted with permission from March et al. (2000). “Step 6. Build a Competing Behavior Pathway” is from O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.). © 1997 South-Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions.

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy Steps 1–5 and Steps 7 and 8 of this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

245

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 2 of 16) Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (times of day and days of the week) Setting Events: Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.)

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the behavior occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.)

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

1. 2.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  2.  How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure 6

So-so 5

4

3

2

Not at all sure 1 (continued)

246

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 3 of 16) Functional Behavioral Assessment Interview—Student Student Name:    Age:       Grade: 

  Date: 

Interviewer:  Student Profile: What are the things you like to do, or do well, while at school? (activities, classes, helping others, etc.)

Step 1B: Interview Student Description of the Behavior What are some things you do that get you in trouble or that are a problem at school? (talking out, not getting work done, fighting, etc.)

How often do you        ? (Insert the behavior listed by the student.)

How long does         usually last each time it happens?

How serious is        ? (Do you or another student end up getting hurt? Are other students distracted?)

Description of the Antecedent Identifying Routines: When, where, and with whom are problem behaviors most likely? Schedule (Times)

Activity

Specific Problem Behavior

Likelihood With Whom Does of Problem Behavior Problem Occur? Low      High 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 (continued)

247

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 4 of 16) Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) What kind of things make it more likely that you will have this problem? (difficult tasks, transitions, structured activities, small-group settings, teacher’s request, particular individuals, etc.)

When and where is the problem most likely to happen? (days of week, specific classes, hallways, bathrooms)

When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? (days of week, specific classes, hallways, bathrooms)

Setting Events: Is there anything that happens before or after school or in between classes that makes it more likely that you’ll have a problem? (missed medication, history of academic failure, conflict at home, missed meals, lack of sleep, history of problems with peers, etc.)

Description of the Consequence What usually happens after the problem occurs? (what is the teacher’s reaction, how do other students react, is the student sent to the office, does the student get out of doing work, does the student get in a power struggle, etc.)

- - - - - - End of Interview - - - - - -

Step 2B: Develop a Testable Explanation Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

1. 2. 3.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  2.  3.  (continued)

248

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 5 of 16) Step 3: Rate Your Confidence in the Testable Explanation If you completed both interviews, was there agreement on these parts?  (Y/N) (a) Setting Events       (b) Antecedents       (c) Behaviors       (d) Consequences       (e) Function      How confident are you that your testable explanation is accurate? Very sure So-so 6

5

4

3

Not at all sure 2

1

Step 4: Conduct Observations (If Necessary) • If student has an identified disability and is at risk of suspension, expulsion, or change in placement you must conduct an observation of student. • If student does not meet above criteria, but confidence rating is 1, 2, 3, or 4, you should conduct observations to better understand when, where, and why the problem behavior is occurring. • If student does not meet above criteria, and confidence rating is 5 or 6, you may go directly to Step 6. Summarize Observation Data Setting Event

Antecedent

Behavior

Consequence

1. 2. 3. Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence listed above, why do you think the behavior is occurring? (to get teacher attention, to get peer attention, gets desired object/activity, escapes undesirable activity, escapes demand, escapes particular people, etc.) 1.  2.  3. 

Step 5: Confirm/Modify Testable Explanation Was there agreement between the teacher interview and the observation?  Y/N a) Setting Events     (b) Antecedents     (c) Behaviors     (d) Consequences     (e) Function    Was there agreement between the student interview and the observation? Y/N a) Setting Events     (b) Antecedents     (c) Behaviors     (d) Consequences     (e) Function    Based on the interviews and observations, what is your working testable explanation for why the problem behavior occurs? (continued)

249

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 6 of 16) Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway

Setting Event

Triggering Antecedent

Desired Behavior

Maintaining Consequences

Problem Behavior

Maintaining Consequences

Function

Alternative Behavior

Setting Event Strategies

Antecedent Strategies

Behavior Teaching Strategies

Consequence Strategies

(continued)

250

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 7 of 16) Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies

Tasks

Person Responsible

By When

Review Date

Evaluation Decision • Monitor • Modify • Discontinue

*If emergency behavior management procedures are necessary, attach crisis plan as a separate sheet. (continued)

251

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 8 of 16) Step 8: Evaluate Plan Behavioral Goal (use specific, observable, measurable descriptions of goal) What is the short-term behavioral goal?

        Expected date What is the long-term behavioral goal?

        Expected date Evaluation Procedures Data to Be Collected

Procedures for Data Collection

Person Responsible

Timeline

Plan review date:           We agree to the conditions of this plan: Student (date) Parent or guardian (date) Teacher (date) Teacher (date) Action team member (date)

Action team member (date) (continued)

252

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 9 of 16) Instructions for Completing the Functional Behavioral Assessment–Behavior Support Plan Protocol (F-BSP Protocol) The F-BSP Protocol was designed as a tool to guide the process of completing a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) and of linking the assessment to the design of an individual behavior support plan (BSP). The F-BSP Protocol is divided into eight steps: (1) Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent/Student; (2) Propose a Testable Explanation; (3) Rate Your Confidence in the Testable Explanation; (4) Conduct Observations; (5) Confirm/Modify Testable Explanation; (6) Build a Competing Behavior Pathway; (7) Select Intervention Strategies; and (8) Evaluation Plan. The F-BSP Protocol can be used to complete either a brief FBA or a full FBA. In a brief FBA, Steps 4 and 5 are omitted. The Student Interview portion of Step 1 is omitted as well in a brief FBA.

Demographic Information Before any interview, it is important to explain the purpose of the interview to the interviewee. Spend a little time explaining why you are doing the interview, indicate that you think it will take about 20–30 minutes to complete, and note that you will follow up with the interviewee once the FBA is completed. Take a few minutes to complete the demographic information at the top of page 1. For confidentiality purposes, you may choose to use only the student’s initials or to identify the student by his or her student number. In the space next to “Person(s) Interviewed,” indicate the person’s relationship to the student (math teacher, lunchroom monitor, parent, etc). In the space next to “Interviewer,” indicate the interviewer’s role in the behavior support process (action team member, team leader, school psychologist, etc.). In the space next to “Student Profile,” ask the interviewee to list some of the student’s strengths, skills, or talents. Also list items or activities that the student enjoys or will work for. This information will help you to design a BSP that builds on the student’s strengths and that includes consequences that are personally reinforcing to the student.

Step 1A: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent The purpose of Step 1 is to get a clear understanding of the problem behavior(s) of concern and to identify routines that predict or support the problem behavior. This is accomplished by generating a clear definition of the problem behavior, and by identifying the setting events, antecedents, and consequences of the problem behavior. The first interview should be conducted with the person who made the initial request for assistance. This may be the student’s primary teacher or any other adult with whom the student has significant contact (e.g., the lunchroom monitor, school counselor, or algebra teacher). A brief FBA typically includes only one teacher interview. A full FBA may include additional interviews with relevant adults, including other teachers or a parent. Copies of the teacher/staff/parent interview can be made to accommodate the need for multiple interviews.

Description of the Behavior The interviewer asks the interviewee four questions regarding the problem behavior. 1. 2. 3. 4.

What does the problem behavior(s) look like? How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? How disruptive or dangerous is the problem behavior? (continued)

253

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 10 of 16) Write down the answers to each question in the space provided. Prompt the interviewee to be as specific as possible. If the answer to the question is not specific, measurable, or observable, prompt the interviewee to be clearer in his or her response. For example, in response to question 1, the interviewee may say “Marisa is spacey and distractible in class.” This definition of the problem behavior is unclear— “spacey and distractible” may mean something different to the interviewer than it does to the interviewee. Prompt the interviewee by saying, “How do you know when Marisa is being spacey and distractible? What does it look like?” Continue to prompt the interviewee until the description of the problem behavior is clear enough that two observers would be able to recognize it independently. If the interviewee describes more than one problem behavior in question 1, be sure to get answers to questions 2, 3, and 4 for each problem behavior. Make a clear note of this on the interview form.

Description of the Antecedent An antecedent is an event or circumstance that happens before a behavior occurs. It can be thought of as the predictor of a problem behavior. Examples of antecedents that could set off problem behavior include asking the student to do a demanding or long task; placing the student next to another child whom he dislikes; or expecting a child to complete a task during unstructured work time. The same antecedent could set off problem behavior for one student, while it helps another student to perform successfully. Because antecedents can vary so much between different students, it is very important to understand the antecedents that matter to the student with whom you are concerned. You can begin to identify the antecedents to problem behavior by looking at the student’s daily routine. Begin by completing the table on the bottom of page 1. In the first two columns, fill in the student’s daily schedule. In the first column, indicate the time period for the activity, and in the second column briefly describe the activity. For example, for a middle school student, you would write down the time for first period and the name of the class that the student has during first period. Then you would continue on through the last period of the day. The schedule for an elementary school student can be obtained from the student’s primary teacher. An elementary school schedule is usually broken into smaller time periods, by subject or activity (e.g., math, science, circle time). The interview will go quicker if you can get the child’s schedule and complete this section before you begin the interview. If you are interviewing a parent, you will complete the first two columns of this table a little differently. Ask the parent to think of the times of their day that are related to school. Some examples include getting ready for school in the morning, transportation to school, transportation home from school, and doing homework. Include all of these activities in the “Activity” column. Ask the parent to provide you with a general idea of times when these activities occur. Complete the rest of the table for the time periods you have listed. Look at the first time period. Ask the interviewee if the student engages in problem behavior during that time period. If he or she does, ask the interviewee what type of problem behavior occurs. Write this down in the column marked “Specific Problem Behavior.” The problem behaviors that you write down should reflect the problem behaviors that you discussed in the first section of the interview. You should already have a good description of these behaviors, so it is fine to write a brief description in this column (e.g., you could write “temper tantrum,” “fighting,” or “distractible” because these behaviors are specifically described in the first section). After you have written down the type of problem behavior that occurs during a time period, ask the interviewee how likely it is that the problem behavior will occur during that time period. Ask him or her to rate the likelihood on a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 means that it rarely happens and 6 means that it happens on a daily basis. Circle that number in the next column. Finally, ask the interviewee with whom the problem is most likely to occur. Does the student get into trouble with other students? Is the student defiant toward the teacher? Perhaps the problem does not impact anyone other than the student. In this column, indicate if the problem occurs with peers, teacher, self, parent, or another significant person. If the interviewee indicates that the problem typically occurs with specific peers, you should indicate these students by using their initials only. Complete each of these columns for each time period listed. (continued)

254

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 11 of 16) Summarize Antecedent (and Setting Events) The next section helps you to summarize and clarify the information you have learned from the description of the student’s schedule. In this section, the interviewee will answer four questions: 1. 2. 3. 4.

What situations seem to set off the problem behavior? When is the problem behavior most likely to occur? When is the problem behavior least likely to occur? Are there specific conditions, events, or activities that make the problem behavior worse?

To answer the first question, take a look at the completed table with the interviewee. First look at the times when the student is most likely to engage in problem behavior—times when the likelihood is rated a 4, 5, or 6. Is there anything similar about those times? For example, is each time period an unstructured time, or do each of the time periods require the student to do demanding work on his or her own? Perhaps each is a time when the student’s sibling is in the same class. Try to determine what is similar about the problematic routines that tend to set off the problem behavior. If the interviewee has trouble answering this question, prompt him or her by saying, “If you wanted to make the problem behavior occur, what would you do?” Ask the interviewee what times of the day and days of the week the problem behavior is most likely to occur. If his or her answer is different than what you would expect (based on the information given in the schedule table), ask the interviewee to clarify his or her answer. Ask the interviewee when the problem behavior is least likely to occur. Knowing when the problem behavior does not occur can help you identify things that work for the student. That is, there are some routines when the student does not get into trouble. If you can identify what it is about those routines that helps the student be successful, you can better determine how to change the student’s unsuccessful routines. Setting events are situations or circumstances that make it more likely that a problem behavior will occur or that make the problem behavior more intense. Some examples include: if the student has a fight with a parent right before coming to school, if the student didn’t get enough sleep or missed a meal, or if the student misses taking medication. Ask the interviewee if he or she knows of certain situations that tend to make the student’s problem behavior worse, or more likely to occur.

Description of the Consequence In this section, you want to find out what usually happens after the problem behavior occurs. Is the student ignored or do all of his peers start to laugh? Is the student sent to the office? Is the student sent to time-out? Ask the interviewee what typically happens after the problem behavior occurs and what impact those consequences seem to have on the problem behavior. In other words, do the consequences make the problem behavior stop, improve, or get worse?

End of Interview At this point, the face-to-face portion of the interview is completed. Next you will summarize the information you have learned from the interview to create a “testable explanation” of why the problem behavior is occurring. If you need to interview additional teachers or other adults (including parents), make copies of the first two pages of the F-BSP protocol and use the copies for as many interviews as you plan to conduct.

Step 2A: Propose a Testable Explanation ABC Sequence A testable explanation is one of the most important pieces of the F-BSP process. It is the summary of everything you have learned about the problem behavior and the link to designing an effective, relevant BSP. (continued)

255

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol (page 12 of 16) Begin to build your testable hypothesis by listing the problem behavior. It is likely that a student will engage in more than one type of problem behavior. For example, the same student might fight with other students and refuse to follow teacher directions. List each type of problem behavior separately in the column labeled “Behavior.” (Don’t list every single problem behavior displayed, e.g., if fighting consists of pushing, hitting, and yelling at other students, you would lump all three behaviors into one type of behavior: “fighting.”) Next, for each type of behavior you have listed, indicate the antecedents that tend to set off or predict that behavior. List them under the column headed “Antecedents.” Refer back to the interview information to identify the antecedents. For each type of behavior you have listed, indicate the consequences that tend to support the problem behavior in the “Consequences” column. The interviewee will have told you about many potential consequences that occur. List the ones that seem to make the behavior continue or worsen. For example, a student who makes inappropriate jokes in class might encounter two consequences. First, the joke might be ignored by other students and he is unlikely to tell that joke again. Second, he might get a lot of attention and laughter over his inappropriate joke. In that case, he is likely to tell other inappropriate jokes or tell the same joke in other classes. In this example, the ignoring consequence did not support the problem behavior, but the attention/laughter consequence did. For your testable explanation of why the problem behavior is occurring, you want to list the consequences that support the problem behavior. In the example, you would write “peer attention and laughter” under the column that is headed “Consequences.” Finally, if there are any setting events that make the problem behavior worse or more likely to occur, list them under the column headed “Setting Event.” Complete the Setting Event, Antecedent, and Consequence boxes for each type of behavior that you have listed. Each set of these is called an ABC sequence.

Function of the Behavior For each ABC sequence, you want to determine why you think the behavior is occurring. At this point you can describe the behavior, you know what situations set it off, and you know what consequences make it continue or get worse. But why is the behavior happening? What function does it serve for the student? Some common functions include: to get peer attention, to get adult attention, to get out of doing difficult work, or to get away from someone the student doesn’t like. For each ABC sequence, decide what you think is really motivating the problem behavior and write it down in the space provided. Once you become more familiar with the F-BSP Protocol, it will become fairly easy to complete Step 2. At that point, we suggest that you complete Step 2 with the interviewee to check for his or her agreement with your summary of the interview.

Step 1B: Interview Student The student interview follows the same format as the teacher/staff/parent interview. The wording of some of the questions has been changed to be more appropriate for talking with a student, but they result in the same type of information. We have found that the student interview is most useful when used with a student in third grade or higher. Younger students typically lack the awareness of their own behavior that is necessary to provide informative answers to the interview questions. However, younger students are able to respond to the Student Profile question, “What are things that you like to do, or do well, while at school?” It is important to ask every student this question. The answer to the question will give you information about the objects or activities that are personally meaningful to the student. For example, the student may prefer using the computer to going to gym class. Once you have an idea of what is personally meaningful for the student, you can build it into the student’s BSP. For example, the student could earn extra time to use the computer by meeting her behavioral goals. (continued)

256

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 13 of 16) It is very important to make the student feel comfortable during the interview process. It is helpful if the student is already familiar with the interviewer. The interview should take place in a setting that is comfortable for the student. For example, a younger child will be less comfortable sitting in an adult-sized chair at an adult-sized table than he or she would be sitting at a student-sized desk. In addition, a student who is frequently called down to the principal’s office for discipline issues will be uncomfortable being interviewed in the principal’s office. Choose a neutral setting, such as an empty classroom, the counselor’s office, or a family resource room. To maintain student confidentiality, any interview (including the teacher and parent interviews) should be conducted in private. Be careful to clearly explain the purpose of the interview to the student. Also, make sure the student understands that he or she is not in trouble and will not get in trouble for answering the interviewer’s questions. It is also helpful to let the student know that his or her parents have given permission for the student to participate in the interview. The following script may be helpful in introducing the purpose of the interview to the student: Hi        . I’m        . I am (a teacher, school counselor, etc.) at this school. One of the things I do is work with kids who are having a hard time in school. I try to figure out how to help them do better in school so they can like school better. I think one of the best ways to do that is to talk to the kids and find out what they think is good and bad about school. So I’d like to ask you some questions. I’d like to find out what you like about school and what are some of the things that get you into trouble at school. Is that okay? If I ask you a question that you don’t understand, just say “I don’t understand,” and I’ll try to explain it. Okay? There’s one more thing I want to tell you. I want to be able to remember what you told me so we can figure out how to help you do well in school. I can remember better when I write things down, so I’m going to write your answers down on this piece of paper. Okay, let’s get started.

Step 2B: Propose a Testable Explanation This is the same process you follow after completing the teacher/staff/parent interview. Refer to Step 2A for more information.

Step 3: Rate Your Confidence in the Testable Explanation Before going further in the F-BSP process, you want to assess how confident you are that you understand the problem behavior and why it is occurring. The best way to do this is to compare the sources of information that you have collected. At this point, you have collected multiple interviews. The box under Step 3 provides you with space to compare the results of these interviews. Look at the testable explanations that you have generated after each interview. Overall, does it seem like the different interviews have generated the same information? Is there agreement between interviews on the setting events, antecedents, behaviors, consequences, and functions? After each item, write a “Y” for Yes if there is agreement between interviews or a “N” for No if the interviews disagree. The more agreement you have between multiple sources, the more confident you can be in your testable explanation of the problem. Next, the team should rate their confidence in the testable explanation. Indicate on a scale of 1 to 6 (1 = not at all confident, 6 = very sure) how confident the team is that they understand why the behavior is occurring, and under what circumstances. A score of 1, 2, or 3 indicates that the team is not very confident in their understanding of the behavior and that they need additional information (usually observations in the classroom) before going on to develop a BSP. (continued)

257

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 14 of 16) Step 4: Conduct Observations There are certain circumstances under which you are required to conduct an observation while doing an FBA and other circumstances when it is recommended. These circumstances are listed directly on the F-BSP Protocol. If observations are warranted and conducted, summarize the observation data under Step 4. Once again, your purpose is to generate a testable explanation that lists the problem behavior, its setting events, antecedents, consequences, and functions. Follow the same format as discussed under Step 1: Interview Teacher/Staff/Parent.

Step 5: Confirm/Modify Testable Explanation Observations of the student in a natural setting (classroom, playground, etc.) give you a clearer picture of the behavior described by the student, the teachers, and the parents. By supplementing the interview information with direct observations, you can confirm or modify your original testable explanation and settle on a working testable explanation. You will use this working testable explanation to build your BSP. First compare the teacher interview with the observation. Was there agreement between the two sources of information on setting events, antecedents, behaviors, consequences, and functions? Mark a “Y” or “N” after each space. Compare the parent interview and student interview with the observation following the same method. Now that you have compiled all of this information, what is your final working explanation for the problem behavior? Record your working explanation under the final question in Step 5.

Step 6: Build a Competing Behavior Pathway If you have identified several different types of problem behavior, you will have a different testable explanation for each problem behavior. You will also need to build a separate competing behavior pathway for each type of problem behavior. Make copies of this page of the F-BSP Protocol as necessary. Begin by recording your testable working explanation. In the box marked “Problem Behavior,” write the type of problem behavior exhibited by the student. Next fill in the boxes for the “Setting Event,” “Antecedent,” and “Consequences” for that problem behavior. Finally, to the right of the box marked “Consequence,” indicate the function of the problem behavior. Next you must decide on the desired behavior and an acceptable, alternative behavior. The desired behavior can be thought of as the long-term goal. How do you hope this problem behavior will change in the long term? For example, if the problem behavior is that the student cries and rips up his paper when he thinks an assignment is too difficult, the desired behavior might be that the student is able to work quietly and complete independent seatwork. The acceptable alternative behavior can be thought of as a shortterm goal. It is an improvement on the problem behavior in that it is more acceptable in the classroom. However, it is considered a short-term goal because, often, it is not possible to sustain over a long period of time. For example, an acceptable alternative behavior for this student might be to raise his hand and receive teacher assistance every time he encounters a problem he doesn’t understand. It is critical that the alternative behavior serves the same function for the student that the problem behavior served. This provides the incentive for the student to begin to change his behavior. In the above example, if the student cries and rips up his paper to receive adult attention, then the acceptable alternative behavior is likely to be effective in producing a change in the student’s behavior. It is an acceptable, more efficient way for the student to receive attention. However, if the student is crying and ripping up his paper to get out of doing the work, then the alternative behavior is likely to actually worsen his behavior. The alternative behavior is likely to bring more emphasis on completing the work rather than escaping it. Determining effective alternative behaviors is often a difficult challenge. It will take some time to gain mastery of this concept. (continued)

258

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 15 of 16) The next step is to begin to brainstorm strategies that will change the student’s problem behavior. The Competing Behavior Pathway serves as a guide. Remember, the Competing Behavior Pathway tells you what the problem behavior is and what you would like the behavior to be. It also tells you how you can predict when the behavior will occur and what type of consequences tend to support, rather than reduce, the problem behavior. Each of these pieces gives you something to work with, something to change. A change in the sequence will bring about a change in the behavior. Include the student’s teacher, parent, or other significant adults in this discussion. These individuals know the student well and will be able to suggest creative and individualized ideas for behavior change. The table underneath the Competing Behavior Pathway lists Setting Event Strategies, Antecedent Strategies, Behavior Teaching Strategies, and Consequence Strategies. Underneath each heading you will list suggestions for changing and improving that part of the problem behavior sequence. Begin by looking at the boxes for problem behavior, desired behavior, and alternative behavior. In order to change a problem behavior to the desired or alternative behaviors, you will need to teach the student how to perform those behaviors. Identify the skills that the student needs to perform the preferred behaviors. One of the strategies you should list is to teach those behaviors to the student. A very powerful method for changing behavior is to clearly define the behavioral expectations, teach behavioral expectations, and then reward the student for following the behavioral expectations. Defining expectations is an antecedent strategy, teaching behavioral expectations is a behavior strategy, and rewarding expectations is a consequence strategy. Rewarding the student should be based on what you learned from the student in terms of what he or she enjoys at school. For example, if the student loves art but hates to use the computer, you would suggest that he or she could earn a few extra minutes of art time for appropriate behavior rather than a few extra minutes of computer time. As you brainstorm strategies for each column, try to individualize them to the student as much as possible. For example, if a setting event for problem behavior is that the student often misses breakfast, one suggestion would be to provide breakfast for the student at school. If a predictor for problem behavior is that the student acts out when he is seated next to a particular classmate, the antecedent strategy would be to separate the two students. As you can see, these strategies can be, and often are, very simple. Brainstorm as many strategies as you can. You will not use them all. However, it is helpful to have a range of options to choose from. Also, if you implement some strategies and your plan is ineffective, you can come back to this page and you will have a “bank” of ideas to start with. You won’t have to go back to the drawing board.

Step 7: Select Intervention Strategies The next step is to choose the strategies that you are going to begin with. At this point, you have a large number of options to choose from, and you need to narrow it down to the optimal, initial strategies. It is critical that the student’s teacher and parent (or whichever adult is most likely to implement the intervention strategies) are involved in this discussion. You cannot choose which strategies will work best without knowing the implementer’s values, willingness, and ability to implement those strategies. Begin with a reasonable number of intervention strategies. This number will vary depending on the problem addressed and the resources available. However, the people involved in implementing the interventions should be able to tell you what they can handle and what will put a strain on them. Remember, you are trying to get the biggest impact with the most efficient effort. Choose strategies that will fit well within the context in which they are implemented. Choose strategies that will fit well with the teachers’ and parents’ values and attitudes toward behavior change. Once you have chosen which strategies to implement, list them individually under the column labeled “Tasks.” Sometimes you will have to break a task into several different parts in order to accomplish it. For example, if the task is to use a behavior card to monitor and reward the student’s behavior, you might have to break it into the following parts: (1) Decide on the behavioral goals; (2) Create a behavior card; (3) Teach the student to use the behavior card; (4) Explain the behavior card system to the student’s teachers and parents; (5) Decide how the student’s appropriate behavior will be rewarded; (6) Decide who will be in charge of rewarding the student. Each of these parts are critical to accomplishing the original task. (continued)

259

APPENDIX B.  F-BSP Protocol  (page 16 of 16) After each task and its corresponding parts are listed, a person needs to be assigned responsibility for completing those tasks. Think about individuals’ natural roles in the school and assign tasks accordingly. For example, if the task is to teach the student anger management skills and the school counselor teaches an anger management group, then the school counselor should be assigned that task. If the task is to modify the student’s assignments, the teacher should be assigned that task. In addition to assigning a person to be responsible for each task, a deadline for implementation should also be assigned. That is, the group should decide how soon each task should begin. Also indicate the date by which the effectiveness of the strategy will be reviewed. It is a good idea to review a new intervention plan within 2 weeks of implementation. This sheet is kept as a running record of the student’s BSP. The next time that the team meets, they should review this page. First they should determine if the strategies were implemented as planned and the extent to which the strategies are working. These decisions should be based on evaluation data and teacher/parent/student feedback. After reviewing the effectiveness of each strategy, decide whether the strategy should continue to be monitored, should be modified, or should be discontinued. Write “Monitor,” “Modify,” or “Discontinue” in the space next to each strategy. If a strategy is to be modified, or if a new strategy is added, these changes should be added under the column labeled “Tasks.” Once again, assign someone to be responsible for implementing the strategy, by a specific deadline, and with a specific review date.

Step 8: Evaluate Plan The final step is to design a plan to evaluate the effect of the BSP on the student’s behavior. Begin by identifying the short- and long-term goals. Remember that you identified short- and long-term goals when you identified the desired behavior and acceptable alternative behavior for the Competing Behavior Pathway. Write these short- and long-term goals on the evaluation plan. Try to be as specific as possible with your goals so that it is easy to determine if the goals have been met. For example, if one of the goals is to increase rate of homework completion, be specific about how frequently you expect the child to turn in homework for a short-term and a long-term goal. If the student is currently turning in 0% of his homework, your short-term goal might be to have him turn in 30% of his homework, while your long-term goal might be to have him turn in 80% of his homework. The more specific you are in writing your goal, the easier it will be to objectively decide if the student has met the goal. Once you have decided on short- and longterm goals, determine a date by which you expect the student to achieve those goals. Determine this date in conjunction with the teacher and parents of the student. To determine if the goals have been met, you will need to collect data on the student’s performance. The data collected will differ depending on the behavior support strategy and the goal. For example, the student may be placed on a behavior card and his goal may be to earn 80% of his points on a daily basis. In this example, the data collected is the points on the behavior card and the procedures for collecting data is the behavior card itself. As another example, if the student’s goal is to reduce the number of times he fights with other students in class, the teacher might keep a frequency count of the number of fights observed. In this example, the data collected is the number of fights, and the procedure for data collection is the teacher keeping a frequency count. For each goal, you will need to determine the type of data to be collected and a procedure for collecting that data. It is also critical to assign someone to be responsible for collecting the data and indicate the timeline for beginning and reviewing the data.

Agreement of All Key Individuals Finally, all of the key individuals in this process should sign the last page. Their signature indicates that they understand the assessment information, the BSP, and the evaluation plan. Their signatures also indicate that they agree to implement any responsibility that was assigned to them. Signatures should be obtained from the student, parent, participating teachers, and participating action team members.

260

Appendix C

Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS) FACTS-Part A Student/Grade: 

Date: 

Interviewer: 

Respondent(s): 

Student profile: Please identify at least three strengths or contributions the student brings to school. Problem Behavior(s): Identify problem behaviors    Tardy

    Inappropriate language

   Disruptive

   Theft

   Unresponsive

    Fight/physical aggression

   Insubordination

   Vandalism

   Withdrawn

    Verbal harassment

    Work not done

   Other        

Describe problem behavior:                                                Identifying Routines: Where, when, and with whom problem behaviors are most likely. Schedule (Times) Activity

With Whom Does Problem Occur?

Likelihood of Problem Behavior

Specific Problem Behavior

Low    High 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Select 1–3 routines for further assessment. Select routines based on (1) similarity of activities (conditions) with ratings of 4, 5, or 6 and (2) similarity of problem behaviors(s). Complete the FACTSPart B for each routine identified. (continued)

Adapted with permission from March et al. (2000). Copyright 2000 by Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon.

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

261

APPENDIX C. FACTS  (page 2 of 4) FACTS-Part B Student/Grade: 

Date: 

Interviewer: 

Respondent(s): 

Routine/Activities/Context: Which routine (only one) from the FACTS-Part A is assessed? Routine/Activities/Context

Problem Behavior

Provide more detail about the problem behavior(s): What does the problem behavior(s) look like? How often does the problem behavior(s) occur? How long does the problem behavior(s) last when it does occur? What is the intensity/level of danger of the problem behavior(s)? What are the events that predict when the problem behavior(s) will occur? Related Issues (Setting Events) illness

Environmental Features

Other:          

drug use

reprimand/correction

structured activity

physical demands

unstructured time

negative social

socially isolated

tasks too boring

conflict at home

with peers

activity too long

academic failure

other

tasks too difficult

What consequences are most likely to maintain the problem behavior(s)? Things That Are Obtained adult attention

Things Avoided or Escaped From Other:          

hard tasks

Other:          

peer attention

reprimands

preferred activity

peer negatives

money/things

physical effort

Summary of Behavior Identify the summary that will be used to build a plan of behavior support Setting Events and Predictors

Problem Behavior(s)

Maintaining Consequence(s)

How confident are you that the Summary of Behavior is accurate? Not very confident 1

2

3

4

5

Very confident 6 (continued)

262

APPENDIX C. FACTS  (page 3 of 4) What current efforts have been used to control the problem behavior? Strategies for Preventing Problem Behavior schedule change

Other:           

Consequences for Problem Behavior reprimand

seating change

office referral

curriculum change

detention

Other:           

Instructions The FACTS is a two-page interview used by school personnel who are building behavior support plans. The FACTS is intended to be an efficient strategy for initial functional behavioral assessment. The FACTS is completed by people (teachers, family, clinicians) who know the student best, and used to either build behavior support plans, or to guide more complete functional assessment efforts. The FACTS can be completed in a short period of time (5–15 minutes). Efficiency and effectiveness in completing the forms increases with practice.

How to Complete the FACTS-Part A Step 1: Complete Demographic Information Indicate the name and grade of the student, the date the assessment data were collected, the name of the person completing the form (the interviewer), and the name(s) of the people providing information (respondents). Step 2: Complete Student Profile Begin each assessment with a review of the positive and contributing characteristics the student brings to school. Identify at least three strengths or contributions the student offers. Step 3: Identify Problem Behaviors Identify the specific student behaviors that are barriers to effective education, disrupt the education of others, interfere with social development, or compromise safety at school. Provide a brief description of exactly how the student engages in these behaviors. What makes his or her way of doing these behaviors unique? Identify the most problematic behaviors, but also identify any problem behaviors that occur regularly. Step 4: Identify Where, When, and with Whom the Problem Behaviors Are Most Likely A: List the times that define the student’s daily schedule. Include times between classes, lunch, and before school, and adapt for complex schedule features (e.g., odd/even days) if appropriate. B: For each time listed indicate the activity typically engaged in during that time (e.g., small-group instruction, math, independent art, transition). C: Where appropriate indicate the people (adults and peers) with whom the student is interacting during each activity, and especially list the people the student interacts with when he or she engages in problem behavior. D: Use the 1 to 6 scale to indicate (in general) which times/activities are most and least likely to be associated with problem behaviors. A “1” indicates low likelihood of problems, and a “6” indicates high likelihood of problem behaviors. E: Indicate which problem behavior is most likely in any time/activity that is given a rating of 4, 5, or 6. (continued)

263

APPENDIX C. FACTS  (page 4 of 4) Step 5: Select Routines for Further Assessment Examine each time/activity listed as 4, 5, or 6 in the table from Step 4. If activities are similar (e.g., activities that are unstructured; activities that involve high academic demands; activities with teacher reprimands; activities with peer taunting) and have similar problem behaviors, treat them as “routines for further analysis.” Select between one and three routines for further analysis. Write the name of the routine and the most common problem behavior(s). Within each routine identify the problem behavior(s) that are most likely or most problematic. For each routine identified in Step 5 complete a FACTS-Part B.

How to Complete the FACTS-Part B Step 1: Complete Demographic Information Identify the name and grade of the student, the date that the FACTS-Part B was completed, who completed the form, and who provided information for completing the form. Step 2: Identify the Target Routine List the targeted routine and problem behavior from the bottom of the FACTS-Part A. The FACTS-Part B provides information about one routine. Use multiple Part B forms if multiple routines are identified. Step 3: Provide Specifics about the Problem Behavior(s) Provide more detail about the features of the problem behavior(s). Focus specifically on the unique and distinguishing features, and the way the behavior(s) is disruptive or dangerous. Step 4: Identify Events that Predict Occurrence of the Problem Behavior(s) Within each routine what (1) setting events and (2) immediate preceding events predict when the problem behavior(s) will occur. What would you do to make the problem behaviors happen in this routine? Step 5: Identify the Consequences that May Maintain the Problem Behavior What consequences appear to reward the problem behavior? Consider that the student may get/obtain something he or she wants, or that he or she may escape/avoid something he or she finds unpleasant. Identify the most powerful maintaining consequence with a “1,” and other possible consequences with a “2” or “3.” Do not check more than three options. The focus here is on the consequence that has the greatest impact. When problems involve minor events that escalate into very difficult events, separate the consequences that maintain the minor problem behavior from the events that may maintain problem behavior later in the escalation. Step 6: Define What Has Been Done to Date to Prevent/Control the Problem Behavior In most cases, school personnel will have tried some strategies already. List events that have been tried and organize these by (1) those things that have been done to prevent the problem from getting started and (2) those things that were delivered as consequences to control or punish the problem behavior (or reward alternative behavior). Step 7: Build a Summary Statement The summary statement indicates the setting events, immediate predictors, problem behaviors, and maintaining consequences. The summary statement is the foundation for building an effective behavior support plan. Build the summary statement from the information in the FACTS-A and FACTS-B (especially the information in Steps 3, 4, and 5 of the FACTS-B). If you are confident that the summary statement is accurate enough to design a plan, move into plan development. If you are less confident, then continue the functional assessment by conducting direct observation. 264

Appendix D

Student-Guided Functional Assessment Interview (Primary) Student: 

Grade:        Sex: M F  IEP: Y  N

Teacher: 

School: 

Interviewer: 

Date: 

Opening We are meeting today to find ways to change school, so that you like it more. This interview will take about 30 minutes. I can help you best if you answer honestly. You will not be asked anything that might get you in trouble.

Student Strengths and Skills 1. What are things that you like to do, or do well, while at school? (e.g., activities, helping others). 2. What are classes/topics you do well in?

Define the Behaviors of Concern Help the student identify specific behaviors that are resulting in problems in the school or classroom. Making suggestions or paraphrasing statements can help the student clarify her or his ideas. What are the things you do that get you in trouble or are a problem? Prompts: late to class?, talk out in class?, don’t get work done?, fighting?     Behavior Comment 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. (continued)

Adapted from Reed, Thomas, Sprague, and Horner (1997). Copyright 1997 by Springer Science + Business Media. Adapted by permission.

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

265

APPENDIX D.  Student-Guided Functional Assessment Interview (Primary)  (page 2 of 2) Which of the behaviors described are likely to occur together in some way? Do they occur about the same time? In some kind of predictable sequence or “chain”? In response to the same type of situation? a. b. c. Of those groups of behaviors which one is the most concern? The rest of the interview will focus on those behaviors. a.

Complete Student Schedule and Routine Matrix Assist the student to complete the schedule and routine matrices to show the routines and activities where they have difficulty with the behavior(s) they talked about. First have the student complete the schedule column (or have this column completed before the interview). Add any routines unique to the teacher’s classroom. We know that some times and activities are harder and easier for different people. Can you tell me which times during your day are easy and which are difficult? A “6” indicates it is likely that you will have a problem and a “1” indicates that no or few problem(s) occur. (Repeat for routines).

Student Schedule and Routine Matrix Typical Schedule

Rating

Routines

Rating

6 5 4 3 2 1

Getting help

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Getting material/drink, sharpening pencil

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Working in groups

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Working independently (alone)

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Getting permission and going to the restroom

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Transitions (between activities or locations)

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

Working with substitute teachers/volunteers

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

6 5 4 3 2 1

266

Appendix E

Assessing Activity Routines Form Focus Individual:  Date: 

Time

Routine/Activity

Likelihood of Problem Behavior

Type of Problem Behavior Most Likely

Low     High 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

267

Appendix F

Brief Functional Assessment Interview Form Student:    Date:  Behaviors of Concern:

Predictors:

Maintaining Function(s):

What Makes It Worse (Setting Events):

Summary Statement (Define by Routine) Setting Event  →

Predictor  →

Problem Behavior  →

Maintaining Function

From Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools, Second Edition, by Deanne A. Crone, Leanne S. Hawken, and Robert H. Horner. Copyright 2015 by The Guilford Press. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use only (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download a larger version of this material from www.guilford.com/crone-forms.

268

269

Events: 1 Date:

2

3

4

5

st Di

6

as

k lt T

7

ffic u

8

s

9

Predictors

lf-

De

sir ed Ac Item tiv ity /

n

on

Escape/Avoid

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Alo n att e (n en o tio n)

Get/Obtain n

Actual Conseq.

From O’Neill et al., Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior (2nd ed.) © 1997. South-Western, a part of Cengage Learning, Inc. Reproduced by permission. www.cengage.com/permissions.

Totals

Time

pti ru Int er

)

Behaviors

ma

tio ula

Perceived Functions

n

ue eq nd /R

De

tio ten At

ion sit ran T

n

Ending Date:

Sti m

Se

st eq d/R

ma De

ue A

Starting Date:

rso Pe

Name:

ty

ow n’t

Functional Assessment Observation Form

he Ot

( cti vi

Kn r/D o

Appendix G

Co n m o th men in ing h ts: pe ap (if r ini iod, pen tia w ed ls) rit e

Appendix H

A Checklist for Assessing the Quality of Behavior Support Planning: Does the Plan (or Planning Process) Have These Features? When developing and implementing behavior support plans, judge the degree to which each of the following has been considered: G = Good   O = Okay   P = Poor   N = Not applicable  1.  2.  3.  4.  5.

 6.

 7.

 8.

 9.

10.

     Define academic and lifestyle context for behavior support      Operational description of problem behaviors     Problem routines identified      Functional assessment hypotheses stated Intervention/Foundations (issues that cut across routines) a)      health and physiology b)     communication c)     mobility d)     predictability e)     control/choice f)      social relationships g)      activity patterns Intervention/Prevention (make problem behavior irrelevant) a)     schedule b)     curriculum c)      instructional procedures Intervention/Teaching (make problem behavior inefficient) a)      replacement skills b)      new adaptive skills Intervention/Consequences Extinction (make problem behavior ineffective) a)      minimize positive reinforcement b)      minimize negative reinforcement Reinforcement (make appropriate behavior more effective) a)      maximize positive reinforcement Punishment (if needed) a)      negative consequences contingent upon problem behavior Safety/Emergency Intervention Plan a)      clear plan for what to do if/when problem behaviors occur Evaluation and Assessment a)      define the information to be collected b)      define the measurement process c)      define decision-making process Ensure Contextual Fit a)     values b)     skills c)     resources d)      administrative system e)      perceptions that program is in best interest of student

Adapted from Horner, Sugai, Todd, and Lewis-Palmer (1999–2000). Copyright 1999 by Taylor & Francis. Adapted by permission.

270

References

Ablevox. (2013). My daily tasks (Version 1.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Alberto, P., & Troutman, A. (2013). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY: Merrill Prentice Hall. Albin, R. W., Lucyshyn, J. M., Horner, R. H., & Flannery, K. B. (1996). Contextual fit for behavior support plans. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 81–98). Baltimore: Brookes. Algozzine, B., Barrett, S., Eber, L., George, H., Horner, R., Lewis, T., et al. (2014). School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. Available from OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, www. pbis.org. Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13, 3–16. Allday, R. A., Nelson, J. R., & Russell, C. S. (2011). Classroom-­based functional behavioral assessment: Does the literature support high fidelity implementation? Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 22(3), 140–149. Anderson, C., Childs, K., Kincaid, D., Horner, R. H., George, H. P., Todd, A. W., et al. (2012). Benchmarks for advanced tiers. Eugene: Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon.

271

Anderson, C. M., Rodriguez, B. J., & Campbell, A. (2014, May). Functional analysis in schools: Current status and future directions. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Behavior Analysis International, Chicago, IL. Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York: Guilford Press. Assistive Ware. (2013). Proloquo2go (Version 3.0.3) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Autiplan. (2014). Autiplan (Version 3.16) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from www. autiplan.com. Bambara, L. M., Goh, A., Kern, L., & Caskie, G. (2012). Perceived barriers and enablers to implementing individualized positive behavior interventions and supports in school settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(4), 228–240. Bambara, L. M., & Kern, L. (2005). Individualized support for students with problem behaviors. New York: Guilford Press. Beavers, G., Iwata, B., & Lerman, D. (2013). Thirty years of research on the functional analysis of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(1), 1–21. Bedesem, P. L. (2012). Using cell phone technology for self-­monitoring procedures in inclusive settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27, 33–46. Behavioral Dynamics. (2014). Motivaider for

272

References

mobile (Version 1.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Bellini, S., & Akullian, J. (2007). A meta-­analysis of video modeling and video self-­ modeling interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 73, 264–287. Benazzi, L., Horner, R. H., & Good, R. H. (2006). Effects of behavior support team composition on the technical adequacy and contextual fit of behavior support plans. Journal of Special Education, 40, 160–170. Bessette, K. K., & Willis, H. P. (2007). An example of an elementary school paraprofessional-­ implemented functional analysis and intervention. Behavioral Disorders, 32(3), 192–210. Big Nerd Ranch. (2012). eClicker presenter (Version 1.0.18) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Bijou, S. W., Peterson, R. F., & Ault, M. H. (1968). A method to integrate descriptive and experimental field studies at the level of data and empirical concept. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 175–191. Blair, K. C., Fox, L., & Lentini, R. (2010). Use of positive behavior support to address the challenging behavior of young children within a community early childhood program. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 30(2), 68–79. Blood, E., & Neel, R. S. (2007). From FBA to implementation: A look at what is actually being delivered. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(4), 67–80. Bloom, S. E., Iwata, B. A., Fritz, J. N., Roscoe, E. M., & Carreau, A. B. (2011). Classroom application of a trial-based functional analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(1), 19–31. Bloom, S., Lambert, J., Dayton, E., & Samaha, A. (2013). Teacher-­ conducted trial based functional analysis as the basis for intervention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(1), 208–218. Bloom Built. (2014). Day one (journal.diary) (Version 1.14) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Boot Strapped Coffee. (2013). Habit monkey (Version 1.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Bowen, J. M., Jenson, W. R., & Clark, E. (2012). School-based interventions for students with behavior problems. New York: Springer. Bradshaw, C. P., Bottiani, J. H., Osher, D., & Sugai, G. (2014). The integration of positive behavioral interventions and supports and social emotional learning. In M. D. Weist, N. A. Lever, C. P. Bradshaw, & J. S. Owens (Eds.), Handbook of school mental health: Research,

training, practice, and policy (pp. 101–118). New York: Springer. Bradshaw, C. P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K. B., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). Implementation of school-­w ide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education and Treatment of Children, 31(1), 1–26. Briere, D. E., III, & Simonsen, B. (2011). Self-­ monitoring interventions for at-risk middle school students: The importance of considering function. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 129– 140. Briesch, A. M., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2009). Review and analysis of literature on self-­management interventions to promote appropriate classroom behaviors (1988–2008). School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 106–118. Bruhn, A. L., McDaniel, S., & Kreigh, C. (in press). Self-­ monitoring interventions for students with behavior problems: A review of current research. Behavioral Disorders. Burns, M. K., Scholin, S. E., Kosciolek, S., & Livingston, J. (2010). Reliability of decision-­ making frameworks for response to intervention for reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, 102–114. Campbell, S. B. (1995). Behavior problems in preschool children: A review of recent research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36, 113–149. Carr, E. G. (1977). The motivation of self-­injurious behavior: A review of some hypotheses. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 800–816. Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Turnbull, A., Marquis, J., Magito-McLaughlin, D., McAtee, M., et al. (1999). Positive behavior support as an approach for dealing with problem behavior in people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation. Carter, E. W., Lane, K. L., Crnobori, M. E., Bruhn, A. L., & Oakes, W. P. (2011). Self-­determination interventions for students with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders: Mapping the knowledge base. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 100–116. CBTAonline. (2009). ABC data (Version 1.2) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. CBTAonline. (2010). ABC data pro (Version 1.33) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. CBTAonline. (2011). ABC logbook (Version 1.26) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. CBTAonline (2013a). ABC video pro (Version



References 273

1.1.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. CBTAonline. (2013b). ABC video pro lite (Version 1.0.5) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Chandler, L. K., Dahlquist, C. M., & Repp, A. C. (1999). The effects of team-based functional assessment on the behavior of students in classroom settings. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 101–121. Chapin, T. (2014). Self-­regulation training board (Version 1.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Christensen, L., Renshaw, T. L., Caldarella, P., & Young, J. R. (2012). Training a general educator to use function-­based support for students at risk for behavior disorders. Education, 133(2), 313–335. Cipani, E., & Shock, K. M. (2007). Functional behavioral assessment, diagnosis, and treatment: A complete system for educational and mental health settings. New York: Springer. Cipani, E. (2008). Classroom management for all teachers: Plans for evidence-­ based practice (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Class Twist. (2014). Class dojo (Version 2.5.3) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Codding, R., Baglici, S., Gottesman, D., Johnson, M., Kert, A., & Lebeouf, P. (2009). Selecting intervention strategies: Using brief experimental analysis for mathematics problems. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25(2), 146–168. Conroy, M. A., Davis, C. A., Fox, J. J., & Brown, W. H. (2002). Functional assessment of behavior and effective supports for young children with challenging behaviors. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 27, 35–47. Conroy, M. A., Dunlap, G., Clarke, S., & Alter, P. J. (2005). A descriptive analysis of behavioral intervention research with young children with challenging behavior. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 25, 157–166. Cook, C. R., Mayer, G. R., Wright, D. B., Kraemer, B., Wallace, M. D., Dart, E., et al. (2012). Exploring the link among behavior intervention plans, treatment integrity, and student outcomes under natural educational conditions. Journal of Special Education, 46, 3–16. Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Costello, S. (2013). How many apps are in the iPhone App store. Retrieved from http://ipod. about.com/od/iphonesoftwareterms/qt/appsin-app-store.htm.

Costenbader, V., & Markson, S. (1998). School suspension: A study with secondary school students. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 59–82. Crone, D. A., Hawken, L. S., & Bergstrom, M. K. (2007). A demonstration of training, implementing, and using functional behavioral assessment in 10 elementary and middle school settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(1), 15–29. Crone, D. A., Hawken, L. S., & Horner, R. H. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The behavior education program (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Crone, D. A., & Horner, R. H. (2003). Building positive behavior support systems in schools: Functional behavioral assessment. New York: Guilford Press. Cunningham, E., & O’Neill, R. E. (2007). Assessing agreement among the results of functional behavioral assessment and analysis methods with students with emotional/behavior disorders (E/BD). Behavioral Disorders, 32, 211– 221. Daly, E. J., III, Bonfiglio, C., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-­Yates, K. (2006). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part II. Use of brief experimental analysis to evaluate reading fluency treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 323–331. Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B., Dool, E., & Hintze, J. (1998). Using brief functional analysis to select interventions for oral reading. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 203–218. Daly, E. J., III, Persampieri, M., McCurdy, M., & Gortmaker, V. (2005). Generating reading interventions through experimental analysis of academic skills: Demonstration and empirical evaluation. School Psychology Review, 34, 395–414. Desrochers, M. N., Hile, M. G., & Williams-­ Moseley, T. L. (1997). Survey of functional assessment procedures used with individuals who display mental retardation and severe problem behaviors. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101(5), 535–546. Division for Early Childhood. (2007). Position statement: Identification of and intervention with challenging behavior. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from http://dec.membershipsoftware. org/files/Position%20Statement%20and%20 Papers/CB%20Position%20statement.pdf. Division for Early Childhood. (2014). DEC recommended practices in early intervention/early childhood special education. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from http://dec.membershipsoftware. org/ files/Recommended Practices.

274

References

Ducharme, J. M., & Schecter, C. (2011). Bridging the gap between clinical and classroom intervention: Keystone approaches for students with challenging behavior. School Psychology Review, 40, 257–274. Duda, M. A., Clarke, S., Fox, L., & Dunlap, G. (2008). Implementation of positive behavior support with a sibling set in a home environment. Journal of Early Intervention, 30(3), 213–236. Duhon, G., Noell, G., Witt, J., Freeland, J., Dufrene, B., & Gilbertson, D. (2004). Identifying academic skill and performance deficits: The experimental analysis of brief assessments of academic skills. School Psychology Review, 33, 429–443. Dunlap, G., & Carr, E. (2007). Positive behavior support and developmental disabilities. In S. Odom, R. Horner, M. Snell, & J. Blacher (Eds.), Handbook of developmental disabilities (pp. 469–482). New York: Guilford Press. Dunlap, G., Iovannone, R., Kincaid, D., Wilson, K., Christiansen, K., Strain, P., et al. (2010). Prevent–­teach– ­reinforce: The school-­based model of individualized positive behavior support. Baltimore: Brookes. Dunlap, G., & Kincaid, D. (2001). The widening world of functional assessment: Comments on four manuals and beyond. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 365–377. Dunlap, G., Strain, P. S., Fox, L., Carta, J. J., Conroy, M., Smith, B., et al. (2006). Prevention and intervention with young children’s challenging behavior: A summary and perspective regarding current knowledge. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 29–45. DuPaul, G. J., & Ervin, R. A. (1996). Functional assessment of behavior related to ADHD: Linking assessment to intervention design. Behavior Therapy, 27, 601–622. Eber, L., Swain-­Bradway, J., Breen, K., & Phillips, D. (2013). Building Tier 2/Tier 3 capacity within a PBIS system of support. Retrieved from www. pbisillinois.org/publications/reports. Eckert, T. L., Ardoin, S. P., Daisey, D. M., & Scarola, M. D. (2000). Empirically evaluating the effectiveness of reading interventions: The use of brief experimental analysis and single case designs. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 463–473. Eckert, T. L., Codding, R. S., & Dunn, E. K. (2011). Curriculum-­based measurement. In A. S. Davis (Ed.), Handbook of pediatric neuropsychology (pp. 1137–1143). New York: Springer. Edyburn, D. L. (2013). Critical issues in advancing the special education technology evidence base. Exceptional Children, 80, 7–24.

Ellingson, S. A., Miltenberger, R. G., Stricker, J., Galensky, T. L., & Garlinghouse, M. (2000). Functional assessment intervention for challenging behaviors in the classroom by general classroom teachers. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 85–97. Epstein, M., Atkins, M., Cullinan, D., Kutash, K., & Weaver, R. (2008). Reducing behavior problems in the elementary school classroom: A practice guide (NCEE #2008-012). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides. Ervin, R. A., DuPaul, G. J., Kern, L., & Friman, P. C. (1998). Classroom-­based functional and adjunctive assessments: Proactive approaches to intervention selection for adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 65–78. Ervin, R. A., Radford, P. M., Bertsch, K., Piper, A. L., Ehrhardt, K. E., & Poling, A. (2004). A descriptive analysis and critique of the empirical literature on school-­based functional assessment. School Psychology Review, 30(2), 193–210. Etherington, D. (2013). Apple has sold over 8M iPads direct to education worldwide, with more than 1B iTunesU downloads. Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/28/applehas-sold-over-8m-ipads-­direct-­to-­education-­ worldwide -­w ith - more -than -1b -­i tunes -­u -­ downloads. Expressive Solutions. (2010). Percentally (Version 1.1.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Filter, K. J., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Function-­ based interventions for problem behavior. Education and Treatment of Children, 32, 1–19. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: National Implementation Research Network, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, University of Florida. Fleming, C. B., Harachi, T. W., Cortes, R. C., Abbott, R. D., & Catalano, R. F. (2004). Level and change in reading scores and attention problems during elementary school as predictors of problem behavior in middle school. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12, 130–144. Fox, J., & Davis, C. (2005). Functional behavior assessment in schools: Current research findings and future directions. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 1–4.



References 275

Future Help Designs. (2012). iBAA (Version 2.2) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Gage, N., Lewis, T., & Stichter, J. (2012). Functional behavioral assessment-­ based interventions for students with or at risk for emotional and/or behavioral disorders in school: A hierarchical linear modeling meta-­analysis. Behavioral Disorders, 37(2), 55–77. Gilbertson, D., Witt, J., Duhon, G., & Dufrene, B. (2008). Using brief assessments to select math fluency and on-task behavior interventions: An investigation of treatment utility. Education and Treatment of Children, 31(2), 167–181. Ginsburg-­Block, M. D., Rohrbeck, C. A., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2006). A meta-­analytic review of social, self-­concept, and behavioral outcomes of peer-­ assisted learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 732–749. Ginsburg-­Block, M., Rohrbeck, C., Lavigne, N., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2008). Peer-­assisted learning: An academic strategy for enhancing motivation among diverse students. In C. Hudley & A. E. Gottfried (Eds.), Academic motivation and the culture of school in childhood and adolescence (pp. 247–273). New York: Oxford University Press. Goh, A. E., & Bambara, L. M. (2012). Individualized positive behavior support in school settings: A meta-­analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 33(5), 271–286. Good Karma Applications. (2010). First then visual scheduler (Version 1.1.6) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes. apple.com. Google. (2014). Search operators. Retrieved from https://support.google.com/websearch/ answer/136861?hl=en#. Gotclues. (2009). iReward chart: Parents reward tracker behavior chore chart (Version 2.12) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Grant Technology Services. (2013). Tantrum tracker (Version 2.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Grembe. (2011). My pictures talk-video modeling tool (Version 4.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Gresham, F. M., Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Quinn, M. M., & McInerney, M. (1998). Classroom and school-­wide practices that support children’s social competence: A synthesis of research. Washington, DC: American Institutes of Research and Office of Special Education Programs. Gulchak, D. J. (2008). Using a mobile handheld computer to teach a student with an emotional

and behavioral disorder to self-­monitor attention. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 567–581. Handhold Adaptive. (2013a). iPrompts® visual supports, schedulers and picture prompts for Autism and special education (Version 3.0.77) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Handhold Adaptive. (2013b). Story maker for social stories (Version 3.0.77) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes. apple.com. Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 147–185. Harrison, K., & Harrison, R. (2009). The school social worker’s role in tertiary support of functional assessment. Children and Schools, 31(2), 119–127. Harrower, J. K. (1999). Functional assessment and comprehensive early intervention. Exceptionality, 8(3), 189–204. Hastings, R. P., & Brown, T. (2000). Functional assessment and challenging behaviors: Some future directions. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(4), 229–240. Hawken, L., Adolphson, S., MacLeod, K., & Schumann, J. (2009). Secondary-­tier interventions and supports. In G. Sugai, R. H., Horner, G. Dunlap, & W. Sailor (Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior support (pp. 395–420). New York: Springer. Hawken, L., O’Neill, R., & MacLeod, K. (2011). An investigation of the impact of function of problem behavior on effectiveness of the Behavior Education Program. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 551–574. Hemmeter, M. L., Ostrosky, M., & Fox, L. (2006). Social emotional foundations for early learning: A conceptual model for intervention. School Psychology Review, 35, 583–601. Hitchcock, C. H., Dowrick, P., & Prater, M. A. (2003). Video self-­ modeling in school based settings. Remedial and Special Education, 56, 36–45. Hog Bay Software. (2011). Bubbles (Version 3.3.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Horner, R. H. (1994). Functional assessment: Contributions and future directions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 401–404. Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Todd, A. W., Newton, J. S., & Sprague, J. R. (2010). Designing and implementing individualized positive behavior support. In M. E. Snell & F. Brown (Eds.),

276

References

Instruction of students with severe disabilities (7th ed., pp. 225–257). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Horner, R. H., O’Neill, R. E., & Flannery, K. B. (1993). Building effective behavior support plans from functional assessment information. In M. E. Snell (Ed.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (4th ed., pp.184–214). Columbus, OH: Merrill. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., et al. (2009). A randomized, waitlist-­controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-­ w ide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(3), 133–144. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Todd, A. (1996). Comprehensive functional assessment in schools. Grant application submitted to the Office of Special Education, U.S. Department of Education. Eugene: University of Oregon. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-­ Palmer, T. (1999–2000). Elements of behavior support plans: A technical brief. Exceptionality, 8, 205–216. Horner, R. H., Vaughn, B. J., Day, H. M., & Ard, W. R. (1996). The relationship between setting events and problem behavior: Expanding our understanding of behavioral support. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 381– 402). Baltimore: Brookes. Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-­based measurement. New York: Guilford Press. Howell, K. W., & Nolet, V. (1999). Curriculum-­ based evaluation: Teaching and decision making (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: Wadsworth. Hyceit. (2012). Caught being good (Version 1.2) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Amendments of 1997. (1997). H.R. 5, 105th Congress, 1st Session. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Public Law 108–446. Ingram, K., Lewis-­Palmer, T., & Sugai, G. (2005). Function-­ based intervention planning: Comparing the effectiveness of FBA function-­based and non-­ f unction-­ based intervention plans. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7(4), 224–236. Iwata, B., Deleon, I., & Roscoe, E. (2013). Reliability and validity of the functional analysis screening tool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(1), 271–284.

Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1982/1994). Toward a functional analysis of self-­injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197–209. Iwata, B. A., & Dozier, C. L. (2008). Clinical applications of functional analysis methodology. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 3–9. Jameson, J., Thompson, V., Manuele, G., Smith, D., Egan, H., & Moore, T. (2012). Using an iTouch to teach core curriculum words and definitions: Efficacy and social validity. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27(3), 41–54. JBROS Software. (2012). FAO observer tool (Version 1.0.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. JibJab Media. (2013). Beep & boop by storybots (Version 2.0.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Joseph, L. M., & Eveleigh, E. L. (2011). A review of the effects of self-­ monitoring on reading performance of students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 45, 43–53. Kahng, S., & Iwata, B. A. (1998). Computerized systems for collecting real-time observational data. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(2), 253–261. Kalberg, J. R., Lane, K. L., & Lambert, W. (2012). The utility of conflict resolution and social skills interventions with middle school students at risk for antisocial behavior: A methodological illustration. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 23–38. Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic learning problems. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Katsiyannis, A., Conroy, M., & Zhang, D. (2008). District-­ level administrators’ perspectives on the implementation of functional behavior assessment in schools. Behavioral Disorders, 34(1), 14–26. Kauffman, J. M., Mostert, M. P., Trent, S. C., & Hallahan, D. P. (1993). Managing classroom behavior: A reflective approach (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-case research designs (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Kern, L., & Clemens, N. H. (2007). Antecedent strategies to promote appropriate classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 65–76. Lambert, J. M., Bloom, S. E., & Irvin, J. (2012). Trial-based functional analysis and functional communication training in an early childhood setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(3), 579–584. Lee, S. W., & Jamison, T. (2003). Including the FBA process in student assistance teams: An



References 277

exploratory study of team communications and intervention selection. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 14(2), 209–239. Leighton, M. S., O’Brien, E., Walking Eagle, K., Weiner, L., Wimberly, G., & Youngs, P. (1997). Roles for education paraprofessionals in effective schools: An idea book. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1996). Functional assessment of problem behavior: A pilot investigation of the comparative and interactive effects of teacher and peer social attention on students in general education settings. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 1–19. Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior support: A systems approach to proactive school-­w ide management. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31(6), 1–24. Lewis, T. J., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1998). Reducing problem behavior through a school-­w ide system of effective behavioral support: Investigation of a school-­w ide social skills training program and contextual interventions. School Psychology Review, 27, 446–459. Liaupsin, C., Scott, T. M., & Nelson, C. M. (2006). Functional behavioral assessment: An interactive training module. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Lillard, A. S. (2007). Montessori: The science behind the genius. New York: Oxford University Press. Little App Helpers. (2014). My Autism day (Version 1.3.3) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Live School. (2014). Live school [App and information]. Retrieved from whyliveschool.com. Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. (1998). Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions. London: Sage. Loman, S. L., & Horner, R. H. (2014). Examining the efficacy of a basic functional behavioral assessment training package for school personnel. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(1), 18–30. Loman, S., Strickland-­Cohen, M. K., Borgmeier, C., & Horner, R. H. (2013). Basic FBA to BSP training curriculum. Eugene: University of Oregon. Lovaas, O. I., Freitag, G., Gold, V. J., & Kassorla, I. C. (1965). Experimental studies in childhood schizophrenia: Analysis of self-­ destructive behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2, 7–84. Luiselli, J. K., & Cameron, M. J. (Eds.). (1998). Antecedent control: Innovative approaches to behavioral support. Baltimore: Brookes.

March, R., Horner, R. H., Lewis-­Palmer, L., Brown, D., Crone, D., Todd, A. W., et al. (2000). Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS). Eugene: Department of Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. March, R. E., & Horner, R. H. (2002). Feasibility and contributions of functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 158–170. Marquis, J. G., Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Turnbull, A. P., Thompson, M., Behrens, G. A., et al. (2000). A meta-­analysis of positive behavior support. In R. M. Gerston & E. P. Schiller (Eds.), Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues (pp. 137–178). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Marz Consulting. (2011). Behavior tracker pro (Version 3.4.5) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Maxwell Software. (2013). Pill monitor—medication reminders and logs (Version 2.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http:// itunes.apple.com. May, S., Ard, W., III, Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., Glasgow, A., Sugai, G., et al. (2000). Schoolwide information system. Eugene: Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. May, S., Ard, W., Todd, A., Horner, R., Glasgow, A., Sugai, G., et al. (2013a). School-wide Information System (5.0.7 b52). Eugene: University of Oregon. May, S., Talmadge, N., Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., McGovern, S., Morris, J., et al. (2013b). Individual Student Intervention System (5.0.7 b52). Eugene: University of Oregon. May, S., Talmadge, N., Todd, A., Horner, R., & Rossetto-­ Dickey, C. (2013c). Check-In/CheckOut (5.0.7 b52). Eugene: University of Oregon. May, S., Talmadge, N., Todd, A., Horner, R., & Rossetto-­ Dickey, C. (2014). Check-In/CheckOut (5.1.9 b181). Eugene: University of Oregon. McIntosh, K., & Av-Gay, H. (2007). Implications of current research on the use of functional behavior assessment and behavior support planning in school systems. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 3(1), 39–52. McIntosh, K., Borgmeier, C., Anderson, C. M., Horner, R. H., Rodriguez, B., & Tobin, T. J. (2008). Technical adequacy of the functional assessment checklist: Teachers and staff (FACTS) FBA interview measure. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(1), 33–45. McIntosh, K., Filter, K. J., Bennett, J. L., Ryan, C.,

278

References

& Sugai, G. (2010). Principles of sustainable prevention: Designing scale-up of school-­w ide positive behavior support to promote durable systems. Psychology in the Schools, 47(1), 5–21. McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., & Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading skills and function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42, 131–147. McIntosh, K., Mercer, S. H., Hume, A. E., Frank, J. L., Turri, M. G., & Mathews, S. (2013). Factors related to sustained implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 293–311. Mechling, L. C. (2011). Review of twenty-­f irst century portable electronic devices for persons with moderate intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorders. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46(4), 479–498. Miller, F., & Lee, D. (2013). Do functional behavioral assessments improve intervention effectiveness for students diagnosed with ADHD?: A single-­subject meta-­analysis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22(3), 253–282. Monarch Teaching Technologies. (2011). Vizzle player (Version 4.6.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Mooney, P., Ryan, J. B., Uhing, B. M., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2005). A review of self-­ management interventions targeting academic outcomes for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14, 203–331. Motivaider [Apparatus]. (2014). Thief River Falls, MN: Behavioral Dynamics. Mueller, M. M., & Nkosi, A. (2007). State of the science in the assessment and management of severe behavior problems in school settings: Behavior analytic consultation to schools. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 3(2), 176–202. Murdock, S., O’Neill, R., & Cunningham, E. (2005). A comparison of results and acceptability of functional behavioral assessment procedures with a group of middle school students with emotional/behavioral disorders (E/BD). Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 5–18. Nahgahgwon, K. N., Umbreit, J., Liaupsin, C. J., & Turton, A. M. (2010). Function-­based planning for young children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(4), 537–559. National Center on Education Statistics. (2010). The condition of education. Retrieved May 20, 2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe. Neilsen, S. L., & Mcevoy, M. A. (2004). Functional behavioral assessment in early education

settings. Journal of Early Intervention, 26, 115–131. Neiman, S., & Hill, M. R. (2011). Crime, violence, discipline and safety in U.S. public schools. Washington, DC: National Center on Education Statistics. Nelson, J. R., Roberts, M. L., Rutherford, R. B., Jr., Mathur, S. R., & Aaroe, L. A. (1999). A statewide survey of special education administrators and school psychologists regarding functional behavioral assessment. Education and Treatment of Children, 22(3), 267–279. Newcomer, L. L., & Lewis, T. J. (2004). Functional behavioral assessment: An investigation of assessment reliability and effectiveness of function-­ based interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12(3), 168–181. Nippe, G. E., Lewis-­ Palmer, T., & Sprague, J. (1998). The student-­directed functional assessment: An analysis of congruence between student self-­ report and direct observation. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Education and Community Supports, University of Oregon, Eugene. Noldus, L. P. J. J., Trienes, R. J. H., Hendriksen, A. H. M., Jansen, H., & Jansen, R. G. (2000). The Observer Video-Pro: New software for the collection, management and presentation of time-­structured data from videotapes and digital media files. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32, 197–206. O’Neill, R. E., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Horner, R. H., & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development: A practical handbook (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/ Cole. O’Neill, R. E., Bundock, K., Hawken, L. S., & Kladis, K. (2014, May). Acceptability of functional assessment procedures to special education teachers and school psychologists. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis International, Chicago, IL. O’Neill, R. E., Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Sprague, J. R., Storey, K., & Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional assessment for problem behavior: A practical handbook (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. O’Neill, S., & Stephenson, J. (2009). Teacher involvement in the development of function-­ based behaviour intervention plans for students with challenging behaviour. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 33, 6–25. O’Neill, S., & Stephenson, J. (2010). The use of functional behavioral assessment for students with challenging behaviors: Current patterns and experience of Australian practitioners.



References 279

Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 10, 65–82. Packenham, M., Shute, R., & Reid, R. (2004). A truncated functional behavioral assessment procedure for children with disruptive classroom behaviors. Education and Treatment of Children, 27(1), 9–25. Park, K. L. (2007). Facilitating effective teambased functional behavioral assessments in typical school settings. Beyond Behavior, 21–31. Parker, R., Tindal, G., & Stein, S. (1992). Estimating trend in progress monitoring data: A comparison of simple line-­fitting methods. School Psychology Review, 21, 300–312. Payne, L. D., Scott, T. M., & Conroy, M. (2007). A school-­based examination of the efficacy of function-­based intervention. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 158–174. Reed, H. K., Thomas, E. S., Sprague, J. R., & Horner, R. H. (1997). The student guided functional assessment interview: An analysis of student and teacher agreement. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 33–49. Reid, D. H. (2000). Enhancing the applied utility of functional assessment. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(4), 241–244. Reid, J. (1993). Prevention of conduct disorder before and after school entry: Relating interventions to developmental findings. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 243–262. Reid, R., & Nelson, R. (2002). The utility, acceptability, and practicality of functional behavioral assessment for students with high-­ incidence problem behaviors. Remedial and Special Education, 23(1), 15–23. Renshaw, T., Christensen, L., Marchant, M., & Anderson, T. (2008). Training elementary school general educators to implement function-­based support. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 495–521. Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2004). Behavior assessment system for children (2nd ed., BASC-2). Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessment. Risley, T. R. (1968). The effects and side effects of punishing the autistic behaviors of a deviant child. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 21–35. Robers, S., Kemp, J., Truman, J., & Snyder, T. D. (2013). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2012. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Romanczyk, R. G., Gillis, J. M., Callahan, E. H., & Kruser, N. (n.d.). CBTAonline—­ Tools for behavior analysis. Retrieved from cbtaonline. com.

Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36, 12–39. Royer, E. (1995). Behaviour disorders, exclusion and social skills: Punishment is not education. Therapeutic Care and Education, 4, 32–36. Sailor, W., Dunlap, G., Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of positive behavioral support. New York: Springer. Schmidt, W., & Finnegan, J. (1993). The race without a finish line. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Scholastic. (2013). Scholastic reading timer (Version 2.4.4) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Scott, T. M., Alter, P. J., & McQuillan, K. (2010). Functional behavior assessment in classroom settings: Scaling down to scale up. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 87–94. Scott, T. M., Alter, P. J., Rosenberg, M., & Borgmeier, C. (2010). Decision-­making in secondary and tertiary interventions of school-­w ide systems of positive behavior support. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(4), 513– 535. Scott, T. M., Anderson, C. M., & Alter, P. (2012). Managing classroom behavior using positive behavior supports. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Scott, T. M., Anderson, C. M., & Spaulding, S. A. (2008). Strategies for developing and carrying out functional assessment and behavior intervention planning. Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 39–49. Scott, T. M., Bucalos, A., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., Jolivette, K., & DeShea, L. (2004). Using functional behavior assessment in general education settings: Making a case for effectiveness and efficiency. Behavioral Disorders, 29(2), 189–201. Scott, T. M., & Caron, D. B. (2005). Conceptualizing functional behavior assessment as prevention practice within positive behavior support systems. Preventing School Failure, 50(1), 13–20. Scott, T. M., & Eber, L. (2003). Functional assessment and wraparound as systemic school processes: Primary, secondary, and tertiary systems examples. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(3), 131. Scott, T. M., & Kamps, D. M. (2007). The future of functional behavioral assessment in school settings. Behavioral Disorders, 32(3), 146–157. Scott, T. M., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., & McIntyre, J. (2005). Team-based functional behavior assessment as a proactive public school process: A descriptive analysis of current barriers. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14 (1), 57–71.

280

References

Scott, T. M., McIntyre, J., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., & Conroy, M. (2004). An examination of functional behavior assessment in public school setting: Collaborative teams, experts, and methodology. Behavioral Disorders, 29(4), 384–395. Scott, T. M., McIntyre, J., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., Conroy, M., & Payne, L. D. (2005). An examination of the relation between functional behavior assessment and selected intervention strategies with school-­ based teams. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7(4), 205–215. Scott, T. M., Nelson, C. M., & Zabala, J. (2003). Functional behavior assessment training in public schools: Facilitating systemic change. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(4), 216–224. Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Berkeley, S., & Graetz, J. E. (2010). Do special education interventions improve learning of secondary content? A meta-­ analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 437–449. Selosoft. (2014). The zones of regulation (Version 1.2.2) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Sheffield, K., & Waller, R. J. (2010). A review of single-­ case studies utilizing self-­ monitoring interventions to reduce problem classroom behaviors. Beyond Behavior, 19(2), 7–13. Sherrod, M., Getch, Y. Q., & Ziomek-­ Daigle, J. (2009). The impact of positive behavior support to decrease discipline referrals with elementary students. Professional School Counseling, 12(6), 421–427. Shore, B. A., & Iwata B. A. (1999). Assessment and treatment of behavior disorders maintained by nonsocial (automatic) reinforcement. In A. C. Repp & R. H. Homer (Eds.), Functional analysis of problem behavior: From effective assessment to effective support (pp. 122–145). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Skiba, R., & Raush, M. K. (2006). School disciplinary systems: Alternatives to suspension and expulsion. In G. G. Bear & K. M. Minke (Eds.), Children’s needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 631–650). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Skiba, R., Ritter, S., Simmons, A., Peterson, R. L., & Miller, C. (2006). The Safe and Responsive Schools Project: A school reform model for implementing best practices in violence prevention. In S. R. Jimerson & M. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school violence and school safety: From research to practice (pp. 631– 650). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Basic Books. Skinner, B. F. (1966). What is the experimental analysis of behavior? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 213–218. Skinner, C. H., Pappas, D. N., & Kai, A. D. (2006). Enhancing academic engagement: Providing opportunities for responding and influencing students to choose to respond. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 389–403. Skinner, J. N., Veerkamp, M. B., Kamps, D. M., & Andra, P. R. (2009). Teacher and peer participation in functional analysis and intervention for a first grade student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Education and Treatment of Children, 32(2), 243–266. Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A. G., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-­evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 290–322. Solnick, M. D., & Ardoin, S. P. (2010). A quantitative review of functional analysis procedures in public school settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(1), 153–175. Sprick, R. (2008). Interventions: Evidence-­based behavioral strategies for individual students (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing. Sprick, R. (2009). Champs: A proactive and positive approach to classroom management. Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing. Stage, S. A., Jackson, H. G., Moscovitz, K., Erickson, M. J., Thurman, S., Jessee, W., et al. (2006). Using multimethod-­ multisource functional behavioral assessment for students with behavioral disabilities. School Psychology Review, 35(3), 451–471. Starek, J., & McCullagh, P. (1999). The effect of video self modeling on the performance of beginning swimmers. Sports Psychologist, 13, 269–287. Stecker, P. M., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Using curriculum-­ based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of research. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 795– 819. Steege, M. W., & Watson, T. S. (2009). Conducting school-­ based functional behavioral assessments: A practitioner’s guide (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Storey, K., & Post, M. (2012). Positive behavior supports in classrooms and schools: Effective and practical strategies for teachers and other service providers. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Strickland-­ Cohen, M. K. (2011). Behavior support plan knowledge assessment. Eugene:



References 281

Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon. Strickland-­ Cohen, M. K., & Horner, R. H. (in press). Typical school personnel developing and implementing basic behavior support plans. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. Strickland-­Cohen, M. K., Loman, S., & Borgmeier, C. (2012). From Basic FBA to BSP participant’s guide. Eugene: University of Oregon. Stormont, M., Reinke, W., & Herman, K. (2011). Teachers’ knowledge of evidence-­based interventions and available school resources for children with emotional and behavioral problems. Journal of Behavior Education, 20, 138– 147. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2000). Including the functional behavioral assessment technology in schools. Exceptionality, 8(3), 145. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-­ wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35, 245. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2008). What we know and need to know about preventing problem behavior in schools. Exceptionality, 16(2), 67–77. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-­ to-­ intervention and school-­ w ide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-­tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223– 237. Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C. M., et al. (2000). Applying positive behavioral support and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 131–143. Sugai, G., Horner, R., Sailor, W., Dunlap, G., Eber, L., Lewis, T., et al. (2005). School-wide positive behavior support: Implementers’ blueprint and self-assessment. Washington, DC: Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Sugai, G., Lewis-­ Palmer, T., & Hagan-Burke, S. (1999). Overview of the functional behavioral assessment process. Exceptionality, 8(3), 149– 160. 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-­w ide discipline interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(2), 94–101. SuperPsyched, LLC. (2013). Behavior snap (Version 1.3.2) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com.

Sutherland, K. S., Alder, N., & Gunter, P. L. (2003). The effect of varying rates of opportunities to respond to academic requests on the classroom behavior of students with EBD. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 239–248. Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). Exploring the relation between increased opportunities to respond to academic requests and the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with EBD: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 113–121. Szwed, K., & Bouck, E. C. (2013). Clicking away: Repurposing student response systems to lesson off-task behavior. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(2), 1–22. Tapp, J., & Wehby, J. H. (2000). Observational software for laptop computers and optical bar code readers. In T. Thompson, D. Felce, & F. J. Symons (Eds.), Behavioral observation: Technology and applications in developmental disabilities (pp. 71–82). Baltimore: Brookes. Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2003). Reading growth in high-­ poverty classrooms: The influence of teacher practices that encourage cognitive engagement in literacy learning. Elementary School Journal, 104, 3–28. Taylor-­Greene, S., Brown, D., Nelson, L., Longton, J., Gassman, T., Cohen, J., et al. (1997). Schoolwide behavioral support: Starting the year off right. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7(1), 99–112. Todd, A. W., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1999). Individualizing school-­w ide discipline for students with chronic problem behaviors: A team approach. Effective School Practices, 17, 72–82. Track & Share Apps. (2013). Tracknshare (Version 5.0.1) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Treptow, M. A., Burns, M. K., & McComas, J. J. (2007). Reading at the frustration, instructional, and independent levels: Effects on student time on task and comprehension. School Psychology Review, 36, 159–166. Umbreit, J., Ferro, J. B., Liaupsin, C. J., & Lane, K. L. (2007). Functional behavioral assessment and function-­based intervention: An effective, practical approach. Columbus, OH: Pearson. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Educational technology in U.S. public schools: Fall 2008 (NCES 2010-034). Washington, DC: Author. Van Acker, R., Boreson, L., Gable, R. A., & Potterson, T. (2005). Are we on the right course? Lessons learned about current FBA/BIP practices

282

References

in schools. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 35–56. VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Best practices in can’t do/won’t do assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 131–140). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists. Vollmer, T. R., & Northrup, J. (1996). Some implications of functional analysis for school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 76–92. von Ravensberg, H., & Tobin, T. J. (2006). IDEA 2004: Final regulations and the reauthorized functional behavioral assessment. Retrieved from www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/SSRN_d1151394.pdf. Walker, H. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of apps for mobile devices. Journal of Special Education Technology, 26(4), 59–63. Walker, H., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behavior in public schools: Strategies and best practices. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/ Cole. Walsall Academy. (2012a). Classroom timer (Version 1.3) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Walsall Academy. (2012b). Too noisy pro (Version 1.17) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http://itunes.apple.com. Weber, K. P., Killu, K., Derby, K. M., & Barretto, A. (2005). The status of functional behavioral assessment (FBA): Adherence to standard practice in FBA methodology. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 737–744.

WhizzWatt Software. (2014). Functional behavior assessment wizard (Version 1.1.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from http:// itunes.apple.com. Witt, J., VanDerHeyden, A., & Gilbertson, D. (2004). Instruction and classroom management: Prevention and intervention research. In R. B. Rutherford, Jr., M. M. Quinn, & S. R. Mathur (Eds.), Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral disorders (pp. 426– 445). New York: Guilford Press. Wolery, M., Bailey, D. B., & Sugai, G. M. (1988). Effective teaching: Principles and procedures of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Wolf, M. M., Risley, T. R., & Mees, H. (1964). Application of operant conditioning procedures to the behavior problems of an autistic child. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1, 305–312. Wood, B. K., Blair, K. C., & Ferro, J. (2009). Young children with challenging behavior: Function-­ based assessment and intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29, 68–78. Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Zuni, N., & McDougall, D. (2004). Using positive behavioral support to manage avoidance of academic tasks. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(1), 18–24.

Index

Pages followed by t or f indicate tables or figures. ABC (antecedent-behavior-consequence) assessment, 219 ABC Data, 219, 222t ABC Data Pro, 219, 222t ABC Logbook, 220, 222t ABC Video Pro, 221, 223t ABC Video Pro Lite, 221 Academic deficits, 154 skill-based versus performance-based, 158–159, 161f Academic performance, 153–181 “can’t do,” versus “won’t do,” 158–159 classroom observations and, 156–157 curriculum-based measurement and, 157–158 data sources for, 154–159 (see also Curriculum-based measurement; Interviews; Observations; Referrals) FBA and, 154–155, 155f and implementing supports and monitoring change, 162–163 interventions in case example 1, 164–170 interventions in case example 2, 170–180 permanent product review and, 159 problem behavior and, 153–154 and support for individual intervention, 160, 161f, 162 teacher referral and interview and, 155–156 and testable hypothesis for behavior function, 159–160 Administrators, role on behavior support team, 105–106 Agendas, for behavior support team, 109–110, 110f, 111f, 112

Aggression FBA process and, 136–137 testable hypothesis for, 159 Apple/Android iOS, 217t Applied behavior analysis, 4 Appropriate replacement behaviors, 89 teaching, 67–69, 70f–72f, 73 Apps; see also specific apps; Technology trends ABC observation, 219–220 competing behavior model, 220 evaluation of, 235, 237 evaluation rubric for, 224f–225f for FBA, 216, 217t, 218 for interventions antecedent-based, 228, 229t–230t, 231–232 behavior-based, 232–234, 233t consequence-based, 234–235 event-based, 226, 227t, 228 for observational data collection, 218 search tools for, 217t Autiplan Pictoplanner, 229t

B Beep & Boop, 236t Behavior changes, evaluation of, 85–94 with behavior rating scales, 86, 87f, 88, 88f with frequency counts, 85, 85f with observations, 88–89, 89f Behavior charts, data from, 163 Behavior intervention plans (BIPs), 7–8 Behavior Rating Scale, 86, 87f, 88, 88f for checking implementation fidelity, 93 individualized, case example of, 87f

283

284

Index

Behavior Snap, 222t Behavior support plan (BSP) assessment checklist for, 81f and brief FBA, 29–30 choosing reinforcers for, 75–76 competing behaviors and, 68–69, 70f–72f, 73 content of, 66 contextual fit of, 73–74 critical features of, 80 designing, 66–82 documenting, 76 evaluation and modification of, 31–33, 32t, 83–97 (see also Evaluation) critical elements in, 84–94 decisions based on, 94–96 rationale for, 83–84 FBA process and, 4–6 and full FBA, 30–31 as function-based support, 18 (see also Function-based support) individualized, 18, 74–76 informing student about, 76 maintenance of, 97 poor/inconsistent implementation of, 93–94 for preschool-age children, 194–195, 209, 210f–211f, 212 Step 7 of, 77f–79f team development of, 13 team evaluation of, 117–118 testable hypothesis and, 29–30, 52–53 tools for developing, 34 Behavior support systems, continuum of, 126–127 Behavior support team, 101–121; see also Schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) BSP evaluation and, 117–118 building FBA capacity on, 122–133 competencies of, 127–128 confidence in, 107 coordinator/referral liaison’s role in, 107–108 core membership of, 105–107 in ECE and daycare settings, 195–196 leadership models for, 129–131 meeting agendas for, 109–110, 110f, 111f, 112 meeting notes and, 112, 113f membership of, 104–105 model for, 102–103, 103f organizing procedure for, 112, 114–115 participants in first meeting of, 114–115 Partnership Agreement and, 115, 116f in preschool settings, 195–196 promoting teamwork by, 109–118 referral to, 40 and requests for assistance, 40, 41f, 42f, 43f, 44 roles and responsibilities of, 107–109 structure of, 102–105, 104f training of, 127–131 Behavior Tracker Pro, 221, 223t

Behavioral interventions; see Interventions Behaviors; see Appropriate replacement behaviors; Competing behaviors; Problem behavior BehaviorSnap, 220 Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT), 141 Best-practice recommendations, 10–14 Brief experimental analysis (BEA), 155f, 159, 160, 162 in “can’t do” case example, 168–170, 169f Bubbles, 236t

C Case examples; see also Preschool case example of “can’t do” academic behavior, 164–170 of curriculum-based measurement, 164,167, 168f documenting evaluation plans for, 89, 90f–92f, 93 of FBA-BSP process, 39–40 and individualized Behavior Rating Scale, 87f observation data for, 88–89, 89f of testable hypothesis, 167, 169f of “won’t do” academic behavior, 170–180 Caught Being Good, 236t Check-In/Check-Out (CICO), 17 in Tier 2, 25–26, 27f CICO-SWIS, for tracking student outcomes, 140 Class Dojo, 234 Class Dojo—points, 236t Class Dojo—praise, 236t Classroom, observations in; see Observations Classroom Timer, 229t Competency(ies) defined, 127 team member, 127–128 Competing behavior model app, 220 Competing Behavior Pathway, preschool-age children and, 209, 210f–211f, 212 Competing behaviors defined, 68 examples of, 68–69, 73 forms for building pathways for, 70f–72f Computers; see also Apps; Technology trends prevalence in schools, 216 Contextual fit concept and examples of, 73–74 for FBA in preschool settings, 194–195 Cooperative learning groups, 163 Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) academic concerns and, 157–158 case example of, 164, 167, 168f “won’t do” versus “can’t do” deficits and, 158–159

D Data systems, investing in, 140–141 Day One, 227t



Index 285

E

in Tier 1, 21 in typical ECE settings, 190–192 case example of, 196–213 (see also Preschool case example) contextual-fit considerations in, 194–195 family involvement and, 192–193 multiple settings/routines and, 193–194 team structure and, 195–196 unique factors in, 192–196 underutilization of, 135 First & Then, 236t Frequency counts, 85, 85f Functional analysis, in full FBA, 31 Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff (FACTS), 12, 144 Functional behavioral assessment (FBA); see also FBA-BSP for academic performance, 154–155, 155f (see also Academic performance) acceptability of, 6–7 basic components of, 4–5 best-practice recommendations for, 10–14 brief, 29–30 adequacy of, 115, 117 interviews in, 45, 46f–47f, 48f–51f, 52 building capacity for, 122–133, 142–143 challenge of, 122–123 conducting, 39–65 in early childhood education, 182–183, 191–192, 198–213, 199f–203f, 205f–206f, 207f, 208f, 210f–211f outcomes of, 212–213 full, 30–31 additional interviews in, 54, 55f–56f, 57 indications for, 115, 117 observations of students in, 60–61, 62f, 63f student interviews in, 57, 58f–59f, 60 teacher interviews in, 29–31, 54, 55f–56f functional analysis in, 31 goals, process, tools, time by level, 28t historical background of, 4 IDEA recommendations for, 134–135 IDEIA 2004 amendments and, 4, 21, 122–123 implementation fidelity and validity, 9–10 implementation of, 5–6, 93–96, 95f, 96f (see also Behavior support plan [BSP]; Interventions) individualizing, 74–76 potential challenges of, 7–8 with preschool-age children (see Early childhood education; Preschool-age children; Preschool case example) procedures for, 5–10 process in, 40–63 professional development and training in, 13–14 resources for, 8–10 schoolwide plan for, 122

Early childhood education (ECE); see also Preschool-age children; Preschool case example behavior support team in, 195–196 FBA and, 182–183 multi-tiered SWPBS and, 183–187 teacher preparation for, 190 eClicker, 231–232 eClicker Presenter, 230t Evaluation, 83–97 of behavior changes, 85–94 with behavior rating scales, 86, 87f, 88, 88f with frequency count, 85, 85f with observation, 88–89, 89f data systems for, 140–141 data used in, 94–96, 95f, 96f documenting, with evaluation plans, 89, 90f–92f, 93 of feasibility and fidelity, 93–94 of parent, teacher, student satisfaction, 94 Evaluation plans, documenting, 89, 90f–92f, 93 Expected behaviors, teaching, 45

F Family, of preschool-age children, 192–193 FAO Observer Tool, 220, 223t FBA to BSP Training Curriculum, 144, 145t, 146 format for, 146–149 ongoing coaching and feedback for, 148 tools for trainers and, 147–148 for training additional school staff, 148–149 FBA-BSP, 18; see also Schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) basic versus complex, 135–137, 138t conditions for implementing, 139t empirical support for, 149–150 implementing within tiered systems, 150 organizing district delivery of, 137 training school-based personnel for, 143–144 case examples of, 39–40 for “can’t do” problem behavior, 164, 165f–167f, 167–170, 168f, 169f, 171f, 172f summary of, 178 for “won’t do” problem behavior, 170, 172, 173f–175f, 175, 176f, 177, 177f, 178, 179f, 180f, 181f continuum of, 136–137 establishing context for, 139–142 flowchart of, 33f goal of, 123 improving district delivery capacity for, 134–150 multi-tiered, 134 team-based decision model and, 142

286

Index

Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) (cont.) strategies of, 5 studies of, 6–8 teacher versus psychologist acceptance of, 7 team-based processes in, 12–13 technology trends in (see Technology trends) testable hypothesis in (see Testable hypothesis) in Tier 1, 22–23 in Tier 2, 24–27 in Tier 3, 27–31 time required for, 8 tools and strategies for, 11 trial-based functional analysis of, 11–12 truncated, 12 Functional Behavioral Wizard, 219–220, 222t Function-based support, 18; see also FBA-BSP

G

Interviews in preschool center, 198, 200f–202f, 204, 205f–206f, 206 student, 57, 58f–59f, 60 teacher about academic concerns, 155–156 adaptations for parents, 54, 55f–56f for brief FBA, 45, 46f–51f, 52 for brief/full FBA, 29–31 case example of, 164, 166f–167f for full FBA, 54, 55f–56f in Tier 2, 25 tools for conducting, 34 iPads, school use of, 216 iPrompts, 229t, 230t iReward Chart, 236t ISIS-SWIS function and characteristics of, 237–238, 239f for tracking student outcomes, 140–141

Google search operators, 217t

H Habit Monkey, 230t, 232 Hypothesis; see Testable hypothesis

I iBAA, 219, 222t Individual Student Information System (ISISSWIS), for tracking student outcomes, 140 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), FBA recommendations of, 134–135 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), FBA in 2004 amendments of, 4, 21, 122–123 In-service training; see Training Instruction, tailoring, 157 Interventions apps/technology resources for, 226–233 antecedent-based, 228, 229t–230t, 231–232 behavior-based, 232–234, 233t consequence-based, 234–235 event-based, 226, 227t, 228 brief experimental analysis and, 162 for “can’t do” deficit, 170, 171f, 172f FBA-guided, documentation of, 135 implementing and monitoring, 162–163 individual, developing support for, 160, 161f, 162 initial supports for, 160, 161f, 162 for skill-based versus performance-based deficits, 158–159 technology trends in (see Technology trends) topography-based, versus functionally based, 18–19 for “won’t do” versus “can’t do” behaviors, 160, 161f

L Learning environment, in early childhood education, 184–185 Learning groups, cooperative, 163 LiveSchool—points, 236t LiveSchool—praise, 236t

M Maintenance plans, 97 Meeting agendas, for behavior support team, 109–110, 110f, 111f, 112 Motivaider, 229t, 230t, 231 Motivation, lack of, 154 My Autism Day, 227t, 228 My Daily Tasks, 229t, 233t My Pictures Talk, 233–234

N Negative consequences, versus teaching new behavior, 22

O Observational data collection apps and technology resources for, 218 computer-aided, 216 Observational learning, 232–234 Observations for academic concerns, 156–157 for checking fidelity of implementation, 93–96, 95f, 96f classroom, for academic concerns, 156–157 direct, 7–12 in evaluation process, 88–89, 89f in full FBA, 29–30, 33



Index 287

in preschool center, 206, 207f, 208–209, 208f of students, 60–61, 62f, 63f of teaching strategies, 157 video-capable apps for, 221, 222t–223t, 224f–225f, 226 Office discipline referrals (ODRs), tracking, 22–23, 23f, 156

P Paraprofessionals, on behavior support team, 126 Parents assessing and evaluating satisfaction of, 94, 118, 119f on behavior support team, 107 interviews of, 54, 55f–56f in meetings with behavior support team, 114–115 Partnership Agreement, 115, 116f PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory, 141 Peer tutors, 163 Percentally, 230t Performance deficits, defined, 158 Permanent products, review of, 159 Personnel, training of, 9, 13–14 Pill Monitor, 227t Preschool-age children, 182–213; see also Early childhood education; Preschool case example behavioral expectations for, 184–185 determining problem behavior function in, 189–190 developmental characteristics of, 184 developmentally appropriate instruction for, 186 FBA-BSP effectiveness and, 188 problem behavior in, 187–189 prevalence of, 183, 186–187 functions of, 189–190 Preschool case example, 196–213 BSP in, 209, 210f–211f, 212 FBA in, 198–209 interviews in, 198, 200f–202f, 203–204, 205f–206f, 206 observations in, 206, 207f, 208–209, 208f Request for Assistance in, 198, 199f testable explanation in, 202f–203f outcomes in, 212–213 setting for, 197 Prevention, schoolwide, investing in, 139 Principal, role on behavior support team, 105–106 Problem behavior academic performance and (see Academic performance) “basic” versus complex, 137, 138t “can’t do” case example, 158–160, 161f changeable nature of, 20–21

current context of, 15–16 escape-motivated, apps for, 234–235 function of, 18, 19–20, 189–190 intervention goals for, 66 making ineffective, 68 making inefficient, 67 making irrelevant, 67 management strategies for, 125–126 operational definition of, 29, 44 operational definitions of, versus vague descriptions, 44 predictability of, 20 in preschool-age children, 187–189 functions of, 189–190 proposing testable explanation of, 47f, 49f, 51f replacement behaviors for fighting, 72f refusing to do work, 69, 70f whining, tattling, 71f student and adult impacts of, 15–16 teacher’s response to, 156 testable explanation of, 56f, 59f testable hypothesis for, 29–30, 52–53, 61, 62f, 63f, 159–160 thinking functionally about, 18–21 ProLoQuo2Go, 230t Public schools; see Schools Punishment strategies reliance on, 44 versus teaching new behavior, 22

R Referrals for academic concerns, 155–156 to behavior support team, 40 in FBA-BSP process, 114–115 Reinforcers, choosing, 75–76 Request for Assistance, 40, 41f, 42f, 43f, 44 academic concerns and, 155–156 case example of, 164, 165f in preschool center, 198, 199f required information in, 114 Rules, negative, 5

S Safety issues, prevalence of, 3 Scholastic Reading Timer, 236t School settings, FBA procedures in, 5–10 Schools BSP continuum in, 126–127 building FBA capacity in, 122–133 changing priorities of, 123–124 and commitments to FBA, 123 resources of, 124–126, 125t safety issues in, 3

288 School-wide Information System (SWIS), 22 CICO and, 26 for tracking student outcomes, 140 Schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS), 127; see also FBA-BSP critical need for, 3 in early childhood education, 183–187 Tier 1, 184–186 Tier 2, 186–187 Tier 3, 187 in preschool center, 197 overview of, 16–18, 17f references on, 131–133 Tier 1, 16, 17f, 21–23, 23f, 24t Tier 2, 16–17, 17f, 24–27 Tier 3, 17f, 18 FBA and, 27–31 Schoolwide prevention investing in, 139 team-based decision model and, 142 Self-endangerment FBA process and, 136–137 of preschool-age children, 188 of student, 114 Self-evaluation, by student, 84–85 Self-management strategies, technologically assisted, 231 Self-Regulation Training Board, 233t Skill deficits; see also Academic performance defined, 158 Social media apps, 227t Staff, training of, 9, 13–14; see also Training Story Maker for Social Stories, 233t Student evaluating satisfaction of, 94, 118, 120f informing about BSP, 76 observations of, 60–61, 62f, 63f and self-endangerment, 114 self-evaluation by, 84–85 Student interviews, 57, 58f–59f, 60 Student outcomes, data on, 140

T Tantrum Tracker, 221, 223t Tantrums, teaching alternatives to, 67 Teacher assessing satisfaction of, 118, 121f on behavior support team, 106 evaluating satisfaction of, 94 of preschool-age children, 190 referrals by (see Referrals) training of, 9, 13–14 Teacher interviews; see Interviews, teacher Teaching strategies, observations of, 157

Index Team approach, 12–13; see also Behavior support team Technology trends, 214–239; see also Apps; specific apps apps for functional assessment, 216, 217t, 218 guiding principles for, 215 in intervention apps, 226, 227t, 228, 229t–230t, 231–235, 233t introduction to, 214–215 next steps in, 235, 237 in observational data collection, 218–221, 222t–223t, 224f–225f, 225 overview of, 236t in web-based assessment and intervention, 237–239, 239f Testable hypothesis behavior support plan (BSP) and, 29–30, 52–53 case example of, 167, 169f developing, 159–160 observations for testing, 61, 62f, 63f in preschool setting, 202f–203f Tests, review of, 159 Tiers of Behavior Support. See also Functional behavior support; Schoolwide positive behavior support Tier 1, 16, 17f, 21–23, 23f, 24t, 184–186 Tier 2, 16–17, 17f, 24–27, 186–187 Tier 3, 17f, 18,187 Time issues, 8, 28–29, 124–126, 125t Too Noisy, 227t, 229t, 230t Touch-interface devices, handheld, 216 Trackn Share, 227t, 228 Training, 9, 13–14 for basic FBA-BSP, 137 of behavior support team, 127–131 building capacity and, 142–143 for embedding FBA in Tier 1, 23, 24t leader requirements for, 128–129 for school-based personnel, 143–144 trainer requirements for, 143–144 Trial-based functional analysis, 11–12 Tutors, peer, 163

V Video capture capacity, 216 Video modeling, 232–234 Video-capable FBA observation tools, 221, 222t–223t, 224f–225f, 226 Vizzle, 229t

Z Zones of Regulation, 233t