Reading Response/Study Question Submission:
Based on the 4 assigned articles, synthesize all the information and write a paper about SW-PBIS. Consider this paper a preliminary summary of your knowledge and understanding of SW-PBIS should administrators or educational leaders ask you to participate or lead such an endeavor in their school. The paper should include the history of PBIS, features of SW-PBIS, cite research when appropriate, and demonstrate (in your own words) your understanding of its purpose and effectiveness. Your paper should be 1.5 or 2 pages in length (no longer). Double spaced. 12 font. 1″ margins. Times New Roman font. SEE RUBRIC.
Rubric
Project Rubric 7 (1)
| Project Rubric 7 (1) | |||||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIncludes history of PBIS |
5 pts Fully 2.5 pts Partially 0 pts Not Present |
5 pts | |||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIncludes features of SW-PBIS |
|||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSynthesizes information in a way that clearly demonstrates your understanding of the purpose and effectiveness of SW-PBIS |
5 pts Fully 3 pts Partially 0 pts Not Present |
||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIncludes relevant in-text citations |
4 pts Fully 2.4 pts Partially 0 pts Not Present |
4 pts | |||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWell-written; clear and coherent; clearly sequenced |
|||||
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProvides minimum of 2 references APA format |
2 pts Fully 1 pts Partially 0 pts Not Present |
2 pts | |||
|
Total Points: 25 |
Behav Anal Pract. 2015 May; 8(1): 88–91.
Published online 2015 Apr 25. doi: 10.1007/s40617-015-0055-2
PMCID: PMC5048257
PMID: 27703889
School-Wide PBIS: Extending the Impact of Applied Behavior Analysis. Why is This
Important to Behavior Analysts?
Robert F. Putnam and Donald Kincaid
Abstract
Horner and Sugai (2015) recently wrote a manuscript providing an overview of school-wide posi-
tive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) and why it is an example of applied behavior
analysis at the scale of social importance. This paper will describe why school-wide PBIS is impor-
tant to behavior analysts, how it helps promote applied behavior analysis in schools and other or-
ganizations, and how behavior analysts can use this framework to assist them in the promotion
and implementation of applied behavior analysis at both at the school and organizational level, as
well as, the classroom and individual level.
Keywords: School-wide PBIS, Behavior analysts, Applied behavior analysis
Utility of the Work for Clinicians
Provides an overview of why school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports
(PBIS) is important to behavior analysts
Documents the regulations and support for School-wide PBIS across federal, state, and other
organizations
Suggest ways that behavior analysts can be involved in school-wide PBIS
Suggest ways behavior analysts should be involved in school-wide PBIS
Horner and Sugai (2015) provide an overview of school-wide PBIS, suggesting the clear in�luence
of applied behavior analysis in its development, foundations, practices, and emphasis on observ-
able behaviors and data. Applied behavior analysis as a �ield was well articulated in the Baer, Wolf,
and Risley (1968) seminal manuscript. Horner and Sugai (2015) suggest that PBIS is infused with
the basic tenants of applied behavior analysis, in that it is applied, behavioral, analytic, technologi-
cal, conceptual, effective, and capable of appropriately generalized outcomes. They suggest that
there is a growing empirical set of studies that report the implementation of PBIS is associated
1 2
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs40617-015-0055-2
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27703889
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Putnam%20RF%5BAuthor%5D
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Kincaid%20D%5BAuthor%5D
with reduction of of�ice discipline referrals, reduction in suspensions and expulsions, improved
social emotional competence, and improved academic outcomes. They report that over 21,000
schools are in the implementation stages of PBIS.
Why it is This Important to Behavior Analysts?
Behavior analysts have lamented for years the lack of in�luence and adoption of applied behavior
analysis (ABA) practices in both schools and other organizations, as well as, those providers of
services for individuals with challenging behavior and learning issues. The �irst suggested adop-
tion of our practices in federal regulations was in the amended Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (Individual with Disabilities Act, 1997). It was suggested that a functional behavior
assessment (Drasgow and Yell 2001) be the basis of a positive behavior support plan for individu-
als with disabilities. In addition, Congress provided funds to states to provide professional devel-
opment to “provide training in methods… of positive behavior interventions and supports to im-
prove student behavior in the classroom” (20 U.S.C. §1454(a) (3)(B)(iii)(I)). (Drasgow et al. 1999).
On the school-wide level, the Of�ice of Special Education Programs has funded a technical assist-
ance center (Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports 2015)
(pbis.org) to support implementation and research of the school-wide PBIS framework, also called
a multi-tiered system of behavior support, for over 15 years. The U.S. Department of Education
has made a school-wide PBIS one of their priorities and has funded through its State Personnel
Development Grant (SPDG) Program (State Personnel Development Grant Program n.d.) the im-
plementation of school-wide PBIS. Recently, the U.S. Department of Justice has funded through its
Youth Forum Cities’ grant program the implementation of school-wide PBIS. Recently, the U.S.
Department of Education through its Of�ice of Safe and Healthy Students provided a grant compe-
tition for state education agencies (SEA) and local educational agencies (LEA) to implement a
multi-tiered system of behavior supports. Over 19 SEAs and 70 LEAs were awarded these grants.
The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) within the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services that leads public health efforts to advance the behav-
ioral health of the nation and has the mission to reduce the impact of substance abuse and mental
illness on America’s communities has found the school-wide PBIS to be an evidenced-based
framework. They describe on their website (School Climate Transformation Grant n.d.)
(http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/ViewIntervention.aspx?id=242) that “…Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Model is a multicomponent, multitiered, comprehensive ap-
proach to school-wide improvement. Integrating applied behavior analysis, research on effective
schools, and systems change management theory, the intervention is an application of positive be-
havior support (PBS), a set of strategies or procedures designed to improve behavior by employ-
ing positive and systematic techniques.” (In italics by author). The National Educators
Association (NEA), the largest teacher union in the country, has developed a policy statement enti-
tled “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: A Multi-tiered Framework that Works for
Every Student” (Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports n.d.)
(http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB41A-Positive_Behavioral_Interventions-Final ). They sug-
gest that “the NEA views PBIS as a multi-tiered system of support that works for all students and
believes adding language in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to “consider” the
http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/ViewIntervention.aspx?id=242
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB41A-Positive_Behavioral_Interventions-Final
use of PBIS would be bene�icial”. The ESEA, which is up for reauthorization, is the nation’s set of
regulations governing state and local school districts’ provision of education for all students, in-
cluding students with disabilities.
This framework is beginning to be adopted in other areas including services for adults with intel-
lectual disabilities. In Massachusetts, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS), who funds
and regulates services primarily for adults with intellectual disabilities, has recently developed
guidelines (http://ddslearning.com/dds-pbs-initiative) for the implementation of a multi-tiered be-
havior support system across its services with emphasis on preventing problem behavior (an-
tecedent interventions) and function-based interventions.
While a groundswell of support for any approach is not necessarily indicative of an effective and
ef�icient framework, this momentum across a number of federal and state agencies to support and
fund the framework suggested by Horner and Sugai should cause the �ield to better understand
how PBIS embraces the principles of applied behavior analysis. This PBIS momentum also pro-
vides an opportunity for behavior analysts to apply their skills and competencies to improve the
implementation of behavior support practices for individuals, with or without disabilities.
Currently, there are over 10,000 board-certi�ied behavior analysts (BCBAs) in the USA who pri-
marily provide direct or consultation to individuals primarily with disabilities. This has paralleled
the increase in the number of individuals who have joined the ABAI as well as companion organi-
zations such as APBA. Much of this growth in the �ield of ABA was due to parents and profession-
als advocating for applied behavior analysis services for their children. Similarly, thousands of ed-
ucators including state administrators, district administrator, principals, pupil personnel, teachers,
and other staff have requested school-wide PBIS services delivered within a multi-tiered frame-
work. Again, consumers of behavioral support services, in this case educational personnel, are re-
questing an evidenced-based practice—school-wide PBIS. This expansion of the PBIS framework
into educational and other systems provides unique opportunities for the �ield of behavior analy-
sis. For more information about the process (a multi-year undertaking) of implementing school-
wide PBIS, we would suggest pbis.org or Florida’s PBIS website http://�lpbs.fmhi.usf.edu.
What is the Role for Behavior Analysts in School-Wide PBIS?
As Horner and Sugai (2015) suggest, school-wide PBIS has both its conceptual and theoretical un-
derpinnings in applied behavior analysis. We suggest that behavior analysts should be interested
in school-wide PBIS for a number of reasons. First, BCBAs often work in systems where the be-
havioral concerns outstrip their capacity and ability to provide services to all individuals who
need them. In most cases, the focus is on the primarily individual services (tier 3), rather than uni-
versal practices and systems (tier 1 and tier 2) that might impact all students and improve the ef-
fectiveness of the services of those students who need intensive supports. We have seen many in-
stances where BCBAs thrive in a multi-tiered PBIS framework, because they have the capacity to
deliver intensive supports with higher �idelity, producing better outcomes, by supporting a school
to implement more effective tier 1 and tier 2 supports. Additional information/resources about
tier 1 and tier 2 interventions can be accessed at the National Technical Assistance Center for PBIS
http://ddslearning.com/dds-pbs-initiative
http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/
(pbis.org). The Prevent-Teach-Reinforce model by Dunlap, Iovannone, English, et al. (2010) has
been shown to be an effective tier 3 intervention at the individual level for students with challeng-
ing behavior.
School-wide PBIS’s foundation in applied behavior analysis (Dunlap et al. 2008) supports a view
of the critical role that function plays in designing interventions. Behavior analysts are the only ed-
ucational and human services professionals that are explicitly trained on determining the function
of the behavior before selecting an intervention. Their role in applying that knowledge of function
within a multi-tiered PBIS system is critical.
School-wide PBIS suggests the use of single-case designs and the visual presentation of data at
each tier to determine whether there are changes in frequency and/or intensity of the problem
behavior. The National Technical Assistance Center for PBIS has developed a data analysis
system (SWIS Suite n.d.) (swis.org) for schools to enter data at the tier 1 level (of�ice discipline re-
ferrals), tier 2 (partial interval data), and tier 3 (frequency data) and have it presented in a visual
graphical format. Behavior analysts are speci�ically trained in the presentation and interpretation
of data in a graphical visual format (O’Neill, McDonnell, Billingsley, and Jenson 2011), (McDonnell,
O’Keeffe, and O’Neill in press).
School-wide PBIS has a focus on the development of school-wide behavior support plans that em-
phasize the use of antecedent interventions, active teaching of desired behaviors and functionally
equivalent replacement behaviors, as well as, increasing the overall reinforcement for these be-
haviors. Behavior analysts are speci�ically trained in antecedent interventions, effective teaching
and conducting preference assessments and building effective reinforcement systems (Cooper,
Heron, and Heward 2007).
School-wide PBIS has a strong emphasis on conducting treatment integrity assessments at each
tier. The National Technical Assistance Center for PBIS (pbis.org) has developed empirically vali-
dated treatment integrity tools at each tier and has built an electronic data system for the input of
this information (PBIS Assessment n.d.)(pbisapps.org) and a resulting graphical presentation.
Behavior analysts understand the relationship between treatment integrity and the effectiveness
of evidenced-based practices.
As part of the implementation framework, each school or organization involved in school-wide
PBIS needs to select a coach to facilitate implementation. It is recommended that the coach
(Horner 2012) have competencies in data analysis and behavioral theory. A behavior analyst
should evidence those competencies from their training and practice.
Finally, as part of each tier, it is suggested that teams meet on a regular basis (monthly) and re-
view data both on treatment integrity and student/individual outcomes and make data-based deci-
sions to improve/sustain treatment integrity, as well as, measurable, meaningful
student/individual outcomes using evidenced-based interventions. Behavior analysts are trained
to review data and to use evidenced-based interventions.
Why Should Behavior Analysts be Interested in School-Wide PBIS?
In almost all of the critical PBIS implementation areas, behavior analysts have the experience and
training that prepare them to contribute to supporting this PBIS framework across multiple tiers
of implementation.
In many organizations, the sole person committed to data-based decision-making focusing on
treatment integrity and meaningful social emotional outcomes and the use of evidenced-based
practices is the behavior analyst. The framework of school-wide PBIS is not just being imple-
mented in schools. It is being adapted and used across juvenile justice facilities (Sprague et al.
2013), behavior health organizations, services for adults with developmental disabilities, schools
for students with autism, and in home and community services. Behavior analysts have opportuni-
ties to further contribute to the empirical research around the implementation of this framework,
as well as, improving on the effectiveness and ef�iciency of evidenced-based interventions that
have been developed to date and to the creation of potentially new interventions to improve the
meaningful outcomes of individuals served in our schools, homes, and communities. School-wide
PBIS provides the opportunity for behavior analysts to realize one of their major goals—to have
individuals with or without disabilities access evidenced-based practices that are implemented
with good integrity to achieve meaningful outcomes for all/individuals. As B.F. Skinner said in his
book Walden Two (1976) “It is not a question of starting. The start has been made. It’s a question
of what’s to be done from now on.”
Footnotes
This research was supported by the Office of Special Education Programs US Department of Education
(H326S980003). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the
US Department of Education, and such endorsements should not be inferred.
References
Baer D, Wolf M, Risley T. Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
1968;1:91–97. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Cooper JO, Heron TE, Heward WL. Applied behavior analysis. 2. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2007. [Google Scholar]
Drasgow E, Yell M. Functional behavioral assessment: legal requirements and challenges. School Psychology Review.
2001;30:239–251. [Google Scholar]
Drasgow E, Yell M, Bradley R, Shriner JG. The IDEA amendments of 1997: a school-wide model for conducting functional
behavioral assessments and developing behavior intervention plans. Education and Treatment of Children. 1999;22:244–
266. [Google Scholar]
Dunlap G, Carr E, Horner R, Zarcone J, Schwartz I. Positive behavior support and applied behavior analysis: a familial
alliance. Behavior Modi�ication. 2008;32:682–698. doi: 10.1177/0145445508317132. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
Dunlap G, Iovannone R, English C, Kincaid D, Wilson K, Christiansen K, Strain P. Prevent-teach-reinforce: a school-based
model of individualized positive behavior support. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes; 2010. [Google Scholar]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1310980/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16795165
https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjaba.1968.1-91
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Behavior+Analysis&title=Some+current+dimensions+of+applied+behavior+analysis&author=D+Baer&author=M+Wolf&author=T+Risley&volume=1&publication_year=1968&pages=91-97&pmid=16795165&doi=10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Applied+behavior+analysis&author=JO+Cooper&author=TE+Heron&author=WL+Heward&publication_year=2007&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=School+Psychology+Review&title=Functional+behavioral+assessment:+legal+requirements+and+challenges&author=E+Drasgow&author=M+Yell&volume=30&publication_year=2001&pages=239-251&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Education+and+Treatment+of+Children&title=The+IDEA+amendments+of+1997:+a+school-wide+model+for+conducting+functional+behavioral+assessments+and+developing+behavior+intervention+plans&author=E+Drasgow&author=M+Yell&author=R+Bradley&author=JG+Shriner&volume=22&publication_year=1999&pages=244-266&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18420542
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0145445508317132
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Behavior+Modification&title=Positive+behavior+support+and+applied+behavior+analysis:+a+familial+alliance&author=G+Dunlap&author=E+Carr&author=R+Horner&author=J+Zarcone&author=I+Schwartz&volume=32&publication_year=2008&pages=682-698&pmid=18420542&doi=10.1177/0145445508317132&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevent-teach-reinforce:+a+school-based+model+of+individualized+positive+behavior+support&author=G+Dunlap&author=R+Iovannone&author=C+English&author=D+Kincaid&author=K+Wilson&publication_year=2010&
Horner, R. (2012). School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS): coaching for effective
implementation. Retrieved April 4, 2015, from https://www.pbis.org/…/Coaching_Effecive Implementation. Kentucky.
Pptx.
Horner, R.F. & Sugai, G. (2015). School-wide PBIS: an example of applied behavior analysis. Implemented at a scale of social
importance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 24 February 2015. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
Individuals with Disability Education Act Amendments of 1997 [IDEA]. (1997). Retrieved from
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php
McDonnell, J.J., O’Keeffe, B., & O’Neill, R. E. (in press). Single case design and data-based decision-making. Individual
positive behavior supports: a standards-based guide to practices in school and community-based settings. Baltimore,
MD: Paul H. Brookes.
O’Neill RE, McDonnell JJ, Billingsley FF, Jenson WR. Single case research designs in educational and community settings.
Upper Saddle River: Pearson; 2011. [Google Scholar]
PBIS Assessment. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2015, from https://www.pbisapps.org/Applications/Pages/PBIS-
Assessment.aspx.
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2015, from
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB41A-Positive_Behavioral_Interventions-Final .
Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. (2015). University of Oregon. Eugene.
Retrieved April 4, 2015, from http://www.pbis.org/.
School Climate Transformation Grant – State Educational Agency Grants Program. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2015, from
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/schoolclimatesea/index.html.
Skinner B. Walden Two. New York: Macmillan; 1976. [Google Scholar]
Special Education–State Personnel Development Grants Program. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2015, from
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/osepsig/index.html.
Sprague JR, Scheuermann B, Wang E, Nelson CM, Jolivette K, Vincent C. Adopting and adapting PBIS for secure juvenile
justice settings: lessons learned. Education and Treatment of Children. 2013;36:121–134. doi: 10.1353/etc.2013.0031.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
SWIS Suite. (n.d.). Retrieved April 4, 2015, from https://app.swis.org/.
https://www.pbis.org/%E2%80%A6/Coaching_Effecive
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27703887
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Single+case+research+designs+in+educational+and+community+settings&author=RE+O%E2%80%99Neill&author=JJ+McDonnell&author=FF+Billingsley&author=WR+Jenson&publication_year=2011&
https://www.pbisapps.org/Applications/Pages/PBIS-Assessment.aspx
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB41A-Positive_Behavioral_Interventions-Final
http://www.pbis.org/
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/schoolclimatesea/index.html
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Walden+Two&author=B+Skinner&publication_year=1976&
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/osepsig/index.html
https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fetc.2013.0031
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Education+and+Treatment+of+Children&title=Adopting+and+adapting+PBIS+for+secure+juvenile+justice+settings:+lessons+learned&author=JR+Sprague&author=B+Scheuermann&author=E+Wang&author=CM+Nelson&author=K+Jolivette&volume=36&publication_year=2013&pages=121-134&doi=10.1353/etc.2013.0031&
https://app.swis.org/
Responsive Classroom®
and PBIS
Can Schools Use Them Together?
�
Positive behavior is requisite to school success. And positive
behavior can and must be taught, just as math, reading,
science, and art are taught. As educators and policy
makers at the national, state, and local levels come to recognize
the truth of these two statements, schools and districts are
increasingly turning to two growing educational movements—
Responsive Classroom and Positive Behavioral Interventions
and Supports (PBIS)—to learn strategies for teaching positive
student behavior. Some schools and districts see value in both
approaches. ey oen ask, “Are Responsive Classroom and
PBIS compatible with each other? Can our school use both?”
e short answer to these questions is yes, although there are some key differences between
how the two approaches recommend reinforcing children’s positive behavior. e following
explains the areas of compatibility and difference and articulates how Responsive Classroom
and PBIS can work together to create an optimal learning environment for students.
What Is Responsive Classroom? What Is PBIS?
Responsive Classroom
Responsive Classroom is a research-based teaching approach that gives teachers concrete
practices for ensuring a high-quality education for every child every day. Although the
approach offers practices for improving student behavior through effective management,
it goes beyond that to also offer strategies for promoting academic engagement, building
a positive community, and teaching in a developmentally appropriate way.
e Responsive Classroom approach rests on the foundational idea that these four areas of
teaching—engaging academics, positive community, effective management, and develop-
mental awareness—are interrelated and are all crucial to student success. e approach
gives teachers prac tical tools and strategies for raising their competence in all four areas.
e result is that teachers are not just improving student behavior, but constantly creating
an optimal learning environment that promotes students’ overall school success (Center
for Responsive Schools, n.d., About Responsive Classroom).
Since 1981, more than 120,000 teachers have participated in
Responsive Classroom professional development, and Responsive
Classroom practices impact an estimated one million students each
year (Center for Responsive Schools, 2013, e Responsive Class-
room Approach, p. 2; Center for Responsive Schools, 2013, Teacher
Skill Drives Common Core Success, p. 2).
PBIS
PBIS is a framework for providing behavioral supports and inter-
ventions that enhance students’ academic and social outcomes.
As a guide to system building, the PBIS framework does not provide
or require schools to use specific practices. Instead, it names essen-
tial features of an effective behavior support system. ese include:
� the use of respectful, nonpunitive, prevention-oriented
practices
� a focus on skill teaching
� the use of evidence-based practices
� the availability of a continuum of interventions that meet
the needs of all students
� ongoing assessment of students’ needs
� data-based decision making
Districts and schools then employ specific practices that have these
features and that fit their particular needs and culture (Horner, 2014;
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center, n.d., PBIS FAQs).
Although the PBIS framework itself does not stipulate specific practices, PBIS trainers working at
the district or school level may guide schools toward specific behavior practices or social-emotional
learning programs (PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center, n.d., SWPBIS for Beginners).
How Responsive Classroom and PBIS Align
As the preceding descriptions indicate, schools adopting Responsive Classroom can use the PBIS
framework to ensure systematic decision making, and schools adopting PBIS can use Responsive
Classroom practices to meet the PBIS goal of supporting positive behavior in all students.
e table at right shows how key Responsive Classroom practices match the components PBIS
identifies as essential to a comprehensive schoolwide discipline system.
2
M Y T H :
Responsive Classroom and PBIS cannot
be used together because they come
from two fundamentally opposed
schools of educational thought.
F A C T :
Responsive Classroom and PBIS are not
in opposition. Although the Responsive
Classroom approach draws heavily from
constructivist theory, it also uses best
practices from various other schools of
thought and the experiences of practic-
ing educators. Responsive Classroom
believes that this open-minded and
eclectic approach best meets the wide
range of student needs in our schools.
(To learn more, visit www.responsive
classroom.org/principles-and-practices-
responsive-classroom.)
Meanwhile, although PBIS has roots
in behavior science, the PBIS frame-
work today is open to diverse evidence-
based strategies. Its goal is for schools
to provide a positive, comprehensive,
data-driven system of behavior inter-
ventions rather than to adhere to any
particular educational approach.
3
Responsive Classroom Practices
� Leadership actions for establishing a school disci-
pline policy that staff and parents support
� Stated purpose of Responsive Classroom: To ensure
a high-quality education for every child every day.
� Schools using Responsive Classroom may have
their own statement of purpose that is a variation
of (and compatible with) Responsive Classroom’s
stated purpose.
� Methods for creating rules that students are
invested in:
• 3–5 positively stated rules in each classroom
• 3–5 positively stated rules for the whole school
� Practical ways to teach how to translate the rules
into action:
• Interactive Modeling
• Guided practice
• Role-playing
• Positive teacher language: reminders and
specific reinforcing feedback
� Strategies for creating an environment that
promotes positive behavior:
• Morning Meeting
• Frequent verbal connecting of behaviors
with rules
• Academic Choice
• Positive teacher language: reminders and
specific reinforcing feedback
• Closing circles
• Communications with parents about behavior
expectations
� Respectful, productive ways to respond to
misbehavior:
• Teacher proximity and nonverbal cues
• Positive teacher language: redirections
• Additional modeling and role-playing
• Logical consequences
• Buddy teacher time-out
• Problem-solving conferences
• Problem-solving class meetings
• Student–student conflict resolution
• Individual written agreements
• Problem-solving with parents
� Responsive Classroom assessment tools to measure
fidelity of implementation
Components of PBIS Schoolwide Discipline
An agreed-upon and common approach to
discipline
A positive statement of purpose
A small number of positively stated behavior
expectations for all students and staff
Procedures for teaching students the behavior
expectations
A continuum of procedures for encouraging stu-
dents to choose behaviors that meet expectations
A continuum of procedures for discouraging
students from choosing rule-breaking behavior
Procedures for regularly and frequently monitoring
the effectiveness of the discipline system
(Responsive Classroom resources and PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center, n.d., Primary FAQs)
A Side-by-Side Look
Three Tiers of Support
PBIS calls for schools to provide three tiers of positive behavior support to meet students’ dif –
fering needs (PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center, n.d., Secondary Level). Here are the
Responsive Classroom practices that align with each tier.
Tier 1
Classroom and schoolwide practices that support all students in all situations. ese practices
together create a positive social climate in which positive behaviors are explicitly taught
and reinforced and all adults respond to problem behaviors in a consistent way.
Responsive Classroom practices:
� Commonly agreed-upon schoolwide discipline policy
� Creation of schoolwide and classroom rules that students are invested in
� Positive teacher language: reinforcements, reminders, redirections
� Interactive Modeling
� Guided practice
� Role-playing
� Frequent verbal connecting of behaviors with rules
� Morning Meeting
� Academic Choice
� Closing circles
� Logical consequences
� Problem-solving conferences
� Problem-solving class meetings
� Student–student conflict resolution
� Communications with parents about behavior expectations
Tier 2
Additional supports for times when a student needs an extra boost
to remember behavior expectations but doesn’t need the highly
individualized interventions of
Tier 3
.
4
Responsive Classroom practices:
� Additional modeling
� Additional role-playing
� Buddy teacher time-out
� Additional collaborative problem-solving
� Additional student–student conflict resolution
� Individual written agreements
� Problem-solving with parents
Tier 2
Tier 1
5
Tier 3
Highly individualized interventions for serious behavior prob-
lems. Educators draw on the range of Responsive Classroom
principles and practices to cra supports that work for each
child. Here is an example from a school in St. Paul, Minnesota,
that uses the Responsive Classroom approach and PBIS.
“Oliver,” a second grader, has a pattern of unsafe and disrup-
tive behavior, including shouting out during small-group
work, being physically aggressive during structured play,
and destroying his work in a fit of rage during academic
times. Aer determining Oliver’s unmet social and
academic needs, the school’s behavior specialist works
with Oliver’s teacher to design interventions that use
elements of the following Responsive Classroom
practices:
� Interactive Modeling. To address his shouting during group work, Oliver’s teacher starts
using this modeling practice with him, one-on-one, to show him how to raise a hand as
a way to get attention. Oliver’s gym and computer teachers agree that he’ll use the same
method during their classes.
� Problem-Solving Conference. To reinforce Oliver’s use of a positive behavior he’s learning
(such as playing safely during structured play), his teacher begins having brief conversations
with him that borrow from this Responsive Classroom practice. She names the specific helpful
behaviors she noticed and asks him what he noticed. They talk about how he felt when he
chose that behavior and how it helped everyone. They then agree on strategies to help him
continue that behavior, including the teacher’s giving him a quick reminder before struc-
tured play and checking with him afterward to see how things went.
� Academic Choice. To give Oliver a greater sense of control and accomplishment with his aca-
demic work, his teacher begins offering him choices in how to complete assignments, such
as which specific topic to learn about, what supplies to use, which books or other resources
to look at, and how to show what he learned. The teacher also provides closer supervision
of his academic work time until he is able to independently manage his behavior.
All the while, the Tier 1 supports that the school provides to all students and the Tier 2
supports it provides to those needing extra help are creating a strong foundation that
enables these individualized interventions for Oliver to work at their best.
Tier 3
6
Reinforcing Positive Behavior
Both Responsive Classroom and PBIS recognize that reinforc-
ing students’ positive behaviors is crucial if students are to sus-
tain those behaviors. e two approaches differ, however, in
how they recommend giving this reinforcement.
What Responsive Classroom Recommends
e Responsive Classroom approach discourages the use of
tangible rewards as a general practice for reinforcing children’s
positive behavior. Instead, for most children, it emphasizes
using reinforcing teacher language.
For example, if a student listens carefully to classmates before
voicing disagreement during a discussion, his teacher might
whisper to him a moment later, “You listened and considered
other people’s opinions before speaking up. at helps make
the discussion more thoughtful.”
And if a class efficiently transitions from a whole-group activity
to individual work, their teacher might say, “You all got down to
work in less than a minute. at’s the fastest since the beginning
of the year!”
e benefit of using reinforcing language and specifically nam-
ing the helpful behavior as in these examples, rather than giving
a tangible reward, is that it focuses students’ attention on the
behavior instead of on the reward. is encourages students to
see the behavior itself rather than the earning of a reward as the
chief goal. And for many children, a teacher’s reinforcing lan-
guage is all that’s needed for them to develop consistency in
showing positive behaviors.
e Responsive Classroom approach recognizes that some
students or classes, in some circumstances, will need further
reinforcements such as behavior tracking charts and rewards to change
an entrenched negative behavior pattern. In these cases the Responsive Classroom
approach offers guidelines on the effective use and eventual phase-out of the charts and
rewards (Brady et al., 2010; Crowe, 2009).
M Y T H :
Responsive Classroom says teachers
shouldn’t acknowledge individual stu-
dents’ positive behavior.
F A C T :
e Responsive Classroom approach
strongly recommends acknowledging
individual students’ positive behavior,
believing it is vital to their development
and to the creation of a positive school
climate. What the approach discourages
is naming an individual child as an
example for others, such as “See how
Ronna’s paying attention? Let’s see
how many others can pay attention
like that.” Such language comes across
as manipulative and can embarrass the
child being named while breeding
competition in the class. In the Respon-
sive Classroom approach, if a teacher
wants to acknowledge Ronna’s behav-
ior, he does so in private if possible.
If the teacher’s goal is to remind the
class to pay attention, he does so
directly, such as by saying, “Remem-
ber, eyes and ears on the speaker.” Or,
he reinforces the positive behavior of
some members of the class without
naming individual children, such as
“I see that some students are ready to
listen with their eyes and ears on the
speaker. Let’s have everyone do that
now so we can get started with our
learning.”
7
What PBIS Recommends
e PBIS framework emphasizes that schools should have
methods for acknowledging students’ positive behaviors but
does not favor one type of acknowledgment over another, as
long as the student clearly understands what specific behavior
is being acknowledged. e framework states that naming the
specific behavior is “extremely important in increasing the
reoccurrence of appropriate behavior.” e framework also sup-
ports, although it does not mandate, simultaneously giving stu-
dents tokens or points for such behavior (whether or not those
are traded in for tangible objects or special privileges) (PBIS
OSEP Technical Assistance Center, n.d., Primary Level).
e decision about which specific method to use is le to
schools. It’s important to know that rather than requiring any
specific method, the PBIS framework encourages schools to
determine the method most suitable for their school (Horner, 2014).
Moving to Using Only Teacher Language
Oen, teachers who see the benefit of using only reinforcing teacher language nonetheless
find it challenging to shi to this method if they are accustomed to using tangible rewards.
In many cases, giving tokens is as much a way for busy teachers to keep track of whom they’ve
observed and acknowledged in the course of a day as a way to motivate the students. For some
teachers, the token approach is simply what’s familiar.
In many schools that use both Responsive Classroom and PBIS, teachers successfully make
the shi to using only reinforcing language, without tokens or other tangibles, when they
take incremental steps and when their school leaders offer ample support and encourage-
ment along the way. Strategies teachers have used successfully include:
� Posting examples of reinforcing language around the classroom as a self-reminder.
� Setting up a tracking system visible to themselves but not to students, such as check-
ing off names on their class list when they provide specific reinforcing language.
� Using a few set reinforcing phrases, such as “I see you followed our rule on ______”
and “You did ______. at helps us all be better learners” until they start coming up
with their own reinforcing words naturally.
M Y T H :
e central feature of PBIS is to give
children prizes as a reward for show-
ing desired behavior.
F A C T :
Although some teachers use prizes to
reward positive behavior, this is their
school’s or district’s choice for how to
meet PBIS’s goal of acknowledging
positive behavior. e PBIS frame-
work does not stipulate this way
of meeting that goal. In fact, some
PBIS coaches favor using intangible
acknowledgments such as positive
teacher language when such acknowl-
edgments suffice to encourage a child
to continue a positive behavior.
8
T
he three people facilitating the district’s use of the two
approaches—the Responsive Classroom coordinator and
two PBIS coordinators—can oen be seen walking into
a school together to attend a meeting or to co-lead a profes-
sional development workshop. In their office, the three edu –
cators even sit in adjoining cubicles. Collaborating is oen
as simple as rolling their chairs out for a quick chat.
Whether working with a school on modeling expected behav-
iors, giving children brain breaks during work periods, or
preventing bullying, the three educators blend strategies from
their own and each other’s approaches seamlessly. Labeling
strategies as “Responsive Classroom” or “PBIS” is not their
concern.
“Our focus is always on what a school needs, what the students
need, what helps the kids and what doesn’t, not on what’s
Responsive Classroom and what’s PBIS,” says the Responsive
Classroom coordinator.
Responsive Classroom and PBIS
Collaboration in Action
In one large mid-Atlantic school district, Responsive Classroom
and PBIS work together—literally.
9
One of the PBIS coordinators adds that
to help teachers bridge a perceived gap
between Responsive Classroom and PBIS,
they use terminology the teachers under-
stand. For example, if they’re teaching the
Responsive Classroom practice of Interac-
tive Modeling, but the teachers in front
of them are used to referring to that kind
of practice by using the PBIS term “direct
instruction,” they’ll explicitly make the link
for the teachers between Interactive Model-
ing and direct instruction.
When it comes to reinforcing children’s
positive behaviors, the PBIS coordinators
encourage schools to give reinforcements
that highlight the fact that everyone is
working together to build a positive com-
munity rather than the idea of individuals
earning rewards. For example, they recog-
nize that schools may still want to give stu-
dents tickets for positive behavior, but they
encourage schools to count the number of
tickets earned as a whole school. en, when
a certain number of tickets are earned, the
entire student body does a big group cheer
during an assembly or a special group dance
during lunch.
e strong Responsive Classroom–PBIS
collaboration in the district comes from
the three educators’ clear understanding
of the compatibility of the two approaches.
It also comes from the district’s highest-
level decision makers having that same
understanding. e district has directed
all schools to design a positive behavior
approach and promotes using Responsive
Classroom and PBIS together to do so.
e three staff members don’t do all their
professional development work together, of
course. e Responsive Classroom coordina-
tor still oversees the Responsive Classroom
workshops taking place throughout the
district, and the two PBIS coordinators still
provide the PBIS trainings to school teams.
But the close contact between Responsive
Classroom and PBIS in the district means
schools benefit from the strengths of both
approaches.
And at the end of the day, the three are back
to their adjoining cubicles to compare notes,
share ideas, and work together to benefit
students.
“Although I’m passionate about Responsive
Classroom and my colleagues are passionate
about PBIS, it’s not a tug of war,” says the
Responsive Classroom coordinator. “It’s a
tug of peace. And we’re always looking at
how to keep the child at the center of that
tug of peace.” �
“Although I’m passionate about Responsive
Classroom and my colleagues are passionate about
PBIS, it’s not a tug of war, . . . It’s a tug of peace.”
10
Summary
e Responsive Classroom approach and PBIS are compatible for two major reasons:
1. Both hold, as a central tenet, the use of respectful, nonpunitive strategies for teaching
students positive behaviors.
2. Responsive Classroom’s array of practices for teaching positive behaviors and promot-
ing optimal student learning matches the components identified by PBIS as essential
to a comprehensive schoolwide discipline system.
When it comes to reinforcing students’ positive behavior, Responsive Classroom strongly
recommends using positive teacher language and avoiding the use of tangible rewards if
such rewards are not needed. e PBIS framework calls for reinforcing students’ positive
behavior but refrains from stipulating which method to use. is makes it possible for schools
using the PBIS framework to follow Responsive Classroom’s recommended practice for
achieving this important goal.
11
R E F E R E N C E S
Horner, R. (2014, March). Building Capacity of Schools, Districts, and States
to Implement PBIS. Session presented at the 11th International Conference on
Positive Behavior Support, Chicago, IL.
Center for Responsive Schools. (n.d.). About Responsive Classroom.
Retrieved from www.responsiveclassroom.org/about-responsive-classroom
Center for Responsive Schools. (n.d.). Past Research. Retrieved from
www.responsiveclassroom.org/past-research
Center for Responsive Schools. (n.d.). Research Confirms the Benefits.
Retrieved from www.responsiveclassroom.org/research
Center for Responsive Schools. (2013). e Responsive Classroom Approach:
Good Teaching Changes the Future (White paper).
Center for Responsive Schools. (n.d.). e Responsive Classroom Approach:
A High-Quality Education for Every Child Every Day. Retrieved from
www.responsiveclassroom.org/sites/default/files/pdf_files/rc_brochure
Center for Responsive Schools. (2013). Teacher Skill Drives Common Core
Success: How Responsive Classroom Helps (White paper).
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). PBIS FAQs. Retrieved from
www.pbis.org/school/swpbis-for-beginners/pbis-faqs
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). Primary FAQs. Retrieved from
www.pbis.org/school/primary-level/faqs
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). Primary Level. Retrieved from
www.pbis.org/school/primary-level
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). Secondary Level. Retrieved
from www.pbis.org/school/secondary-level
PBIS OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). SWPBIS for Beginners.
Retrieved from www.pbis.org/school/swpbis-for-beginners
F O U N D E D I N 1 9 8 1
Center for Responsive Schools, Inc.
85 Avenue A, P.O. Box 718
Turners Falls, MA 01376-0718
800-360-6332 Fax 877-206-3952
www.responsiveclassroom.org
This white paper is available
on the Responsive Classroom website at
http://bit.ly/rcwhitepaper3
Photographs © Jeff Woodward. All rights reserved.
Responsive Classroom®
IS SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT
AN EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE?
September, 2007
A major focus for current policy and systems change efforts in education and mental
health is the extent to which states are investing in practices and procedures that are
supported by rigorous research evidence. Evidence-based practices have been
demonstrated in formal research studies to be related to valued outcomes for children and
their families.
A reasonable question is if School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS) is an
evidence-based practice. The purpose of this document is to lay out the current evidence
assessing SWPBS and the considerations that may be relevant for state, district and
national decision-makers.
Any claim that a practice or procedure is “evidence-based” should be framed in the
context of (a) explicit description of the procedure/practice, (b) clear definition of the
settings and implementers who use the procedure/practice, (c) identification of the
population of individuals who are expected to benefit, and (d) the specific outcomes
expected. Given this context, the research involving the practice/procedure may be
reviewed, and an array of criteria have been proposed by different agencies and
organizations (c.f. American Psychological Association, What Works Clearinghouse,
SAMSA, Institute for Education Science) for how this literature may be examined to
determine the level of experimental rigor, and the confidence with which any statement
about “evidence-based” effects can be claimed. A summary of suggestions for defining
evidence-based practices from Quantitative (Gersten et al., 2005), Correlational
(Thompson et al., 2005) and Single Subject (Horner et al., 2005) research methods was
reviewed for educational literature in special section of Exceptional Children (Odom et
al., 2005).
We provide here (a) the citations defining the context content for SWPBS, (b) the current
status of evidence for each of the three tiers of the SWPBS approach (Primary
Prevention, Secondary Prevention, Tertiary Prevention), and (c) summary of current and
expected directions.
School-wide Positive Behavior Support
School-wide Positive Behavior Support is a systems approach to establishing the social
culture and behavioral supports needed for all children in a school to achieve both social
and academic success. SWPBS is not a packaged curriculum, but an approach that
defines core elements that can be achieved through a variety of strategies. The core
elements at each of the three tiers in the prevention model are defined below:
Prevention Tier Core Elements
Primary Behavioral Expectations Defined
Behavioral Expectations Taught
Reward system for appropriate behavior
Continuum of consequences for problem behavior
Continuous collection and use of data for decision-making
Secondary Universal screening
Progress monitoring for at risk students
System for increasing structure and predictability
System for increasing contingent adult feedback
System for linking academic and behavioral performance
System for increasing home/school communication
Collection and use of data for decision-making
Tertiary Functional Behavioral Assessment
Team-based comprehensive assessment
Linking of academic and behavior supports
Individualized intervention based on assessment information focusing
on (a) prevention of problem contexts, (b) instruction on functionally
equivalent skills, and instruction on desired performance skills, (c)
strategies for placing problem behavior on extinction, (d) strategies
for enhancing contingence reward of desired behavior, and (e) use of
negative or safety consequences if needed.
Collection and use of data for decision-making
The core elements of SWPBS are integrated within organizational systems in which
teams, working with administrators and behavior specialists, provide the training, policy
support and organizational supports needed for (a) initial implementation, (b) active
application, and (c) sustained use of the core elements (Sugai & Horner, in press).
Is there evidence indicating that SWPBS can be implemented with fidelity and is related
to improved social and/or academic outcomes for students?
Among the most rigorous standards for documenting that a practice/procedure is
“evidence-based” is demonstration of at least two peer-reviewed randomized control trial
research studies that document experimental control. To meet this standard the
practice/procedure must be operationally defined, there must be formal measures of
fidelity, there must be formal outcome measures, and these elements must be used within
a randomized control trial group research design.
Measures
SWPBS measures documenting fidelity
Cohen, R., Kincaid, D., & Childs, K. (in press). Measuring school-wide positive behavior
support implementation: Development and validation of the “Benchmarks of
Quality.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.
Horner, R. H., Todd, A., Lewis-Palmer, T., Irvin, L., Sugai, G., & Boland, J. (2004). The
school-wide evaluation tool (SET): A research instrument for assessing school-
wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Intervention 6(1) 3-
12.
Irvin, L.K., Horner, R.H., Ingram, K., Todd, A.W., Sugai, G., Sampson, N., & Boland, J.
(2006). Using office discipline referral data for decision-making about student
behavior in elementary and middle schools: An empirical investigation of
validity. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8(1), 10-23.
Irvin, L.K., Tobin, T., Sprague, J., Sugai, G. and Vincent, C. (2004). Validity of office
discipline referral measures as indices of school-wide behavioral status and
effects of school-wide behavioral interventions. Journal of Positive Behavioral
Interventions 6, 131-147.
Safran, S. P. (2006). Using the Effective Behavior Supports Survey to guide development
of school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Support,
8, 3-9.
Primary Prevention Tier of School-wide Positive Behavior Support
Randomized Control Trials assessing SWPBS are (a) proposed, (b) being
conducted, or (c) recently completed.
a. Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Todd, A., Nakasato, J., &
Esperanza, J., (under review). A Randomized Control Trial of School-wide
Positive Behavior Support in Elementary Schools.
This paper documents that typical state agents were successful in
implementing SWPBS practices, and that these practices were
experimentally linked to improved perception of school safety, with
preliminary support that implementation was associated with improved
proportion of students at 3rd grade who met the state reading standard.
The paper is currently under peer review.
b. Bradshaw, C., Leaf, P., Debnam, K. (2007) Project Target: a presentation
at the Maryland State SWPBS Conference
This paper documents a randomized control trial conducted in Maryland in
which implementation of SWPBS was demonstrated to occur with fidelity,
and be linked to (a) improved organizational health, (b) improved
academic outcomes, and (c) reductions in office discipline referrals. The
paper has only been disseminated as a professional presentation at this
time, and has not gone through peer review. It is anticipated that this
paper will be submitted for publication within the next 12 months.
c. Sprague, J., & Biglan, A., et al (in progress). A Randomized Control Trial
of SWPBS with Middle Schools.
This research in currently in data-collection phase, with preliminary
results presented a professional conferences indicating reduction in
problem behavior levels when SWPBS core features were implemented.
Publishable results are anticipated for 2010.
d. Wagner, M., Sumi, C., et al., (under consideration). Effectiveness Study of
School-wide Positive Behavior Support.
This grant proposal is under review. The grant proposes a four year
randomized control analysis of SWPBS across three states. If funded the
study would produce results in 2011.
Syntheses of School-wide PBS from Mental Health Institute
Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A., & Lynn, N. (2006). School-based Mental Health: An
Empirical Guild for Decision-makers. The Research and Training Center for Children’s
Mental Health, Florida Mental Health Institute, University of South Florida
“Most experts in the field agree that school-wide PBS is in its infancy (Dunlap, 2006).
However, the early results of PBS interventions implemented at the indicated level, and
the growing body of support for implementation at the universal and selective levels for
children who have emotional/behavioral problem is very promising.” P. 32
“Because the roots of PBS are in applied experimental analysis of behavior, the evidence
for PBS, at this time, is primarily derived from single subject designs. This research,
while not in the traditional empirical mode, is nevertheless rigorous, generalizable, and
strong in social validity (Sugai & Horner, 2002). Therefore, administrators have a
preponderance of evidence to support their exploration of PBS as a viable model for
School-based Mental Health programs.” P. 33
Evaluation studies examining SWPBS that used research quality measures, but did NOT
employ experimental designs document both implementation of the core feature by
typical school personnel, and either improved academic performance, or reductions in
office discipline referrals.
Barrett, S., Bradshaw, C., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (in press). Maryland state-wide PBIS
initiative. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
Benedict, E., Horner, R.H., & Squires, J. (in press). Assessment and implementation of
Positive Behavior Support in preschools. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education.
Biglan, A. (1995). Translating what we know about the context of antisocial behavior in
to a lower prevalence of such behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28,
479-492
Blonigen, B., Harbaugh, W., Singell, L., Horner, R.H., Irvin, L., & Smolkowski, K. (in
press). Application of economic analysis to school-wide positive behavior support
programs. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
Bohanon, H., Fenning, P., Carney, K., Minnis, M., Anderson-Harriss, S., Moroz, K.,
Hicks, K., Kasper, B., Culos, C., Sailor, W., & Piggott, T. (2006).School-wide
application of positive behavior support in an urban high school: A case study.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 8(3), 131-145
Chapman, D., & Hofweber, C., (2000). Effective behavior support in British Columbia.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2 (4), 235-237.
Colvin, G., & Fernandez, E., (2000). Sustaining Effective Behavior Support Systems in
an Elementary School. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 2(4), 251-253.
De Pry, R. L., & Sugai, G. (2002). The effect of active supervision and precorrection on
minor behavioral incidents in a sixth grade general education classroom. Journal
of Behavioral Education, 11, 255-267.
Doolittle, J., & Horner R., (2007). Sustaining school-wide positive behavior support.
Manuscript in preparation.
Duda, M.A., Dunlap, G., Fox, L., Lentini, R., & Clarke, S. (2004). An experimental
evaluation of positive behavior support in a community preschool program.
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education24(3), 143-155
Fanning, P., Theodos, J., Benner, C., & Bohanon-Edmonson, H. (2004). Integrating
proactive discipline practices into codes of conduct. Journal of School Violence,
3(1), 45-61
Galloway, R., Panyan, M., Smith, C. & Wessendorf, S. (in press) Systems change with
school-wide positive behavior supports: Iowa’s work in progress. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions.
George, H., & Kincaid, D. (in press). Building district-level capacity for positive
behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
Hirsch, E. J., Lewis-Palmer, T., Sugai, G., & Schnacker, L. (2004). Using school bus
discipline referral data in decision making: Two case studies. Preventing School
Failure, 48(4), 4-9
Horner, R.H., Sugai, G., Todd, A.W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005). School-wide positive
behavior support. In L. Bambara & L. Kern (Eds.) Individualized supports for
students with problem behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans. (pp. 359-
390) New York: Guilford Press
Irwin D., & Algozzine, R., (2005) North Carolina Positive Behavior Supports Evaluation
Report. Unpublished evaluation report
Lassen, S., Steele, M., & Sailor, W. (2006). The relationship of school-wide positive
behavior support to academic achievement in an urban middle school. Psychology
in Schools 43(6), 701-712
Lewis, T. J., Colvin, G., & Sugai, G. (2000). The effects of precorrection and active
supervision on the recess behavior of elementary school students. Education and
Treatment of Children, 23, 109-121.
Lewis, T., Hudson, S., Richter, M., & Johnson, N. (2004). Scientifically supported
practices in EBS: A proposed approach and brief review of current practices.
Behavior Disorders, 29, 247-259.
Lewis, T. J., Powers, L. J., Kelk, M. J., & Newcomer, L. (2002). Reducing problem
behaviors on the playground: An investigation of the application of school-wide
positive behavior supports. Psychology in the Schools, 39,181-190.
Lohrmann-O’Rourke, S., Knoster, T., Sabatine, K., Smith, D., Horvath, G., & Llewellyn,
G., (2000). School-wide Application of PBS in the Bangor Area School District.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(4). 238-240.
Luiselli, J. K, Putnam, R. F, Handler, M. W, & Feinberg, A. B. (2005). Whole-School
Positive Behaviour Support: Effects on student discipline problems and academic
performance. Educational Psychology 25(2-3), 183-198
Luiselli, J. Putnam, R., & Sunderland M. (2002). Longitudinal evaluation of behavior
support interventions in public middle school. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 4 (3), 182-188.
Mayer, G. R., Butterworth, T., Nafpaktitis, M., & Suzer-Azaroff, B. (1983). Preventing
school vandalism and improving discipline: A three year study. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 355-369
Metzler, C. W., Biglan, A., Rusby, J. C., & Sprague, J. R. (2001). Evaluation of a
comprehensive behavior management program to improve school-wide positive
behavior support. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 448-479
McIntosh, K., Flannery, K. B., Sugai, G., Braun, D., & Cochrane, K. L. (in press).
Relationships between academics and problem behavior in the transition from
middle school to high school. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
McIntosh, K., Horner, R.H., Chard, D., Boland, J., & Good, R. (2006). The use of
reading and behavior screening measures to predict non-response to school-wide
positive behavior support: A longitudinal analysis. School Psychology Review35,
275-291.
Muscott, H., & Mann, E. (in press). Positive behavioral interventions and supports in
New Hampshire: Effects of large-scale implementation of schoolwide positive
behavior support on student discipline and academic achievement. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions.
Nakasato, J., (2000). Data-based Decision-making in Hawaii’s Behavior Support Effort.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 2(4), 247-250.
Nelson, J. R. (1996). Designing schools to meet the needs of students who exhibit
disruptive behavior. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 147-161.
Nelson, J. R., Colvin, G., & Smith, D. J. (1996). The effects of setting clear standards on
students’ social behavior in common areas of the school. The Journal of At-Risk
Issues, Summer/Fall, 10-17.
Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, N. (1996). Effects of direct instruction,
cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom
behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal
of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 53-62.
Nelson, J. R., Martella, R., & Galand, B. (1998). The effects of teaching school
expectations and establishing a consistent consequence on formal office
disciplinary actions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 6, 153-161.
Nersesian, M., Todd, A., Lehmann, J., & Watson, J., (2000). School-wide Behavior
Support Through District-Level System Change. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions 2 (4). 244-246.
Putnam, R. F., Handler, M. W., Ramirez-Platt, C. M., & Luiselli, J. K. (2003). Improving
student bus-riding behavior through a whole-school intervention. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 583-589.
Putnam, R.F., Luiselli, J.K., Handler, M.W., & Jefferson G.L. (2003). Evaluating student
discipline practices in a public school through behavioral assessment of office
referrals. Behavior Modification, 27, 505-523
Putnam, R.F., Luiselli, J.K. & Sunderland, M. (2002). Longitudinal evaluation of
behavior support intervention in a public middle school. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions. 4, 182-188
Sadler, C., (2000). Effective Behavior Support Implementation at the District Level:
Tigard-Tualatin School District. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2(4),
241-243.
Safran, S. P. & Oswald, K. (2003). Positive behavior supports: Can schools reshape
disciplinary practices? Exceptional Children, 69, 361-373
Skiba, R. J., Peterson, R. L., & Williams, T. (1997). Office referrals and suspensions:
Disciplinary intervention in middle schools. Education and Treatment of
Children, 20, 295-315.
Stewart, R.M., Benner, G.J., Martella, R.C., Marchand-Martella, N.E. (2007). Three-tier
models of reading and behavior: A research review. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions 9, 239-253.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1994). Achieving educational excellence: Behavior
analysis for achieving classroom and schoolwide behavior change. San Marcos,
CA: Western Image
Taylor-Greene & Kartub, D., (2000). Durable implementation of School-wide Behavior
Support: The High Five Program. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions,
2(4) 231-232.
Taylor-Greene, S., Brown, D., Nelson, L., Longton, J., Gassman, Cohen, J., Swartz, J.,
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Hall, S. (1997). School-wide behavioral support:
Starting the year off right. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 99-112.
Vaughn, B., White, R., Dunlap, G., & Strobeck, S. (in press). A case study of a
classroom intervention for problem behaviors: Collateral effects and social
validation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
Secondary Tier of School-wide Positive Behavior Support.
Randomized Control Trials
Bradshaw C., Leaf, P., et al, (in progress) Randomized control trial of secondary and
tertiary interventions added to schools already using primary prevention efforts.
This research began 2007 and is scheduled for completion 2011.
Cheney, D., et al., (in progress). Randomized control trial of Check-in/ Check-out
procedures. Results have been collected and are being summarized. Preliminary
presentations at professional conferences indicate functional effect between use of
procedures and both improved scores on standardized assessment instruments, and direct
observation of problem behavior.
Materials and Research on Specific Secondary Interventions..
Beard-Jordan, K., & Sugai, G. (2004). First Step to Success: An early intervention for
elementary children at risk for antisocial behavior. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 396-
409.
Carter, D.R. & Horner, R.H. (in press). Adding functional behavioral assessment to First
Step to Success: A case study. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.
Chafouleas, S.M., Christ, T.J., Riley-Tillman, T.C., Briesch, A.M., & Chanese, J.M. (in
press). Generalizability and dependability of Daily Behavior Report Cards to
measure social behavior of preschoolers. School Psychology Review.
Chafouleas, S., Riley-Tillman, C., Sassu, K., LaFrance, M., Patwa, S., (2007) Daily
behavior report cards: An investigation of the consistency of on-task data across
raters and methods. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 9(1), 30-37.
Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guardino, D., & Lathrop, M (2007). Response to intervention:
Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children,
73(3), 288-310.
Filter, K. J., McKenna, M. K., Benedict, E. A., Horner, R. H., Todd, A. W., & Watson, J.
(2007). Check in/ check out: A post-hoc evaluation of an efficient, secondary-
level targeted intervention for reducing problem behaviors in schools. Education
and Treatment of Children, 30(1), 69-84.
Hawken, L. H. & Johnston, S. (in press). Preventing severe problem behavior in young
children: The Behavior Education Program. Journal of Early and Intensive
Behavior Intervention
Hawken, L. & Horner, R. (2003). Evaluation of a targeted group intervention within a
school-wide system of behavior support, Journal of Behavioral Education, 12,
225-240.
Hawken, L. H. & MacLeod, K. S., & O’Neill, R. (2007). Effects of function of problem
behavior on the responsiveness to the Behavior Education Program. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
Hawken, L. S., MacLeod, K. S. & Rawlings, L. (2007). Effects of the Behavior
Education Program (BEP) on problem behavior with elementary school students.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 94-101.
Hawken, L. (2006). School psychologists as leaders in the implementation of a targeted
intervention: The Behavior Education Program (BEP). School Psychology
Quarterly, 21, 91-111.
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.
McCurdy, B. L., Kunsch, C., & Reibstein, S. (2007). Secondary prevention in the urban
school: Implementing the Behavior Education Program. Preventing School
Failure, 12-19.
Miller, M., Fenty, N., & Scott, T. M. (in press). An examination of the effects of social
skills instruction in the context of small group reading. Preventing School Failure
Todd, A. W., Kaufman, A., Meyer, G., & Horner, R. H. (in press). The Effects of a
Targeted Intervention to Reduce Problem Behaviors: Elementary School
Implementation of Check In – Check Out. Journal of Positive Behavioral
Interventions
Check & Connect (Drop-out Prevention)
Christenson, S., & Carroll, E. B. (1999). Strengthening the family-school partnership
through Check and Connect. In E. Frydenberg (Ed.), Learning to cope:
Developing as a person in complex societies (pp. 248-273). London: Oxford
University Press.
Christenson, S. L., & Havsy, L. H. (2004). Family-school-peer relationships: Significance
for social-emotional and academic learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.
Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and
emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 59-75) New York:
Teachers College Press.
Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., Lehr, C. A., & Hurley, C. M. (2000). Promoting
successful school completion. In D. Minke & G. Bear (Eds.), Preventing school
problems—Promoting school success: Strategies and programs that work.
Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Filter, K. J., McKenna, M. K., Benedict, E. A., Horner, R. H., Todd, A. W., & Watson, J.
(2007). Check in/ Check out: A Post-Hoc Evaluation of an Efficient, Secondary-
Level Targeted Intervention for Reducing Problem Behaviors in Schools.
Education and Treatment of Children, 30, 69-84
Reschly, A., & Christenson, S. L. (2006). School completion. In G. G. Bear & K. M.
Minke (Eds.), Children’s needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention
(pp. 103-112). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Sinclair, M., Hurley, C., Christenson, S., Thurlow, M., & Evelo, D. (2002). Connections
that keep kids coming to school. In R. Algozzine & P. Kay (Eds.), Preventing
problem behaviors: A handbook of successful prevention strategies. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Todd, A., Kauffman, A., Meyer, G., & Horner, R.H. (in press). The effects of a targeted
intervention to reduce problem behaviors: Elementary school implementation of
check-in-check-out. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
Refereed Journal Articles: Secondary Interventions
Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check &
Connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school.
Journal of School Psychology, 42(2), 95-113.
Christenson, S. L., Hurley, C. M., Hirsch, J. A., Kau, M., Evelo, D., & Bates, W. (1997).
Check and Connect: The role of monitors in supporting high-risk youth. Reaching
Today’s Youth: The Community Circle of Caring Journal, 2(1), 18-21.
Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (2004). School dropouts: Prevention considerations,
interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(1),
36-39.
Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., Thurlow, M. L., and Evelo, D. (1999). Promoting
student engagement with school using the Check & Connect model. Australian
Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 9(1), 169-184.
Lyst, A. M., Gabriel, S., O’Shaughnessy, T. E., Meyers, J., & Meyers, B. (2005). Social
validity: Perceptions of Check and Connect with early literacy support. Journal of
School Psychology, 43(3), 197-218.
Lehr, C. A., Hansen, A., Sinclair, M. F., & Christenson, S. L. (2003). Moving beyond
dropout towards school completion: An integrative review of data-based
interventions. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 342-364.
Lehr, C. A., Sinclair, M. F., & Christenson, S. L. (2004). Addressing student engagement
and truancy prevention during the elementary years: A replication study of the
Check & Connect model. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 9(3),
279-301.
Morse, A. B., Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Promoting
school completion. Principal Leadership, 4(6), 9-13.
Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., Evelo, D. L., & Hurley, C. M. (1998). Dropout
prevention for youth with disabilities: Efficacy of a sustained school engagement
procedure. Exceptional Children, 65(1), 7-21.
Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M .L. (2005). Promoting school
completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities.
Exceptional Children, 71(4), 465-482.
Sinclair, M. F., Lam, S. F., Christenson, S. L. & Evelo, D. (1994). Parent-teacher action
research in profile. Equity and Choice, 10(1), 21-35.
Thurlow, M. L., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Evelo, D. L. (1997). Wanting the
unwanted: Keeping those “out of here” kids in school. Beyond Behavior, 8(3), 10-
16.
First Steps to Success
Epstein, M. H., & Walker, H. M. (2002). Special education: Best practices and First Step
to Success. In B. J. Burns & K. Hoagwood (Eds.), Community treatment for
youth: Evidence-based interventions for severe emotional and behavioral
disorders (pp. 179-197). New York: Oxford University Press.
Golly, A., Sprague, J., Walker, H. M., Beard, K., & Gorham, G. (2000). The First Step to
Success program: An analysis of outcomes with identical twins across multiple
baselines. Behavioral Disorders, 25(3), 170-182.
Golly, A., Stiller, B., & Walker, H. M. (1998). First Step to Success: Replication and
Social Validation of an Early Intervention Program. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders 6(4), 243-250.
Walker, H., Stiller, B., & Golly, A. (1998). First Step to Success: A collaborative Home-
School Intervention for Preventing Antisocial Behavior at the Point of School
Entry. Young Exceptional Children, 1(2), 2-6. ($5.00)
Walker, H. M. (1998). First Steps to Prevent Antisocial Behavior. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 30(4), 16-19.
Walker, H. M., Kavanagh, K., Stiller, B., Golly, A., Severson, H. H., & Feil, E. G.
(1998). First Step to Success: An Early Intervention Approach for Preventing
School Antisocial Behavior. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,
6(2), 66-80.
Social Skills Training – Research Summary Articles
Gresham, F. M., Sugai, G. & Horner, R. H. (2001). Interpreting outcomes of social skills
training for students with high-incidence disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(3),
331-334.
Lane, K. L., Wehby, J., Menzies, H. M., Doukas, G. L., Munton, S. M., & Gregg, R. M.
(2003). Social skills instruction for students at risk for antisocial behavior: The
effects of small-group instruction. Behavioral Disorders, 28(3), 229-248.
Moote, G., Smyth, N. J., & Wodarski, J. S. (1999). Social Skills Training With Youth in
School Settings: A Review. Research on Social Work Practice, 9, 427-465.
Powers, L. J. (2003). Examining the effects of targeted group social skills intervention in
schools with and without school-wide systems of positive behavior support.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.
Tertiary Prevention
The research supporting the effectiveness of functional behavioral assessment, the design
of individualized behavioral interventions, and the active use of data in the
implementation of behavior support is perhaps the most robust of the databases within
SWPBS. The majority of this research has employed single-case designs to examine the
effects of specific interventions, but increasingly studies are linking behavioral and
academic interventions to reduction in problem behavior.
This research has not at this time assessed the interaction effects associated with
implementation of elements at all three tiers in the SWPBS prevention framework.
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.
Blair, K.C., Umbreit, J., Dunlap, G., & Jung, G. (in press). Promoting inclusion and peer
participation through assessment-based intervention. Topics in Early Childhood
Special Education
Borgmeier, C., & Horner, R.H. (2006). An evaluation of the predictive validity of
confidence ratings in identifying accurate functional behavioral assessment
hypothesis statements. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 8(2), 100-105
Brooks, A., Todd, A. W., Tofflemoyer, S., & Horner, R. H. (2003). Use of functional
assessment and a self-management system to increase academic engagement and
work completion. Journal of Positive Behavior Intervention, 5, 144-152.
Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based
interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained
problem behavior: Preliminary results from a single case study. Learning
Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 15-25
Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Turnbull, A. P., Marquis, J. G., Magito-McLaughlin, D.,
McAtee, M. L., et al. (1999). Positive behavior support for people with
developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. American Association on Mental
Retardation Monograph Series. Washington, D. C.: American Association on
Mental Retardation
Crone, D., Hawken, L., & Bergstrom, M., (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.
Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guardino, D., & Lathrop, M (2007). Response to intervention:
Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children,
73(3), 288-310.
Harvey, M. T., Lewis-Palmer, T., Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2003). Trans-situational
interventions: Generalization of behavior support across school and home
environments. Behavioral Disorders, 28, 299-213
Ingram, K., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Sugai, G. (2005). Function-based intervention planning:
Comparing the effectiveness of FBA indicated and contra-indicated intervention
plans. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 224-236
Lucyshyn, J., Albin, R., Horner, R.H., Mann, J. C., Mann, J. A. & Wadsworth, G. (2007).
Family Implementation of Positive Behavior Support with a Child with Autism: A
Longitudinal, Single Case Experimental and Descriptive Replication and
Extension. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 9(3), 131-150
McIntosh, K., Borgmeier, C., Anderson, C., Horner, R.H., Rodriguez, B., & Tobin, T. (in
press). Technical adequacy of the Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers
and Staff FBA intervention measure. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions
McIntosh, K. Chard, D., Boland, J., & Horner, R. (2006). A demonstration of combined
efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading
and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions. 8(3). 146-154.
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
Preciado, J., Horner, R.H., & Baker, S. (in press). Using a function-based approach to
decrease problem behavior and increase academic engagement for Latino English
Language Learners. Journal of Special Education
Scott, T. M., & Caron, D. (2006). Functional Behavior Assessment at the School-Wide
Level: Determining Predictability and Function of Typical Problem Behaviors.
Preventing School Failure 50(1), 13-20
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
Scott, T. M., McIntyre, J., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., Conroy, M., & Payne, L. (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
Stover, A.C., Dunlap, G., & Neff, B. (in press). The effects of a contingency contracting
program on the nocturnal enuresis of three children. Research on Social Work
Practice
Behav Anal Pract. 2015 May; 8(1): 80–85.
Published online 2015 Feb 24. doi: 10.1007/s40617-015-0045-4
PMCID: PMC5048248
PMID: 27703887
School-wide PBIS: An Example of Applied Behavior Analysis Implemented at a Scale of
Social Importance
Robert H. Horner and George Sugai
Abstract
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is an example of applied be-
havior analysis implemented at a scale of social importance. In this paper, PBIS is de�ined and the
contributions of behavior analysis in shaping both the content and implementation of PBIS are re-
viewed. Speci�ic lessons learned from implementation of PBIS over the past 20 years are
summarized.
Keywords: Positive behavioral interventions and supports, Whole-school social culture, Applied
behavior analysis
Behavior Analysis in Practice is focused on practical demonstrations of behavior analysis in school,
community, work, and home contexts. One current example is the emergence of school-wide
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) as a framework for improving the academic
and social outcomes for students. In this paper, we describe PBIS, the contributions of behavior
analysis to de�ining, evaluating, and implementing PBIS, and initial lessons learned from the past
20 years of implementing PBIS across over 21,000 schools in the USA. Our goals are to both frame
the strong tie between PBIS and ABA and suggest lessons learned that may in�luence both re-
search and large-scale implementation efforts with other examples of behavioral intervention.
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a framework for delivering
both the whole-school social culture and additional tiers of behavior support intensity needed to
improve educational and social outcomes for all students. PBIS is an applied example of behav-
ioral theory (Baer et al. 1968; Cooper et al. 2007; Dunlap et al. 2008). As Anderson and Kincaid
(2005) have noted, the PBIS meets each of the �ive features used to de�ine applied behavior analy-
sis (applied and behavioral; analytic and conceptual; technological; effective; and generality). Many
in the �ield may in fact argue that positive behavior support is best described simply as an in-
stance of behavior analysis. Others, however, (including Anderson and Kincaid) have argued that
1 2
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs40617-015-0045-4
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27703887
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Horner%20RH%5BAuthor%5D
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Sugai%20G%5BAuthor%5D
elements of PBIS, including person-centered planning (Kincaid et al. 2005), wrap-around mental
health supports (Eber et al. 2009), self-determination (Carr et al. 1999; Wehemeyer 2005), pre-
vention science (Catalano et al. 2002; Gordon 1983), and implementation science (Fixsen et al.
2005) include elements that are not yet validated through behavioral science. Regardless of
whether PBIS is “only” or “mostly” behavior analysis, a central message is that PBIS grew from
and is infused with the principles and technology of behavior analysis.
The impact of behavior analysis on PBIS is most clear in (a) the emphasis on operational de�ini-
tions of behavior and intervention elements, (b) the logic model used to select environmental ma-
nipulations designed to alter student and staff behavior, and (c) an unrelenting commitment to
measurement of both implementation �idelity and the impact of PBIS on student outcomes. Two
themes that de�ine PBIS are a focus on the whole-school as the unit of intervention (Biglan 1995;
Mayer 1995; Mayer and Butterworth 1979), and the simultaneous development of interventions
tied to at least three tiers of support intensity (Fuchs and Fuchs 2006). Figure 1 presents the fre-
quently referenced multi-tiered prevention approach borrowed from community health and �irst
introduced to education by Hill Walker (Walker et al. 1996). The logic from this approach starts
with de�ining an organization’s most highly valued outcomes (e.g., reading, math, writing, and so-
cial behavior), and then selecting the smallest set of research-validated procedures needed to de-
liver these outcomes with at least 80 % of the target population. In schools, this “Tier I” level fo-
cuses on establishing a school-wide positive social culture that includes (a) de�ining and teaching a
small set of behavioral expectations (e.g., be respectful, be responsible, and be safe), (b) establish-
ing a ubiquitous system for reinforcing performance of these expectations, (c) implementing a
consistent system for interrupting, correcting, and redirecting behavioral errors, and (d) building
an ef�icient system to collect, summarize, and use data for decision-making (Horner et al. 2010;
Putnam et al. 2002; Sugai and Lewis 1999; Sugai et al. 2014).
Fig. 1
Multi-tiered prevention model
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
As symbolized by the Tier I (primary prevention) level in Fig. 1, all students experience Tier I be-
havior support. This level of support is not dependent on documented “need” or some formal as-
sessment protocol. Tier I (primary prevention) is proactive and designed to be administered be-
fore error patterns develop. Because all students receive Tier I supports, these practices must be
highly ef�icient and logically integrated with all other elements of the environment. The start of
each school year begins by teaching and/or reviewing school-wide behavioral expectations before
students have had the opportunity to make behavioral mistakes. Primary prevention is intended
to both reduce the likelihood of initial problem behaviors and support the sustained shift toward
positive behavior when more intense supports are implemented later in the year.
Tier II (secondary prevention) practices focus on moderate intensity supports that address the
most common needs of students with ongoing problem behavior. As indicated in Fig. 1, Tier II sup-
ports are added to Tier I supports and are designed for the 10–15 % of students who bene�it
from additional structure, more overt, and frequent antecedent prompts, a higher rate of positive
recognition, and elevated training in both behavioral expectations and self-regulation skills (Crone
et al. 2010; Sugai et al. 2014). The elevated level of risk experienced by these students is matched
not only by elevated support intensity, but also by the frequency and speci�icity with which
progress monitoring data are collected. Tier II supports typically are packaged and standardized
for highly ef�icient implementation across multiple students (e.g., �irst step to success Walker et al.
2009; check-in/ check-out Hawken et al. 2006).
Tier III (tertiary prevention) practices are characterized by individualized assessment, individual-
ized support plan design, comprehensive support plan implementation, and the management of
support by a team uniquely organized to meet the preferences and needs of individual student
(Scott et al. 2008). The establishment of Tier III supports is an overt commitment by the system to
include a full range of students in the school. An important addition to Tier III support practices is
a formal process for monitoring both if a support plan is being implemented as well as if it is be-
ing effective (Pinkelman 2014). Tier III supports are not new to schools. Special education expec-
tations for individualized support have been required since 1975. The value of this approach,
however, now extends beyond special education to all students requiring higher intensity sup-
ports. When implementing Tier III behavior supports, teams consider behavioral, academic, men-
tal health, physical, social, and contextual variables (Crone et al. 2010). This is a high-intensity ap-
proach to support, intended for 5 % or fewer students within a school. As symbolized within Fig. 1
, Tier III supports are expected to be (a) needed less often than Tier I and Tier II supports and (b)
more effective when they are implemented within schools that simultaneously offer Tier I and Tier
II supports.
Implementation of PBIS has been formally evaluated in a number of descriptive, evaluation, and
experimental studies. Findings indicate that PBIS is experimentally associated with reduction in of-
�ice discipline referrals (Bradshaw et al. 2010, 2012; Horner et al. 2009; Safran and Oswald 2003),
reduction in out of school suspensions and expulsions (Bradshaw et al. 2010), improved social
emotional competence (Bradshaw et al. 2012), improved organizational ef�iciency (Bradshaw et al.
2008, 2009), improved academic outcomes (Horner et al. 2009), improved perception of safety
(Horner et al. 2009; Ross et al. 2012), and reduction in bullying (Ross and Horner 2009;
Waasdorp et al. 2012).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig1/
Lessons Learned
A worthy question is why PBIS has been so widely adopted over the past 20 years when so many
other examples of behavior analysis have offered impressive research outcomes with limited soci-
etal adoption. We offer the following as “lessons learned” that may guide future research and dis-
semination efforts.
1. Emphasize Core Features and Evidence-based Strategies. Behavioral theory focuses on the
behavioral mechanism(s) by which core features of an environment alter behavior. Core
features are the “kernels” or “smallest functional units” needed to produce valued outcomes
(Embry and Biglan 2008). Within PBIS, consistent attention has been given to operational
descriptions of the core features needed to achieve academic and social gains for students. The
focus on core features allows the separation of the strategy being employed (e.g., second step
Frey et al. 2005) and the feature being established (e.g., increased instruction of pro-social
behavior). Students behave differently when core features are in place, and core features are
more likely to be in place when research validated programs are implemented. Too often,
however, programs and core features are combined, and users emphasize adoption of the
program or package without con�irming implementation of functional core features.
Emphasizing core features, rather than the practices that are used to achieve the core features,
allows school personnel to tailor new strategies and packages to the local cultural and context.
For example, while schools using PBIS are expected to de�ine and teach school-wide behavioral
expectations, the speci�ic expectations and the method for teaching the expectations are left to
match the culture, resources and organizational demands of the local school.
The focus on core features also has direct relevance for the implementation process. Because
adoption of a package or intervention strategy is not adoption of PBIS, school teams need a
formal way to assess if core features are in place. This is done through formal �idelity assess-
ment. Implementation of PBIS is not determined by participation in a training workshop, em-
ployment of a “certi�ied trainer,” or purchasing an instructional product. Implementation of
PBIS is assessed by measuring if the core features of Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III support are in
place in a school (c.f. Algozzine et al. 2010).
2. Implement “Systems” that Support and Sustain Effective Practices. The likelihood that a school
will implement and sustain PBIS with high �idelity depends largely on attention not just to the
PBIS core features, but the “systems” that support implementation (e.g., policies, team
structures, data systems, funding, and regulations) (McIntosh et al. 2010). Figure 2 provides a
summary of the integration of outcomes, intervention practices that change student behavior,
the systems that support and sustain adult behavior, and the data needed for adaptation and
continued improvement.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig2/
Fig. 2
Role of Systems in PBIS
Behavioral theory teaches us that organizations do not behave, people behave. And people be-
have differently within social contexts with clearly de�ined contingencies (Dickinson 2000).
Organizational behavioral theory extends what we have learned about developing adaptive in-
dividual behavior patterns, to development of similar behavior patterns across coordinated
groups of individuals (Abernathy and Lattal 2014). In schools, this means (a) establishing en-
gaged leadership teams, (b) delivering training and support to teams of individuals, (c) provid-
ing the resources and time to allow teams to receive training, apply skills/practices learned in
training, and (d) adapting procedures in response to data, local cultural, and organizational
variables. Schools implementing these practices are more likely to implement PBIS with high �i-
delity and sustain PBIS with valued student outcomes (Coffey & Horner 2012; McIntosh et al.
2010).
3. Collect and Use Data for Decision-making. Among the great contributions of behavior analysis
has been a consistent emphasis on operational measurement (Cooper et al. 2007). Within PBIS,
behavioral measurement is central at two levels. The �irst level focuses on the extent to which
adopted procedures have been successful in establishing the core features of PBIS (e.g.,
measurement of �idelity or intervention integrity; Fryling et al. 2012). Investing in valid, reliable,
and ef�icient measures of implementation �idelity led to over 11,524 schools in 2014
systematically measuring PBIS �idelity with 81 % meeting Tier I �idelity criteria during the year.
The second, and more traditional, emphasis is on continuous measurement of student
behavior. Within PBIS, school teams monitor student discipline patterns to assess not just the
frequency of problems, but the type of problem behavior, locations where problems are most
and least likely, time of day, students engaging in problem behavior, and the perceived
maintaining behavioral function of problem behavior. By asking every staff member in a school
to record not just who and what a student did that was problematic, but the perceived function
of the problem behavior, PBIS builds a system that extends function-based behavior support
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig2/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig2/
from Tier III, high-intensity, individual support plans to the Tier II and Tier I levels of school-
wide prevention. The key is that data are used not just for policy levels reports to state and
district administrators, but for local decision-making at the school and classroom level. Effective
use of data by school teams has been demonstrated to improve educational outcomes (Newton
et al. 2012), and the repeated use of data at the school level has been associated with improved
sustainability of PBIS implementation (McItosh et al. 2014).
4. Implementation Process
A fourth lesson drawn from behavior analysis is an emphasis on the implementation process.
Implementation science (Fixsen et al. 2005, 2013) separates intervention practices (what is
done to change student behavior) from the practices used to change an organizational system
(adoption of the intervention practices). It is as important to de�ine how effective practices are
adopted as it is to provide the research demonstrating that these practices both produce de-
sired change in the organization, and desired outcomes for the target population.
Figure 3 integrates the lessons learned from implementation of PBIS. First, implementation of
PBIS in schools requires a district or regional implementation team. Students are the unit of im-
pact, schools are the unit of intervention, but districts are the unit of implementation. Teams
are the mechanism for comprehensive and sustained implementation. The district leadership
team is more than advisory or informative they actively manage and guide the implementation
process. Second, there is a tendency for implementation efforts to both start and end with ini-
tial demonstrations. This is ineffective. Effective implementation processes build district and
school capacity while establishing initial demonstrations. As initial schools in a district adopt
PBIS the leadership team needs to be improving district capacity to (a) conduct PBIS training
without reliance on external trainers, (b) provide active coaching of trained skills to ensure that
they are applied under natural conditions, at high �idelity, and with the adaptation to local cul-
ture needed to achieve the core features, (c) establish the behavioral expertise in behavior
analysis needed for moving from the foundational knowledge needed for Tier I practices to the
more sophisticated knowledge needed for implementation of Tier II and Tier III supports, and
(d) development of the evaluation capacity to assess both school-level and district-level out-
comes. Failure to invest in the implementation elements needed to move from “demonstration”
to “full implementation” too often results in major �iscal and organizational loss (Horner et al.
2014).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig3/
Fig. 3
Implementation framework
Summary
The promise of applied behavior analysis is that our understanding of human behavior will have
direct impact on improving social systems. The challenges faced in schools, families, work places,
and communities require better application of behavioral theory. School-wide PBIS is one example
of successful implementation of behavioral theory to address a major social concern. It is an ex-
ample that is still evolving, but with over 21,000 schools in the USA actively engaged in implement-
ing PBIS, and a growing body of scholarship supporting the impact of PBIS on student behavior it
is worthwhile to consider lessons learned. A full summary of these lessons is beyond the scope of
the present paper, but four key messages have relevance for anyone extending behavioral theory
to large social systems.
First, use current science to isolate the smallest number of core features needed in a context to
produce valued outcomes. Identify multiple strategies and practices for establishing these core
features allows different implementers to select the strategy or practice that best �its their social
and cultural context.
Second, implement the “systems” needed for sustained high �idelity use of effective practices.
Systems include the policies, teaming structures, decision-making protocols, funding, and organi-
zational practices that allow effective interventions to be adopted with ef�iciency and effectiveness.
Third, a central part of this process is development of data systems that allow all individuals in the
system to engage in effective decision-making. Finally, attention to the implementation process is
as critical as attention to the research-validated practices. Implementation includes attention to
the selection of core practices, the teams needed to achieve functional effects, the stages of adop-
tion, and the development of the drivers and data systems that allow effective practices to �lourish.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig3/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048248/figure/Fig3/
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the Of�ice of Special Education Programs US Department of
Education (H326S980003). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not neces-
sarily re�lect the position of the US Department of Education, and such endorsements should not
be inferred.
References
Abernathy WB, Lattal D. Organizational behavior management. In: McSweeney FK, Murphy ES, editors. Handbook of operant
and classical conditioning. Oxford: Wiley; 2014. [Google
Scholar]
Algozzine, B., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Barrett, S., Dickey, C. R., Eber, L., et al. (2010). Evaluation blueprint for school-wide
positive behavior support. Eugene, OR: National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and
Support. Retrieved from www.pbis.org.
Anderson, C., & Kincaid, D. (2005). Applying behavior analysis to school violence and discipline problems: schoolwide
positive behavior support. The Behavior Analyst, 28, 49–63. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
Baer D, Wolf M, Risley T. Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
1968;1:91–97. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
Biglan A. Translating what we know about the context of antisocial behavior into a lower prevalence of such behavior.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1995;28:479–492. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-479. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Bradshaw, C., Koth, C., Bevans, K., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. (2008). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral
interventions and supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly,
23(4), 462–473.
Bradshaw, C. P., Sawyer, A. L., & O’Brennan, L. M. (2009). A social disorganization perspective on bullying-related attitudes
and behaviors: the in�luence of school context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 43(3-4), 204–220. [PubMed]
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions
and supports on student outcomes: results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133–148.
Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., & Leaf, P. J. (2012). Effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports
on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics, e1136–e1145. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Turnbull, A. P., Marquis, J. G., McLaughlin, D. M., McAtee, M. L., et al. (1999). Positive behavior
support for people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental
Retardation Monograph Series.
Catalano RF, Hawkins JD, Berglund ML, Pollard JA, Arthur MW. Prevention science and positive youth development:
competitive or cooperative frameworks? Journal of Adolescent Health. 2002;31:230–239. doi: 10.1016/S1054-
139X(02)00496-2. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Coffey, J., & Horner, R. H. (2012). The sustainability of school-wide positive behavior support. Exceptional Children, 78(4),
407–422.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Handbook+of+operant+and+classical+conditioning&author=WB+Abernathy&author=D+Lattal&publication_year=2014&
http://www.pbis.org/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755344/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22478439
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1310980/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16795165
https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjaba.1968.1-91
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Behavior+Analysis&title=Some+current+dimensions+of+applied+behavior+analysis&author=D+Baer&author=M+Wolf&author=T+Risley&volume=1&publication_year=1968&pages=91-97&pmid=16795165&doi=10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91&
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1279854/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8557621
https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjaba.1995.28-479
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Behavior+Analysis&title=Translating+what+we+know+about+the+context+of+antisocial+behavior+into+a+lower+prevalence+of+such+behavior&author=A+Biglan&volume=28&publication_year=1995&pages=479-492&pmid=8557621&doi=10.1901/jaba.1995.28-479&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19333749
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3483890/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23071207
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12470920
https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS1054-139X(02)00496-2
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Adolescent+Health&title=Prevention+science+and+positive+youth+development:+competitive+or+cooperative+frameworks?&author=RF+Catalano&author=JD+Hawkins&author=ML+Berglund&author=JA+Pollard&author=MW+Arthur&volume=31&publication_year=2002&pages=230-239&pmid=12470920&doi=10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00496-2&
Cooper JO, Heron TE, Heward WL. Applied behavior analysis. 2. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2007. [Google Scholar]
Crone, D., Hawken, L., & Horner, R. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The Behavior Education Program
(2nd ed.). The Guilford Practical Intervention in the Schools Series. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Dickinson AM. The historical roots of organizational behavior management in the private sector: the 1950s – 1980s. Journal
of Organizational Behavior Management. 2000;20:9–58. doi: 10.1300/J075v20n03_02. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Dunlap G, Carr E, Horner R, Zarcone J, Schwartz I. Positive behavior support and applied behavior analysis: a familial
alliance. Behavior Modi�ication. 2008;32:682–698. doi: 10.1177/0145445508317132. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
Eber L, Hyde K, Rose J, Breen K, McDonald D, Lewandowski H. Completing the continuum of schoolwide positive behavior
support: Wraparound as a tertiary-level intervention. In: Sailor W, Dunlap G, Sugai G, Horner R, editors. Handbook of
positive behavior support. LLC: Springer; 2009. pp. 671–704. [Google Scholar]
Embry DD, Biglan A. Evidence-based kernels: Fundamental units of behavioral in�luence. Clinical Child and Family
Psychology Review. 2008;11:75–113. doi: 10.1007/s10567-008-0036-x. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). ImplementationResearch: A Synthesis of the
Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National
Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231), 11, 247–266.
Fixsen DL, Blase K, Metz A, Van Dyke M. Statewide implementation of evidence-based programs. Exceptional Children
(Special Issue) 2013;79:213–230. [Google Scholar]
Frey KS, Nolen SB, Edstrom LV, Hirschstein MK. Effects of a school-based social-emotional competence program: linking
children’s goals, attributions, and behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2005;26:171–200.
doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2004.12.002. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Fryling M, Wallace M, Yassine J. Impact of treatment integrity on intervention effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis. 2012;45:449–453. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2012.45-449. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Fuchs D, Fuchs L. Introduction to response to intervention: what, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly.
2006;41:93–99. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Gordon RSJ. An operational classi�ication of disease prevention. In: Steinberg JA, Silverman MM, editors. Preventing mental
disorders. Rockville: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1983. [Google Scholar]
Hawken, L. S., Pettersson, H., Mootz, J., & Anderson, C. (2006). The Behavior Education Program: A check-in, check-out
intervention for students at risk. Video or DVD. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Horner RH, Sugai G, Smolkowski K, Eber L, Nakasato J, Todd A, Esperanza J. A randomized, waitlist-controlled effectiveness
trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.
2009;11(3):133–144. doi: 10.1177/1098300709332067. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Horner RH, Sugai G, Anderson CM. Examining the evidence-base for school wide positive behavior support. Focus on
Exceptional Children. 2010;42:1–14. [Google Scholar]
Horner, R. H., Kincaid, D., Sugai, G., Lewis, T., Eber, L., Barrett, S., et al. (2014). Scaling up school-wide positive behavioral
interventions and supports: the experiences of seven states with documented success. Journal of Positive Behavioral
Interventions. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/1098300713503685.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Applied+behavior+analysis&author=JO+Cooper&author=TE+Heron&author=WL+Heward&publication_year=2007&
https://doi.org/10.1300%2FJ075v20n03_02
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Organizational+Behavior+Management&title=The+historical+roots+of+organizational+behavior+management+in+the+private+sector:+the+1950s+-+1980s&author=AM+Dickinson&volume=20&publication_year=2000&pages=9-58&doi=10.1300/J075v20n03_02&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18420542
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0145445508317132
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Behavior+Modification&title=Positive+behavior+support+and+applied+behavior+analysis:+a+familial+alliance&author=G+Dunlap&author=E+Carr&author=R+Horner&author=J+Zarcone&author=I+Schwartz&volume=32&publication_year=2008&pages=682-698&pmid=18420542&doi=10.1177/0145445508317132&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Handbook+of+positive+behavior+support&author=L+Eber&author=K+Hyde&author=J+Rose&author=K+Breen&author=D+McDonald&publication_year=2009&
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2526125/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18712600
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10567-008-0036-x
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Clinical+Child+and+Family+Psychology+Review&title=Evidence-based+kernels:+Fundamental+units+of+behavioral+influence&author=DD+Embry&author=A+Biglan&volume=11&publication_year=2008&pages=75-113&pmid=18712600&doi=10.1007/s10567-008-0036-x&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Exceptional+Children+(Special+Issue)&title=Statewide+implementation+of+evidence-based+programs&author=DL+Fixsen&author=K+Blase&author=A+Metz&author=M+Van+Dyke&volume=79&publication_year=2013&pages=213-230&
https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.appdev.2004.12.002
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Developmental+Psychology&title=Effects+of+a+school-based+social-emotional+competence+program:+linking+children%E2%80%99s+goals,+attributions,+and+behavior&author=KS+Frey&author=SB+Nolen&author=LV+Edstrom&author=MK+Hirschstein&volume=26&publication_year=2005&pages=171-200&doi=10.1016/j.appdev.2004.12.002&
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3405943/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22844155
https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjaba.2012.45-449
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Behavior+Analysis&title=Impact+of+treatment+integrity+on+intervention+effectiveness&author=M+Fryling&author=M+Wallace&author=J+Yassine&volume=45&publication_year=2012&pages=449-453&pmid=22844155&doi=10.1901/jaba.2012.45-449&
https://doi.org/10.1598%2FRRQ.41.1.4
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Reading+Research+Quarterly&title=Introduction+to+response+to+intervention:+what,+why,+and+how+valid+is+it?&author=D+Fuchs&author=L+Fuchs&volume=41&publication_year=2006&pages=93-99&doi=10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Preventing+mental+disorders&author=RSJ+Gordon&publication_year=1983&
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300709332067
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Positive+Behavior+Interventions&title=A+randomized,+waitlist-controlled+effectiveness+trial+assessing+school-wide+positive+behavior+support+in+elementary+schools&author=RH+Horner&author=G+Sugai&author=K+Smolkowski&author=L+Eber&author=J+Nakasato&volume=11&issue=3&publication_year=2009&pages=133-144&doi=10.1177/1098300709332067&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Focus+on+Exceptional+Children&title=Examining+the+evidence-base+for+school+wide+positive+behavior+support&author=RH+Horner&author=G+Sugai&author=CM+Anderson&volume=42&publication_year=2010&pages=1-14&
Kincaid, D., Knab, J. T., & Clark, H. B. (2005). Person-centered planning. Mental Health Law & Policy Faculty Publications.
Paper 702. http://schoalrcommons.usf.edu/mhlp_facpub/702
Mayer GR. Preventing anti-social behavior in the schools. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1995;28:267–278.
doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-467. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Mayer GR, Butterworth T. A preventive approach to school violence and vandalism: an experimental study. Personnel and
Guidance Journal. 1979;57:436–441. doi: 10.1002/j.2164-4918.1979.tb05431.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
McIntosh K, Filter K, Bennett J, Ryan C, Sugai G. Principles of sustainable prevention: designing scale-up of school-wide
positive behavior support to promote durable systems. Psychology in the Schools. 2010;47:5–21. [Google Scholar]
McItosh, K., Kim, J., Mercer, S., Strickland-Cohen, M.K. & Horner, R., (2014). Variables associated with enhanced
sustainability of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Assessment for Effective Intervetnion,
November, 1–8. doi:10.1177/1534508414556503.
Newton JS, Horner RH, Algozzine B, Todd AW, Algozzine KM. A randomized wait-list controlled analysis of team-initiated
problem solving. Journal of School Psychology. 2012;50:421–441. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2012.04.002. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
Pinkelman, S. (2014). Effects of Self-delivered Performance Feedback and Impact Assessment via the Individual Student
Information System (ISIS-SWIS) on Behavior Support Plan Treatment Fidelity and Student Outcomes (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
Putnam RF, Luiselli JK, Sunderland M. Longitudinal evaluation of behavior support intervention in a public middle school.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2002;4:182–188. [Google Scholar]
Ross, S. W., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Bully prevention in positive behavior support. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42,
747–759. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
Ross, S. W., Romer, N., & Horner, R. H. (2012). Teacher well-being and the implementation of school-wide positive behavior
interventions and support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 118–128. doi:10.1177/1098300711413820.
Safran, S. P., & Oswald, K. (2003). Positive behavior supports: can schools reshape disciplinary practices? Exceptional
Children, 69(3), 361–373.
Scott TA, Anderson CM, Spaulding SA. Strategies for developing and carrying out functional assessment and behavior
intervention planning. Preventing School Failure. 2008;52:39–49. doi: 10.3200/PSFL.52.3.39-50. [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
Sugai G, Lewis TJ. Developing positive behavioral support systems. In: Sugai G, Lewis TJ, editors. Developing positive
behavioral support for students with challenging behavior. Arlington, VA: Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders;
1999. pp. 15–23. [Google Scholar]
Sugai G, Simonsen B, Bradshaw C, Horner R, Lewis T. Delivering high quality school wide positive behavior support in
inclusive schools. In: McLeskey J, Waldron NL, Spooner F, Algozzine B, editors. Handbook of research and practice for
inclusive schools. New York, NY: Routledge; 2014. pp. 306–321. [Google Scholar]
Waasdorp, T., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2012). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and support
(SWPBIS) on bullying and peer rejection: a randomized control effectiveness trial. Archive of Pediatric Adolescent
Medicine, 166, 149–156. [PubMed]
http://schoalrcommons.usf.edu/mhlp_facpub/702
https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjaba.1995.28-467
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Applied+Behavior+Analysis&title=Preventing+anti-social+behavior+in+the+schools&author=GR+Mayer&volume=28&publication_year=1995&pages=267-278&doi=10.1901/jaba.1995.28-467&
https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fj.2164-4918.1979.tb05431.x
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Personnel+and+Guidance+Journal&title=A+preventive+approach+to+school+violence+and+vandalism:+an+experimental+study&author=GR+Mayer&author=T+Butterworth&volume=57&publication_year=1979&pages=436-441&doi=10.1002/j.2164-4918.1979.tb05431.x&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Psychology+in+the+Schools&title=Principles+of+sustainable+prevention:+designing+scale-up+of+school-wide+positive+behavior+support+to+promote+durable+systems&author=K+McIntosh&author=K+Filter&author=J+Bennett&author=C+Ryan&author=G+Sugai&volume=47&publication_year=2010&pages=5-21&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22710014
https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jsp.2012.04.002
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+School+Psychology&title=A+randomized+wait-list+controlled+analysis+of+team-initiated+problem+solving&author=JS+Newton&author=RH+Horner&author=B+Algozzine&author=AW+Todd&author=KM+Algozzine&volume=50&publication_year=2012&pages=421-441&pmid=22710014&doi=10.1016/j.jsp.2012.04.002&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Positive+Behavior+Interventions&title=Longitudinal+evaluation+of+behavior+support+intervention+in+a+public+middle+school&author=RF+Putnam&author=JK+Luiselli&author=M+Sunderland&volume=4&publication_year=2002&pages=182-188&
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2791686/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20514181
https://doi.org/10.3200%2FPSFL.52.3.39-50
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Preventing+School+Failure&title=Strategies+for+developing+and+carrying+out+functional+assessment+and+behavior+intervention+planning&author=TA+Scott&author=CM+Anderson&author=SA+Spaulding&volume=52&publication_year=2008&pages=39-49&doi=10.3200/PSFL.52.3.39-50&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Developing+positive+behavioral+support+for+students+with+challenging+behavior&author=G+Sugai&author=TJ+Lewis&publication_year=1999&
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Handbook+of+research+and+practice+for+inclusive+schools&author=G+Sugai&author=B+Simonsen&author=C+Bradshaw&author=R+Horner&author=T+Lewis&publication_year=2014&
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22312173
Walker HM, Horner RH, Sugai G, Bullis M, Sprague JR, Bricker D, Kaufman MH. Integrated approaches to preventing
antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders.
1996;4:194–209. doi: 10.1177/106342669600400401. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Walker, H. M., Seeley, J. R., Small, J., Severson, H. H., Graham, B., Feil, E. G., et al. (2009). A randomized controlled trial of the
�irst step to success early intervention: demonstration of program ef�icacy outcomes in adverse, urban school district.
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17, 197–212. doi:10.1177/1063426609341645.
Wehemeyer, M. (2005). Self-determination and individuals with severe disabilities: re-examining meanings and
misconceptions. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30, 113–120.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F106342669600400401
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Journal+of+Emotional+and+Behavioral+Disorders&title=Integrated+approaches+to+preventing+antisocial+behavior+patterns+among+school-age+children+and+youth&author=HM+Walker&author=RH+Horner&author=G+Sugai&author=M+Bullis&author=JR+Sprague&volume=4&publication_year=1996&pages=194-209&doi=10.1177/106342669600400401&
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
