reproductions supplied by edrs are the best that can … · contents. preface / iv. presentations...

68
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 481 852 EC 309 878 AUTHOR Bullock, Lyndal M., Ed.; Gable, Robert A., Ed. TITLE School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors. INSTITUTION Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders. ISBN ISBN-0-86586-973-1 PUB DATE 2003-00-00 NOTE 67p.; Highlights from the Forum on School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors (Tampa, FL, February 15-16, 2002). AVAILABLE FROM Council for Exceptional Children, 1110 North Glebe Rd., Arlington, VA 22201-5704. Tel: 888-232-7733 (Toll Free); e- mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.cec.sped.org. PUB TYPE Collected Works General (020) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Academic Accommodations (Disabilities); *Behavior Disorders; *Behavior Modification; Discipline; Educational Environment; Elementary Secondary Education; Functional Behavioral Assessment; *Intervention; Prevention; *School Personnel IDENTIFIERS *Positive Behavioral Support ABSTRACT This monograph presents highlights from a 2002 forum on school-wide approaches to working with students with challenging behaviors. The forum's focus was on ways to make systemic changes to create school environments that support the use of positive academic and behavioral interventions at the building and classroom levels. The following presentations of keynote speakers are included: (1) "Behavior in the Schools: Issues Related to Students with Challenging Behaviors" (Richard Van Acker); (2) "Accommodations and Modifications for Students with Challenging Behaviors: Collaborating with General Education" (Michael N. Hazelkorn); (3) "Strategic Use of School Personnel: Providing Meaningful Behavioral Supports for Students with Challenging Behaviors and the School Personnel Who Work with Them" (Mary Karen Oudeans); (4) "Managing Kids: Direct Answers for Tricky Issues" (Anthony Moriaty); and (5) "Developing Effective Behavioral Intervention Plans and Positive Behavioral Supports" (Richard Van Acker). Also included are summaries of the following discussion groups and leaders: "Proactive Approaches To Working with Challenging Behaviors: Voices from the Field" (Howard S. Muscott and others); "Improving School Climate: Moving from 'Your Kids' to 'Our Kids'" (Karen Barnest and others); "Practicing an Ethos of Care: Laying a Foundation for School-Wide Proactive Approaches" (Teresa L. Teaff and Cathy Kea); "The Academic/Behavioral Connection: Working Effectively with Students with Challenging Behaviors" (Beverley H. Johns); and "Meeting the Needs of Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders through Proactive Approaches" (Mary E. Little) . (Individual presentations and discussion summaries contain references.) (DB) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.

Upload: dotuong

Post on 01-Aug-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 481 852 EC 309 878

AUTHOR Bullock, Lyndal M., Ed.; Gable, Robert A., Ed.TITLE School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Working with Students

with Challenging Behaviors.INSTITUTION Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.ISBN ISBN-0-86586-973-1PUB DATE 2003-00-00NOTE 67p.; Highlights from the Forum on School-Wide Proactive

Approaches to Working with Students with ChallengingBehaviors (Tampa, FL, February 15-16, 2002).

AVAILABLE FROM Council for Exceptional Children, 1110 North Glebe Rd.,Arlington, VA 22201-5704. Tel: 888-232-7733 (Toll Free); e-mail: [email protected]; Web site:http://www.cec.sped.org.

PUB TYPE Collected Works General (020) Speeches/Meeting Papers(150)

EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Academic Accommodations (Disabilities); *Behavior Disorders;

*Behavior Modification; Discipline; Educational Environment;Elementary Secondary Education; Functional BehavioralAssessment; *Intervention; Prevention; *School Personnel

IDENTIFIERS *Positive Behavioral Support

ABSTRACT

This monograph presents highlights from a 2002 forum onschool-wide approaches to working with students with challenging behaviors.The forum's focus was on ways to make systemic changes to create schoolenvironments that support the use of positive academic and behavioralinterventions at the building and classroom levels. The followingpresentations of keynote speakers are included: (1) "Behavior in the Schools:Issues Related to Students with Challenging Behaviors" (Richard Van Acker);(2) "Accommodations and Modifications for Students with ChallengingBehaviors: Collaborating with General Education" (Michael N. Hazelkorn); (3)"Strategic Use of School Personnel: Providing Meaningful Behavioral Supportsfor Students with Challenging Behaviors and the School Personnel Who Workwith Them" (Mary Karen Oudeans); (4) "Managing Kids: Direct Answers forTricky Issues" (Anthony Moriaty); and (5) "Developing Effective BehavioralIntervention Plans and Positive Behavioral Supports" (Richard Van Acker).Also included are summaries of the following discussion groups and leaders:"Proactive Approaches To Working with Challenging Behaviors: Voices from theField" (Howard S. Muscott and others); "Improving School Climate: Moving from'Your Kids' to 'Our Kids'" (Karen Barnest and others); "Practicing an Ethosof Care: Laying a Foundation for School-Wide Proactive Approaches" (Teresa L.Teaff and Cathy Kea); "The Academic/Behavioral Connection: WorkingEffectively with Students with Challenging Behaviors" (Beverley H. Johns);and "Meeting the Needs of Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disordersthrough Proactive Approaches" (Mary E. Little) . (Individual presentations anddiscussion summaries contain references.) (DB)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

c100

007t-

00C--00Cr

C)[4

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUC40NAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

his document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

0 Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

Council forChildren withBehavioralDisorders 1

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS

BEEN GRANTED BY

Of SO rTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

SCHOOL-WIDE PROACTIVE APPROACHES

TO WORKING WITH STUDENTS

WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE FORUM ON

SCHOOL-WIDE PROACTIVE APPROACHES TO WORKING

WITH STUDENTS WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

SPONSORED BY

COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN WITH BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS

TAMPA, FL FEBRUARY 15-16, 2002

LYNDAL M. BULLOCK

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

DENTON, TEXAS

EDITED BY

ROBERT A. GABLE

OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY

NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

-03135`17 COTT' g.TAHILAINTA

1

CUEB

Council forChildren withBehavioralDisorders

SCHOOL-WIDE PROACTIVE APPROACHES

TO WORKING WITH STUDENTS

WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE FORUM ON

SCHOOL-WIDE PROACTIVE APPROACHES TO WORKING

WITH STUDENTS WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

SPONSORED BY

COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN WITH BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS

TAMPA, FL FEBRUARY 15-16, 2002

LYNDAL M. BULLOCK

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

DENTON, TEXAS

EDITED BY

ROBERT A. GABLE

OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY

NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

3

ABOUT THE COUNCIL FOR CHILDREN WITH

BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS (CCBD)

CCBD is an international organization committed to promoting and facilitating the educationand general welfare of children and youth with behavioral or emotional disorders. CCBD, whosemembers include educators, parents, mental health personnel, and a variety of other profes-sionals, actively pursues quality educational services and program alternatives for persons withbehavioral disorders, advocates for the needs of such children and youth, emphasizes researchand professional growth as vehicles for better understanding behavioral disorders, and providesprofessional support for persons who are involved with and serve children and youth with behav-ioral disorders.

In advocating for professionals in the field of behavioral disorders, CCBD (a division of TheCouncil for Exceptional Children) endorses the Standards for Professional Practice and Code ofEthics that was adopted by the Delegate Assembly of The Council for Exceptional Children in1983.

Other CCBD Products

Behavioral DisordersThis journal, published quarterly, serves as a meansto exchange information and share ideas related toresearch, empirically tested educational innova-tions, and issues and concerns relevant to studentswith behavioral disorders. The journal is free withCCBD membership or is available to nonmembersby subscription.

Beyond BehaviorThis practitioner-oriented journal is publishedthree times annually and focuses on issues faced bydirect service providers in the field. The journal isfree with CCBD membership or is available to non-members by subscription.

CCBD NewsletterThis newsletter is designed to keep membersinformed about the organization and its activitiesand is available to members on a quarterly basis.

Other CCBD Products:Third Mini-Library Series on Emotional/BehavioralDisorders

Developing Positive Behavioral Support forStudents with Challenging Behaviors by GeorgeSugai and Timothy J. Lewis

ISBN 0-86586-973-1

Educating Students with Emotional and Beha-vioral Disorders: Historical Perspective andFuture Directions by Richard J. Whelan and JamesM. Kauffman

Historical Chronology of the Council for Childrenwith Behavioral Disorders: 1964-1999 by Lynda]M. Bullock and Anthony L. "Tony" Menendez

Perspective on EmotionallBehavioral Disorders:Assumptions and Their Implications for Educa-tion and Reatment by C. Michael Nelson,Terrance M. Scott, and Lewis Polsgrove

Psychoeducation: An Idea Whose Time Has Comeby Mary M. Wood, Larry K. Brendtro, Frank A.Fecser, and Polly Nichols

A Revisitation of the Ecological Perspectives onEmotionallBehavioral Disorders: UnderlyingAssumptions and Implications for Education andReatment by Mary Lynn Cantrell, Robert P.Cantrell, Thomas G. Valore, James M. Jones, andFrank A. Fecser

Safe Schools: School-Wide Discipline Practices byTimothy J. Lewis and George Sugai

All products are available from Council for ExceptionalChildren, 1110 North Glebe Road, Arlington, VA22201-5704. 1-800-CEC-READ (232-7323).

Copyright © 2002 by Council for Exceptional Children, 1110 North Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22201-5704. Stock No. S5544.

CONTENTS

Preface / iv

Presentations of Keynote Speakers

Behavior in the Schools: Issues Related to Students with Challenging Behaviors / 1Richard Van Acker

Accommodations and Modifications for Students with Challenging Behaviors:Collaborating with General Education / 6

Michael N. Hazelkorn

Strategic Use of School Personnel: Providing Meaningful Behavioral Supports forStudents with Challenging Behaviors and the School Personnel Who Workwith Them / 12

Sister Mary Karen Oudeans

Managing Kids: Direct Answers for Tricky Issues / 19Anthony Moriarty

Developing Effective Behavioral Intervention Plans and Positive BehavioralSupports / 24

Richard Van Acker

Perspectives of Discussion Groups

Proactive Approaches to Working with Challenging Behaviors: Voices from theField / 32

Howard S. Muscott, Anthony Menendez, Darlene M. James, and Jody Jackson

Improving School Climate: Moving from "Your Kids" to "Our Kids" / 38Karen Barnes, Paula Flint, and Bernie Travnaker

Practicing an Ethos of Care: Laying a Foundation for School-Wide ProactiveApproaches / 42

Teresa L. Teaff and Cathy Kea

The Academic/Behavioral Connection: Working Effectively with Students withChallenging Behaviors / 49

Beverley H. Johns

Meeting the Needs of Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders ThroughProactive Approaches / 55

Mary E. Little

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors iii

5

PREFACE

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997) contains a numberof important provisions that relate to the relationship between academic andnonacademic performance. It includes the stipulation that schools now make

use of positive interventions designed to promote more acceptable or appropriate stu-dent behavior. This and other disciplinary provisions pose new challenges but alsoafford new opportunities to better serve students with emotional or behavioral disor-ders. More than a decade of research has shown that redefining the structure, organ-ization, and culture of the school will help to achieve positive outcomes. Obviously,establishing a school-wide, classroom-level, and pupil-specific set of supports requiresan unwavering commitment to making fundamental changes in the way schools oper-ate. It takes a significant amount of time and effort as well. Even so, there is ample evi-dence that schools can reap tremendous dividends, such as a dramatic decline in theincidence of noncompliant, acting-out behavior, suspensions and expulsions, and spe-cial education referrals, and an increase in academic performance.

The Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders (CCBD) recognizes thatschool personnel need to be better prepared to address the challenges posed by anincreasingly diverse student population. For that reason, we sponsored a forum on"School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with ChallengingBehavior." We designed the forum to bring together parents, teachers, administrators,local and state agency representatives, and others who work with students with chal-lenging behavior. The focus was on ways to make systemic changes in schools.Discussion emphasized ways to create a school environment that supports the use ofpositive academic and behavioral interventions at the building and classroom levels.It also underscored the importance of academic accommodations and modificationsand the benefits that accrue when general educators, special educators, and supportpersonnel collaborate on behalf of students with and without disabilities.

In this monograph, we have attempted to capture the highlights of that forumboth the expert presentations and the deliberations of participants from around thecountry. On behalf of the Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders, we trustthat you will find the content useful in seeking ways to address the diverse learningand behavior needs of students with challenging behavior.

Lyndal M. Bullock and Robert A. Gable

Editors

iv Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

BEHAVIOR IN THE SCHOOLS: ISSUES RELATED

TO STUDENTS WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

RICHARD VAN ACKERUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO

Michael sits at his desk dreading the fact that the nextactivity will involve a spelling bee. He knows he can'tspell, and he always feels stupid when he misses thefirst or second word given. He can feel his stomachbeginning to chum. He thinks to himself, "Maybe Ishould ask the teacher if I can go to the nurse's office."He just knows his morning is going to end as a disas-ter. At recess the other kids will tease him by mis-spelling the word he missed and then laugh. Under hisbreath he whispers, "I hate school!"

Schooling represents a unique experience for childrenand youth. Children are not invited to attend school;they are compelled to do so. Thus, the public schoolrepresents one of the few social contexts in which par-ticipation is mandated (prison is another example).Once in school, children must learn to interact withothers who are often very different from themselves(e.g., cultural, ethnic, linguistic diversity). They mustshare adult attention, space, and materials with theirpeers. These same peers provide or withhold socialacceptance and support.

The educational process requires that children pub-licly perform a variety of tasks and skills that may bebeyond the capability of an increasing number of them.Nevertheless, the educational process provides fewopportunities for students to decline teacher requestsfor active participation. For example, most teacherswould not provide Michael (in the example above) anopportunity to sit out of the spelling bee because of hislack of skill or confidence; nor would many teachersintroduce strategic modifications in the curriculum byadjusting the difficulty of the words presented basedupon his skill level. In most classrooms, Michael wouldbe compelled and sometimes coerced into making aneffort until such time as he failed and was then allowedto sit down.

What options are available to students who feeluncomfortable with or are unable to perform the aca-

demic tasks presented to them? As educators, most ofus can provide an extensive list of behaviors that stu-dents employ to escape or avoid assigned tasks:Noncompliance, active resistance, verbal or physicaldisruptions, leaving the instructional area, passive-aggressive behavior, and withdrawal are but a fewoptions. Often the display of noncompliant or disrup-tive behavior results in the student's being sent fromthe classroom to another location (e.g., time-out area,the principal's office). In effect, the student is allowedto escape the task, which provides negative reinforce-ment. At the same time, avoiding the continued stressassociated with working with a disruptive student neg-atively reinforces the teacher through the removal ofthe annoying student. Over time, many teachers learnto avoid making demands of students who display chal-lenging and disruptive behaviors. In essence, theseteachers make a covert, although often unconsciousagreement with the student: I won't bother you if youdon't bother me" (i.e., disrupt my class). This phenom-enon has been termed the curriculum of noninstruc-tion (Gunter, Denny, Jack, Shores, & Nelson, 1993;Shores, Gunter, & Jack, 1993).

While efforts to avoid challenging behaviors mayallow teachers to get through the day with fewer prob-lems, they do little to address student or teacher learn-ing. In the following discussion, we will explore studentbehavior and identify some key concepts that must beaddressed when attempting to deal effectively withchallenging student behaviors.

Understanding the Complexityof Human Behavior

Addressing the educational needs of students who dis-play challenging behaviors is one of the greatest con-cerns confronting educators today. Unfortunately,many educators have not been appropriately preparedto understand the complex nature of behavior. Mostteachers and administrators seek a uniform code of

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 1

conduct that provides a given consequence for a givenrule violation. For example, when a student uses pro-fanity, the teacher will verbally reprimand the studentand deliver a 5-minute time out. However, dealingeffectively with challenging behavior sometimesrequires more than simply identifying the behavior andthen applying a standard intervention.

The same surface behavior may have very differentetiologies. Behavior can result from a student's wish tomeet a particular desire or need. The student may beusing profanity to gain adult attention (reprimand) orto escape a particular situation (time out).1 Behaviorcan also be a symptom of a particular disability or cog-nitive deficit. For example, the student's profanity mayrepresent coprolalia, a tic behavior associated withTourette syndrome (Robertson & Baron-Cohen, 1998).Often, student behavior simply reflects prior learningor habits that have been developed over time (e.g., pro-fanity is modeled and permitted in the student's homeand community). The nature of the interventionrequired may be quite different in each of these situa-tions. For instance, a teacher's verbal reprimand wouldlikely increase the undesired behavior of a child seek-ing attention, while time out would allow escape oravoidance. Coprolalia in Tourette syndrome can bedecreased, but treatment typically calls for reinforce-ment of lower rates of the response rather than punish-ing a student for the disability.

A student's culture also can impact behavior signifi-cantly. For example, there are cultural differences inwhat is expected in various social situations. As a result,social interactions that involve persons from diversecultures can increase the probability of misinterpreta-tion of behaviors and intentions. Kochman (1981) dis-cussed differences in conversational eye contactbetween Anglo Americans and African Americans.Anglo Americans typically maintain eye contact whenlistening and frequently break eye contact when speak-ing. The pattern is just the opposite for AfricanAmericans. These differences in social expectationscould lead to serious problems in many situations.

For example, an Anglo-American teacher confrontstwo students, one African American the other AngloAmerican, both of whom were involved in a seriousschool rule violation. During the time the teacher iscorrecting the students, the Anglo American is lookingdirectly at the teacher, while the African American fre-quently looks away. When asked to state his side of thesituation, the Anglo-American student breaks eye con-tact when speaking, as expected, whereas the African-American student maintains constant eye contact withthe teacher. The teacher may misinterpret the African-American student's behavior as unconcerned when lis-tening and disrespectful or even aggressive whenspeaking ("He sat there and glared at me as he spoken.

Based on this misinterpretation, the teacher mightimpose on the two boys very different consequences forthe same offense. The differential treatment of thesetwo students might foster feelings of racial prejudicethat further alienate the African-American student.

Knowledge of the AppropriateBehavior: Necessary But NotSufficientMany educators fail to consider fully the process oflearning when attempting to address challenging stu-dent behaviors. The vast majority of our behavior is notthe result of deliberate, planned, and discrete cognitiveprocesses; rather, it is the enactment of learned schemathat we employ in given situations. That is, throughlearning, much of our behavior takes on a level of auto-maticity that allows us to focus on other elements inthe environment. Recall when you first learned to writeyour name in cursive. The formation of the lettersrequired considerable concentration and effort. Do youhave to think about signing your name today? Thisaction now takes little effort or forethought; writingyour signature has become essentially an automaticresponse. Much of our behavior is governed in thismanner. The neural pathways that govern often-repeat-ed behaviors become structurally supported in such away that engaging in the behavior requires littlethought or effort.

Many of the undesired behaviors displayed by stu-dents are similarly automatic in nature. Despite the factthat they are involved in a social problem-solving cur-riculum, many students will engage in undesiredbehavior when confronted by a peer (e.g., aggression).A student with a history of aggression who is pushed bya classmate on the playground, for example, is unlikelyto step aside and accept that a social problem exists andthen identify possible problem-solving alternatives(e.g., ignoring the behavior of being pushed, indicatingthat he does not like to be pushed, seeking the assis-tance of an adult). Typically, the student has a learned,automatic solution: If someone pushes you, push himor her backharder.

Now, if a teacher were to observe the confrontationand ask whether there was any other way the problemcould have been addressed, the student would likely beable to provide a number of prosocial alternatives. Formany teachers, this response would suggest that thestudent knew what should have been done but chose toengage in the undesired behavior. Accordingly, it wouldbe reasonable to punish the student because he willful-ly misbehaved. This is not always the case; the auto-matic response and the newly learned social cognitiveproblem-solving skills are controlled by very different

2 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

structures in the brain, and retrieval is determined dif-ferentially (Carter, 1998). As anyone who has everattempted to stop smoking or lose weight can attest,knowledge is not behavior. If it were, no one wouldsmoke or be overweight. It follows that the studentmust be taught the desired behavior and be given theopportunity to successfully practice the new skill withappropriate feedback until this new' behavior becomesan automatic response.

A student who has injured his preferred hand willfind it difficult to sign his name with his nonpreferredhand despite the fact that he knows how to write hisname, but with repeated practice he can learn to writeand manipulate objects with his nonpreferred hand.Likewise, a student who engages in a learned undesiredbehavior can learn a more acceptable alternative behav-ior with proper instruction and appropriate practice. Inthat this process takes time, educators must be aspatient and purposeful when teaching students desiredbehavior as when teaching them academic skills.

Prevention of Behavior ProblemsWe know far more about how to promote student aca-demic success and prevent problems from occurringthan about how to have a positive impact on problembehavior once displayed. Educational research reflects astrong and significant correlation between academicproblems and behavior problems; they essentially gohand in hand. Improving academic success has repeat-edly had a positive impact on student behavior. Schoolsuccess depends upon the effective interaction of thefollowing variables:

Student characteristics. Students enter the schoolsetting with a variety of student-based characteris-tics (e.g., cultural beliefs, attitudes, abilities).

Teacher behaviorlinstructional practices. Teachersdemonstrate a variety of personal and professionalcharacteristics (e.g., cultural beliefs, instructionalskills, interpersonal skills) that impact studentbehavior.

Curriculum. If the curriculum is too difficult, thestudent may fail to master critical skills; if it is tooeasy, the student becomes bored.

When there is a mismatch between two or more ofthese variables, there is an increased risk for studentfailure. Thus, any attempt to address student behaviorshould include some exploration of other variablessuch as teacher behavior, the nature of the instruction-al task, and even peer behavior. Attempts to change stu-dent behavior without efforts to alter the social context

in ways that will support the desired behavior changeare likely doomed to failure (Tolan & Guerra, 1994).

Punitive Approaches toBehavior Change

Most school-based efforts to address challenging stu-dent behaviors rely heavily upon punishment and theapplication of punitive consequences for undesiredbehaviors (Sugai, Kame'enui, & Colvin, 1993). Whilethese strategies may work for a large number of stu-dents, for others the use of punishment simply exacer-bates the problem. The most challenging students inthe school are unlikely to be punished into desiredbehavior. Efforts to change these students' behaviorwill require interventions that "trap" them into aca-demic and social success while making their undesiredbehaviors less effective in meeting their needs. Theimplementation of this "trap" requires:

A wide opening to attract the individual. Thisinvolves the teacher's providing the student with fre-quent opportunities to respond academically. Theresponse opportunities should be designed to maxi-mize the student's success. That is, given the stu-dent's ability, he or she should have an 85% orgreater chance at providing a correct response.

"Bait." The lesson should address and promote thestudent's ability to meet needs similar to those metby the undesired behavior (e.g., attention, power andcontrol, peer affiliation). For example, if a studentengages in disruptive behavior to gain peer accept-ance, the lesson could be designed to provide peerinteraction and attention. If power and control is anissue for the student, the lesson can provide choiceand leadership opportunities.

A "spring" or "catch." A trap requires something tohold the individual within it. The catch for most stu-dents will involve success, competence, and animproved relationship with a caring adult.

Few students who are actively provided with opportuni-ties to be academically competent and who experienceacademic success engage in disruptive behavior.

Teachers should take the time to recognize the capa-bilities and limitations of their students. Lesson plansshould be reviewed prior to implementation to ensurethat accommodations have been made that will provideample opportunity for all students to meet with aca-demic success. Students who are at an increased levelof risk for academic failure or who pose the greatestrisk for the display of challenging behaviors should beengaged proactively. That is, teachers should makeevery effort to engage these students in positive inter-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 3

actions at the start of each class. Successful teachersroutinely greet these students socially as they enter theclassroom. They provide them with opportunities torespond early in the activity and involve them through-out the lesson. Opportunities to respond should bedelivered strategically (specifically selected with thetarget student's ability in mind) to ensure an 85% to90% chance of correct responding. Too often the firstinteraction a teacher has with these at-risk students isa negative one. These negative interactions tend topush the student away rather than draw them into thelesson.

Addressing Undesired BehaviorsDespite proactive, positive strategies, some studentswill display problem behaviors. Addressing these unde-sired behaviors as errors in social learning that requireinstructional remediation will typically surpass tradi-tional disciplinary approaches based solely on punish-ment. All too often, educators respond to problembehaviors in ways they would never think of using whenaddressing academic errors:

Ignoring errors. When attempting to teach a givenconcept or skill, teachers seldom ignore errors in thedisplay of that concept or skill. For example, if teach-ing the capitals of the 50 United States, a teacherwould not ignore a student's response that identifiedChicago as the capital of Illinois.

Warnings as a consequence. Likewise, an effectiveteacher does not provide a warning as a conse-quence2 for an error. "Chicago is not the capital ofIllinois. I won't mark it wrong this time, but if youmake this error again I will have to mark it wrong."

Rapid escalation of a consequence. One of the mosttroubling practices often applied to undesired behav-ior involves rapid escalation in the nature of the con-sequence. Try to imagine a teacher addressing astudent's academic error this way: "Michael, Chicagois not the capital of Illinois. I am going to have tomark this wrong. Moreover, if you make this erroragain, I'm going to take off 2 points. If you repeat theerror a third time, I will remove 10 points, and if youmake the error after that I will have to remove youfrom social studies!"

If these approaches are so effective at altering behavior,why do we not employ them to address academicerrors? We do not employ these strategies because theyare neither appropriate nor particularly effectivenorare they appropriate for addressing social behavior.

When possible, the consequences imposed by schoolpersonnel in response to student undesired behaviors

4 Council for Children with

should serve to teach appropriate alternative behaviorsand/or allow students to practice these new alternativebehaviors. An increasing number of schools have begunto adopt instructional or pedagogical consequences forundesired behaviors. These consequences involve thestudent in a learning task or the active display of analternative behavior as the direct consequence of a ruleviolation. For example, instead of a 3-day suspensionfor fighting, a student might more appropriately berequired to participate in an intensive 3-day anger man-agement program. Schools are working with their com-munities (e.g., mental health providers, police) todevelop and deliver these types of programs. In somestates, the money saved by not suspending the students(i.e., through loss of Average Daily Attendance funds)helps to defray the cost of these alternative programs.

Instructional or pedagogical consequences providethree very important benefits related to school disci-pline policies:

1. They employ sound instructional strategies thathave been empirically validated to increase knowl-edge and skills.

2. They call upon the pedagogical knowledge of learn-ing that teachers already have (related to academics)and apply it to learning. Thus, teachers have the baseknowledge.

3. They serve to educate and support alternativedesired behaviors, not just punish undesired behav-iors. Thus, they are much more appropriate whenaddressing behavior problems that might involveculture- or disability-related etiologies. School per-sonnel are not punishing the child for the behaviorper se; rather, they are providing an opportunity forthe student to learn the appropriate desired school-based behavior.

Conclusion

By all accounts, problem behavior is a fact of life in ourschools. There is increasing recognition that educationpersonnel must come to understand the nature of chal-lenging behavior. We must accept that student behavioris often complex and multiply determined; no singlevariable (e.g., parenting) explains or even determinesthe occurrence of a particular behavior. For that rea-son, our efforts to respond to problem behaviors willvary depending on a number of different factors (e.g.,student strengths and weaknesses, task demands, peersupports, outside influences). There is no simple "cook-book" response that is likely to be effective. In the end,we must learn to apply to the social/behavioral learningerrors of students the same thinking that goes into

Behavioral Disorders Monograph

_I

seeking to understand and then develop a plan to reme-diate their academic learning errors.

References

Carter, R. (1998). Mapping the mind. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.

Gable, R. A., Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Jr., Howell, K., &Hoffman, C. (1998). Addressing student problem behavior.Part II: Conducting a functional assessment. Washington DC:Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice.

Gunter, P., Denny, R., Jack, S., Shores, R., & Nelson, M. (1993).Aversive stimuli in academic interactions between studentswith emotional disturbance and their teachers. BehavioralDisorders, 18, 265-274.

Kochman, T. (1981). Black and white styles in conflict. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Neel, R. S., & Cessna, K. K. (1993). Behavioral intent:Instructional content for students with behavioral disorders.In K. K. Cessna (Ed.), Instructionally differentiated program-ming: A needs-based approach for students with behavior dis-orders (pp. 31-39). Denver: Department of Education.

Robertson, M. M., & Baron-Cohen, S. (1998). Tourette syndrome:The facts. New York: Oxford University Press.

Shores, R., Gunter, P., & Jack, S. (1993). Classroom managementstrategies: Are they setting events for coercion? BehavioralDisorders, 18, 92-102.

Sugai, G., Kame'enui, E., & Colvin, G. (1993). Project PREPARE:Promoting responsible, empirical and proactive alternativesin regular education for students with behavior disorders.Unpublished manuscript, College of Education, University ofOregon, Eugene.

Tolan, P. H., & Guerra, N. (1994). What works in reducing ado-lescent violence: An empirical review of the field. Boulder, CO:Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.

Endnotes

1. Learned behaviors often meet specific needs or desires of theindividual, such as the needs for attention, power, or control;to escape or avoid an undesired activity; to attain peer affilia-tion; tangible rewards; and to seek justice or revenge (Neel &Cessna, 1993). A functional assessment of behavior is a proce-dure that can be employed to help identify the function a spe-cific target behavior serves for a student and to identifycontext variables that serve to occasion or maintain thebehavior (Gable, Quinn, Rutherford, Howell, & Hoffman,1998).

2. If you feel the student requires a warning to cue appropriatebehavior, provide the warning prior to the display of unde-sired behavior (e.g., "Michael, we are going to walk to the rest-room. Remember we do not talk in the hallway").

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 5

ACCOMMODATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS FOR

STUDENTS WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS:

COLLABORATING WITH GENERAL EDUCATION

MICHAEL N. HAZELKORNSCHOOL DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DELLS, WISCONSIN DELLS, WI

InclusionToday, there is a substantial amount of attention direct-ed toward giving all students with disabilities, mild tosevere, the opportunity to belong and participate withtheir general education peers. For many of these stu-dents, this movement affords academic and nonacade-mic opportunities not otherwise available. Yetintegrating students with emotional or behavioral dis-orders (E/BD) into general education settings remainsone of the greatest challenges to our profession. Bothresearch and experience demonstrate that these stu-dents are the most difficult to include in general edu-cation. They are the first students asked to leave theclassroom and the last students invited to return(Cheney & Muscott, 1996).

The inclusion of students with disabilities in gener-al education has gone through many stages, with manyterms being used to describe classroom placement.During the mid 1980s, discussion focused on mergingspecial education and general education (Will, 1986).This movement became known as the regular educa-tion initiative (REI). In the 1990s, the concept of inte-grating students with disabilities became known asinclusion or the full inclusion movement. Full inclu-sion is a concept that promotes the elimination of spe-cial education classrooms. The underlying principle isthat all children can be taught in general educationclassrooms if they are provided appropriate supportsand services. Those who advocate for inclusion believethat students with disabilities should be integrated intogeneral education classrooms and should be full mem-bers of those classrooms, whether or not they meet thetraditional curricular standards.

If inclusion is about "educational access, equity, andquality for all students" (Giangreco, Cloninger, &Iverson, 1998, p. 8), then why is it so controversial,especially for students with E/BD? One reason is thatstudents with E/BD pose major challenges to the cur-rent inclusion movement's objectivesin particular,

6 Council for Children with

the ability of the general education environment to ade-quately teach and shape prosocial behavior (Lewis,Chard, & Scott, 1994). Across time, inclusion hasmoved from "mainstreaming" students with disabilitieswithout specially designed instruction after they werejudged capable of keeping up to placing students intogeneral education classrooms even if they are not readyto perform successfully. We have moved from a "fullcontinuum of services, the blueprint for special educa-tion during the last thirty years . . .[to] a philosophy offull inclusion" (Cheney & Muscott, 1996, p. 109).Accordingly, students with E/BD are being included ingeneral education classrooms despite the lack ofresearch to support such placements (Gibb, Allred,Ingram, Young, & Egan, 1999; Schneider & Leroux,1994; Stout, 1996) and, in some cases, without the sup-port of their parents (Palmer, Fuller, Arora, & Nelson,2001). Many educators have chosen to define inclusionas a "point on the continuum of educational services,"rather than a "philosophical position, attitude, andvalue statement" (Guetzloe, 1999, p. 93). Others assertthat inclusion should be something we believe, notsomething we do; I fully support that view.

Basic Premises

We know that most attempts to integrate students withE/BD into general education classrooms have not beensuccessful. One reason is that too few teachers have theability to respond to deviant problems and, in mostcases, respond in ways that exacerbate the problem(e.g., Heflin & Bullock, 1999; Long & Kelly, 1994). AsSugai and Homer (1994) have pointed out, if this is tochange, we need administrators, teachers, and supportstaff who have the knowledge, skills, and experience towork effectively with students with challenging behav-iors. Teachers must be more in control of their classesso that they will have more time for instruction before

Behavioral Disorders Monograph

2

they are likely to accept troubled students into theirclassrooms (Long, 1994).

If students with E/BD are to be successfully includedin general education classrooms, then the premisesupon which integration is based must be clear. The firstpremise is that inclusion was not designed to take serv-ices from students without disabilities in general edu-cation settings. A second premise is that all studentscan benefit from individualized expectations. A thirdpremise is that inclusion was based on the understand-ing that it is a team process, one that includes frequentinteraction between general and special educators andschool personnel working as teammates and partners(Cheney & Muscott, 1996).

The 1997 Amendments to the Individuals withDisabilities Education Act (PL 105-17) stipulated thatthere should be high expectations for students with dis-abilities and they should be involved in and be able tomake progress toward goals relative to the general edu-cation curriculum. Yet inclusion should not result in adecline in direct special education services in segregat-ed settings or increased academic and nonacademicprogramming by general educators (Sugai & Horner,1994). For the most part, the courts have upheld deci-sions for inclusive placements in the student's homeschool (Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education, ElPaso [1989]; Greer v. Rome City School District [1991];Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough ofClementon School District [1993]; Sacramento CityUnified School District v. Rachel H. [19941). Otherdecisions have supported exclusion (e.g., Chris D. v.Montgomery County Board of Education [1990]; ClydeK and Sheila K v. Puyallup School District [1994];Geiss v. Parsippany-Roy Hills Board of Education[1985]). In all, both federal legislation and judicial deci-sions offer support to the inclusion movement; howev-er, the question remains: Are current educationalpractices conducive to including students with E/BD?

Barriers to InclusionIf we are to integrate students with E/BD in generaleducation classrooms, we must recognize that manycurrent practices prevent successful inclusion. Somereform efforts stem from the fact that many see adecline in the quality of public schools that is damagingthe future of our children. Others believe that collegesare spending too much time providing remedial educa-tion rather than higher education. In addition, there isthe general sense that workers lack basic skills neces-sary to be productive in the workplace. As a result,there is a national movement for higher academic stan-dards and greater educational accountability in schools.

Another possible barrier relates to teacher prepara-tion. Most general education teachers do not possess

the knowledge, expertise, and experience to use inter-vention techniques (e.g., modeling, self-control, socialskills instruction) shown to be effective with studentswith E/BD (Shapiro, Miller, Sawka, Gardill, & Handler,1999). In addition, the school-age population is morediverse than in the past. Schools are serving studentswho have special education needs; have limited Englishproficiency; are hungry, abused, unsupervised, suicidal,pregnant, violent, at risk, or bisexual; or are on drugs.

Not surprisingly, many believe that schools arespending too much time keeping basic order in theclassroom, which undermines the real business ofschoolingnamely, for teachers to teach and studentsto learn. As a response to what is perceived as a lack ofdiscipline, schools have moved to a policy of "zero tol-erance." Viewed together, these movements pose seri-ous challenges to educators who work with studentswith serious behavior problems (Sugai & Horner,1994).

Conditions for InclusionIf students with E/BD are to be successful in generaleducation environments, then the conditions must beconducive to their success. If students do not feel likethey belong, they will not want to learn. If they do feellike they belong, they are more likely to work to be suc-cessful (Ellis, Hart, & Small-McGinley, 1998). Even so,inclusion transcends the classroom. School administra-tors play a critical role in creating and promoting a cli-mate that is supportive of inclusion. They provide thevision. They initiate the ideas and provide the support.They must be proactive, visible, and committed toresponding positively to students with diverse learningand behavioral needs. In an era of high-stakes testingand increased educational accountability, that is nosimple undertaking.

Teachers are the other part of the equation neededfor successful inclusion. First and foremost, generaleducation teachers must agree to participate in thatprocess. They must foster a climate of nurturance andrespect. A teacher who demonstrates respect for stu-dents is likely to gain much more cooperation andgoodwill from the students. Indeed, students haveasserted that if they didn't feel respected by the teacher,they wouldn't do anything in class (Ellis et al., 1998).

Teachers must know how to establish clear studentexpectations. In many cases, students need to be taughtthose expectations systematically and situationally.Teachers must have a solid grasp of the basic principlesof classroom management and how to avoid powerstruggles with their students. Given all that we knowabout problems inside and outside the classroom,teachers must know how and be willing to support stu-dents in conflict. Lower caseloads, adequate resources,

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 7

1 3 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

and ongoing staff development are critical to accom-plishing these goals.

Teacher Skills

A few years ago, Johnson (1999) singled out a numberof skills that teachers need if students are to be inte-grated successfully in inclusive environments. Forexample, teachers need to be able to use multilevelinstructioninstruction in which the lesson containsvarying expectations and the content is aligned with thestudents' skill levels. Teachers must be able to use activ-ity-based and experiential learning in which studentsengage in discovery, movement, interaction with theenvironment, and manipulation of materials. Studentswho are actively engaged in instruction aligned withtheir interests and abilities learn and behave better.

Student-directed learning is another technique forincreasing motivation, interest, and self-esteem. Instudent-directed learning, students express their inter-ests and help to make decisions about various aspects ofthe content of the curriculum. Furthermore, individ-ual, small-group, or class-wide peer tutoring has beensuccessful in inclusive classrooms as students have anopportunity to develop patience, creativity, empathy,and perseverance along with specific academic skills.

Another technique that encourages students to worktogether is cooperative learning. For many teachers,cooperative learning has become a core strategy forsuccessful group-individual instruction. Cooperativelearning affords teachers a way to capitalize on studentstrengths academically and behaviorally. The jigsawstrategy, in which each student becomes an expert insome area and teaches the others, and the group proj-ect strategy, in which students combine their knowl-edge to create a project or assignment, are but twoexamples of how teachers can accommodate a hetero-geneous class.

Considerations for ParticipationIf the school-wide and classroom conditions are rightand the teachers have the necessary skills and support,then many students can be placed in inclusive environ-ments. As always, placement decisions should be indi-vidualized and needs based. Decisions regarding thecurriculum and supports should be group-individual-ized and needs based as well. Sufficient supports mustbe in place to meet the students' diverse learning andbehavioral needs. Supports should be in place beforestudent placement occurs. Finally, the placementshould not be viewed as an educational objective, but asa means to reaching specific educational ends (Lewis etal., 1994).

8 Council for Children with

AccommodationsAccommodations and modifications relate to services,teaching strategies, and changes or modifications inlearning environments to enable students to performsuccessfully. Many of the accommodations discussedhere are commonly found in the classroom. However,the mere fact that a modification is typical does notmean it is effective. Finding effective accommodationsis more than finding the right list. The "accommoda-tions are most effective when general and special edu-cation teachers design them as an integrated part of thecurriculum" ("Effective Accommodations," 1997, p. 1).This involves advance planning, routine assessment ofstudent strengths, careful consideration of resources,and planning time ("Effective Accommodations,"1997). The key to making student accommodations isto select from among a range of options one or morethat, within a reasonable amount of time and with areasonable amount of effort, are likely to produce themost gains for the largest number of students("Effective Accommodations," 1997).

Lesson Presentation

Lessons need to be structured so that students areactively engaged and motivated to learn. The contentand anticipated outcomes of the lesson should dictatethe teaching approach. Teachers will be most effectiveif they use a multisensory approach to instruction. Avariety of activities (e.g., large-group instruction, smallcooperative group work, individual assignments, learn-ing centers, physical movement, discussion) will helpto engage students. Other techniques include reviewingprevious lessons; using advance organizers; settingclear learning and behavioral expectations; simplifyingdirections; providing written outlines; writing keypoints on the board, overhead, or Power Point; empha-sizing critical information; presenting demonstrationsor visual aids; using finished products as permanentmodels; taping lectures for replay; and using manipula-tives for instruction.

Materials

The use of different or modified instructional materialsmay help students to succeed in general educationclassrooms. For example, taped texts can help studentswho have difficulty reading. Color-coded texts or mate-rials or highlighted (or underlined) textual materialwill enable students to focus on what they need toknow. Study guides also are an excellent way to helpstudents focus on relevant aspects of instruction.Finally, note-taking assistance (e.g., printed copies,cloze copy forms) allows the students to focus on thelesson rather than the task of writing notes.

Behavioral Disorders Monograph

14

Motivation

There is ample empirical evidence that students whoare motivated by the teacher or the curriculum are lessapt to act out in class. Even so, we recognize that it isessential to develop positive relationships with studentsbased on mutual respect so that students can becomeinvested in the teaching/learning process. Teachers canpromote this by allowing students some decision inwhat they will learn. Another way to increase students'motivation is to concentrate on their strengths andencourage them to actively participate by asking ques-tions or assigning activities that ensure success. It isimportant to reinforce and reward appropriate partici-pation. Successful teachers are aware of potentiallyfrustrating situations and ignore inappropriate behav-ior as much as possible. In sum, they use effective, rel-evant, motivating instruction.

Level of Support

Increasing the amount of personal assistance for stu-dents with E/BD will increase their chances of successin the general education classroom. This can be accom-plished in various ways, including team teaching andthe strategic use of competent classmates. One way toincrease personal assistance is to seat the student nearsomeone who will be helpful and understanding or toassign the student a partner. Peers can be taught tomonitor and/or redirect inappropriate behavior. Theteacher can stand near the student when giving direc-tions or presenting a lesson. If necessary, paraprofes-sional can be assigned to assist the student.

Setting/Room Arrangements

The daily routine and schedule, as well as class rulesand expectations, should be directly taught to all stu-dents and be posted in a prominent place in the class-room. Although the schedule should be consistent, itshould be changed to accommodate students if it is notworking. Distractions should be reduced or minimizedas much as possible. Preferential seating can be givento selected students (e.g., proximity to adults, compe-tent peers, removal from distractions and potentiallydangerous areas). A place for quiet time would be help-ful for many students. As Guetzloe (1999) stated, "therewill always be a need for a 'safe place' within the school"(P. 5).

Assignments

Assignments can be given in small, distinct steps.Students can be allowed to copy from a paper or book.The difficulty level of the assignment can be adjusted invarious ways: Adapting the number of items needed forcompletion can shorten the assignment. Written direc-tions can be read to students. Oral cues and prompts

can be provided. Finally, students can each be given anassignment notebook and daily or weekly checklists orgraphs on which to record completed work.

Homework

Different techniques are available to increase studenthomework completion. Teachers can accept verbalresponses, rather than written responses. Other stu-dents can be allowed to tape their responses or dictatethem to peers. Teachers can reduce the number ofquestions or problems. Peer tutoring or extra help ses-sions can be offered. In addition, teachers can providean example of a completed question at the top of eachhomework assignment for students to refer to as theycomplete their homework. At the end of class, teachersshould restate the assignment to be completed thatevening, have one or more students repeat the mainpoints of the assignment, and answer student questionsabout their responsibilities.

Alternatives to Testing and Grading

Rather than giving the typical pencil/paper tests, teach-ers can accommodate the needs of students by assess-ing skills in different ways. For instance, students cangive oral reports, poster presentations, or classroomdemonstrations as evidence of content mastery.Students also can demonstrate proficiency by audiotaping the answers. When testing, teachers should relyon evaluation procedures that help the student to buildskills over time and choose procedures that are mostauthentic and relevant to the student's current andfuture needs.

Instead of the traditional letter grades, a pass/failsystem with "honor," "high pass," and "pass" can beused. Individualized education programs or contractgrading are acceptable alternatives. Portfolio sum-maries and work samples with rubrics have been usedsuccessfully in inclusive classrooms.

Organization

Students who are organized stand a better chance ofsucceeding in general education classrooms. As I men-tioned previously, students should be directly taughtand routinely supported (and reinforced) to use assign-ment sheets, notebooks, or monthly calendars. Manyteachers demonstrate ways for students to organizetheir notebooks or provide folders to help them organ-ize their work. Finally, teachers help students set time-lines for completion of long assignments and/or askstudents to complete smaller portions of the assign-ment.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 9

1 5

Support PersonnelThe inclusion of students with E/BD is unlikely to suc-ceed if the necessary support is not provided to bothstudents and teachers. Consultative support is anessential element for inclusion (Gibb et al., 1999;Shapiro et al., 1994), as are well-trained teachers (Lewiset al., 1994). Accordingly the role of special educationteachers (and/or paraprofessionals) needs to be clearlyunderstood by all participants.

LeadershipBuilding-level administrative leadership that can shapethe attitudes of teachers and parents is critical to suc-cessful inclusion (Lewis et al., 1994). The leadershipmust be visionary as well as practical in nature. Finally,administrators must ensure that technical assistanceand professional development are available to facilitatethe inclusion process.

CurriculumStudents with E/BD need appropriate instruction in acurriculum that is not substantially less than thatreceived by students without E/BD. Edgar (1987)described the problem relating to the curriculum as adilemma with "two equally appalling alternatives, inte-grated mainstreaming in a nonfunctional curriculumwhich results in horrendous outcomes (few jobs, highdropout rate) or separate, segregated programs for analready devalued group, a repugnant thought in ourdemocratic society" (p. 560). If students with E/BD areto succeed in school and beyond, they need social skillsinstruction (Lewis et al., 1999) and vocational educa-tion that is aligned with the demands of specific jobs(Heflin & Bullock, 1999). Students who have E/BD needan individually tailored program that uses the continu-um of service options (Heflin & Bullock, 1999).

ConclusionIs inclusion best for all students with challengingbehaviors? Will it be enough to restructure the generaleducation classroom? Will it be enough to make rea-sonable accommodations? The answers to these ques-tions lie ahead. Including students with E/BD ingeneral education classrooms is more than just makingreasonable accommodations. Inclusion is a powerfuleducational philosophy. If inclusion is to work, the cul-ture of most schools (i.e., the attitudes, the beliefs, thevalues, and the traditions) must change dramatically.Educators must be valued, supported, intellectually

stimulated, and celebrated. Most would agree that wehave a long way to go.

ReferencesCheney, D., & Muscott, H. S. (1996). Preventing school failure for

students with emotional and behavioral disabilities throughresponsible inclusion. Preventing School Failure, 40,109-116.

Chris D. v. Montgomery County Board of Education, 753 F. Supp.922 (M.C. Ala. 1990).

Clyde K. and Sheila K. v. Puyallup School District, 35 F.3d 1396(9th Cir. 1994).

Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education, 874 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir.1989).

Edgar, E. B. (1987). Secondary programs in special education: Aremany of them justifiable? Exceptional Children, 53, 555-561.

Effective accommodations for students with exceptionalities:Steps to making effective accommodations. (1997,September). CEC Today, 4(3), 1,9,15.

Ellis, J., Hart, S., & Small-McGinley, J. (1998). The perspectivesof "difficult" students on belonging and inclusion in the class-room. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 7,142-146.

Geiss v. Parsippany-Troy Hills Board of Education, 774 F.2d 575(3rd Cir. 1985).

Giangreco, M. R., Cloninger, C. J., Iverson, V. S. (1998). Choosingoutcomes and accommodations for children: A guide to edu-cational planning for students with disabilities (2nd ed.).Baltimore: Brookes.

Gibb, S. A., Allred, K., Ingram, C. F., Young, J. R., & Egan, W. M.(1999). Lessons learned from the inclusion of students withemotional and behavioral disorders in one junior high school.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 122-136.

Greer v. Rome City School District, 950 F.2d 688 (11th Cir. 1991).Guetzloe, E. (1999). Inclusion: The broken promise. Preventing

School Failure, 43(3), 21-24.Heflin, L. J., & Bullock, L. M. (1999). Inclusion of students with

emotional/behavioral disorders: A survey of teachers in gener-al and special education. Preventing School Failure, 43(3),

66-71.Johnson, G. M. (1999). Inclusive education: Fundamental

instructional strategies and considerations. PreventingSchool Failure, 43(2), 72-78.

Lewis, T. J., Chard, D., & Scott, T. M. (1994). Full inclusion andthe education of children and youth with emotional andbehavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 19, 277-293.

Long, N. J. (1994). Inclusion: Formula for failure? Journal ofEmotional and Behavioral Problems, 3(3), 19-23.

Long, N. J., & Kelly, E. F. (1994). The double struggle: "The but-ler did it." Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Problems,3(3), 49-55.

Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon SchoolDistrict, 995 F.2d 1204 (3rd Cir. 1993).

Palmer, D. S., Fuller, K., Arora, T., & Nelson, M. (2001). Takingsides: Parent views on inclusion for their children with severedisabilities. Exceptional Children, 67, 467-484.

Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H., 14 F.3d1398 (9th Cir. 1994).

Schneider, B. H., & Leroux, J. (1994). Educational environmentsfor the pupil with behavioral disorders: A "best evidence" syn-thesis. Behavioral Disorders, 19, 192-204.

Shapiro, E. S., Miller, D. N., Sawka, K., Gardill, M. C., & Handler,M. W. (1999). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,7(2), 83-93,127.

10 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

16

Stout, K. S. (1996). Special education inclusion. In EducationIssues Series [On-line]. Available: www.weac.org/resource/june96/speced.htm

Sugai, G. St Homer, R. (1994). Including students with severebehavior problems in general education settings:

Assumptions, challenges, and solutions (The OregonConference Monograph, Vol. 6). Eugene: University ofOregon, College of Education.

Will, M. C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: Ashared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52, 411-415.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 11

STRATEGIC USE OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL:

PROVIDING MEANINGFUL BEHAVIORAL

SUPPORTS FOR STUDENTS WITH

CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS AND THE SCHOOL

PERSONNEL WHO WORK WITH THEM

SISTER MARY KAREN OUDEANSSILVER LAKE COLLEGE, MANITOWOC, WI

Systems Approaches forBehavioral SupportToday we are witnessing the emergence of two systemsapproaches for working with students with emotionalor behavioral disorders (E/BD). These approaches are(a) positive behavior intervention supports (PBIS) and(b) school-based wraparound planning. Both representa fundamental change in the way we view behaviorproblems in the context of the total school milieu. Achange in perspective also means changes in how fac-ulty, staff, and administrators respond to students withE/B D.

Positive Behavior Intervention Supports

The PBIS approach is a proactive systems approach forpreventing and responding to classroom and schooldiscipline problems. This approach includes both aschool-wide and an individual behavior support focus(Lewis Si Sugai, 1999). Emphasis is on developing andmaintaining safe learning environments in whichteachers can teach and students can learn. According toTodd, Homer, Sugai, and Sprague (1999), effectivebehavior support in the schools must address differentpatterns of behavior that occur in classroom and non-classroom settings. Effective supports are not a patch-work of reactive behavior management plans developedincident by incident or student by student; rather, PBISis an integrated, proactive approach to addressing thediverse learning and behavioral needs of all students.

Over nearly 15 years, effective behavior supportshave been developed and refined to help school person-nel build their capacity to successfully educate all stu-dentsincluding students with challenging behaviors.

This approach is being implemented and evaluated in agrowing number of states, including Oregon, Hawaii,Illinois, Kansas, and Missouri, as well as the province ofBritish Columbia (e.g., Lewis Si Sugai, 1999; Nakasato,2000; Sadler, 2000).

School-Wide Behavior Support. Efforts to build school-wide behavior support are gaining momentum, asschools seek to respond to the 1998 White House man-date to make our schools violence-free environments(Dwyer, Osher, di Warger, 1998). The primary purposeof a school-wide discipline model is to provide guidanceand support to students in the general school milieu inboth classroom and nonclassroom environments.School-wide systems approaches have become a priori-ty in schools across the country.

In implementing a school-wide model, all students,faculty and staff, administrators, and parent volunteersactively participate in the training necessary to putPBIS into practice. Personnel are taught to defineschool goals and expectations. Since the success ofschool-wide programs depends on consistent programimplementation, those expectations are spelled outclearly in observable and measurable terms. Schoolpersonnel are taught to provide students with positivefeedback for meeting expectations and to apply correc-tive feedback and negative consequences for violationsof school expectations.

Those schools that have developed and implementedschool-wide systems report a dramatic transformationof the overall school culture. Schools are transformedfrom a negative and reactive environment, in whichteachers write up office referrals for behavior infrac-tions and the students who are most at risk often aresuspended or expelled from school, to a positive, proac-

12 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

1 8

tive environment in which all students are reinforcedfor meeting school expectations and teachers engage inproactive problem solving with students and each other(e.g., Horner & Sugai, 2000; Lohrmann-O'Rourke,Knoster, Sabatine, Smith, Horvath, & Llewellyn, 2000;Taylor-Greene & Kartub, 2000; Walker, Colvin, &Ramsey, 1995). Schools and districts that claim successin building safe environments through school-wide sys-tems for effective behavioral support found that sys-tematic, direct instruction on appropriate behavior isnot just for students who demonstrate problems, butfor all students (e.g., Colvin, Sugai, & Patching, 1993).

Individualized Behavior Supports. According to Taylor-Greene, Brown, Nelson, Longton, Gassman, Cohen, andcolleagues (cited in Todd, Horner, Sugai, & Colvin,1999), 3% to 7% of the student population in elemen-tary or middle schools engage in chronic misbehaviorsthat do not respond to existing school-wide systems.These students require additional resources and moreindividualized behavior support than the majority ofthe students involved in the school-wide system.

The 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act(IDEA '97) mandates that schools make use of positivebehavior programming for students with disabilities.Consistent with the notion of group-individual positivebehavior support, the purpose of that mandate is totake a proactive view of challenging behavior thatincludes teaching students replacement behaviors thatserve the same purpose as the problem behavior and, inturn, increase the possibilities for success in school andpostschool life. Positive behavior supports consist of amultitiered approach to groupindividual needs thatnot only substantially diminishes discipline-relatedproblems, but also increases academic outcomes for allstudents.

School-Based Wraparound Planning

A second system approach, school-based wraparoundplanning, is an approach for developing effective indi-vidualized plans for students who need more thanschool-wide (i.e., universal) or targeted, school-onlyinterventions. Originally, the wraparound process wasdesigned and implemented as an initiative within theNational Institute of Mental Health as a system of caremodel. Simply put, a system of care is a community-based approach to providing students with comprehen-sive, integrated services that are available throughmultiple agencies and professionals in collaborationwith families (Eber, Nelson, & Miles, 1997).

According to Eber and colleagues (1997), as schoolsestablish and implement effective school-wide and indi-vidualized behavior supports, school-based wraparoundplanning appears to be the next logical step to assistingstudents with chronic and severe behavior challenges.

These are the students who need more support in theform of an individualized comprehensive plan thatencompasses home, school, and community. Since theeligibility criteria for the E/BD classification requiresevere, chronic, and frequent behaviors manifested inhome, school, and community contexts, the wrap-around approach appears to be an effective way to cre-ate the ownership and clarity that is necessary toimprove outcomes for students and their families andteachers.

Sameness Analysis: Best PracticeIn analyzing the "sameness" threads that weavethrough these two approaches to serving students withE/BD, several common themes emerge. First, bothapproaches focus on the processes and skills that facil-itate systems change. Second, capacity building to sup-port systems change is a high priority. Third, bothapproaches utilize team members' strengths, prioritizestakeholder needs, and rely on the use of proven strate-gies that result in positive outcomes that are deter-mined by team members.

Both PBIS and wraparound planning represent bestpractices for school personnel to provide meaningfulsupport to students with challenging behaviors and allthose who work with these students. Since PBIS andwraparound planning are not add-on curricula, pack-ages, or commercially produced programs, their devel-opment and implementation require training inprocesses such as effective team behavior (e.g., team-based planning and problem-solving skills) as well asspecific group-individual interventions and programevaluation options. Given that changes in philosophyand practice are fundamental to the success of theseapproaches, active administrative leadership and ongo-ing staff commitment are essential. In addition, train-ing and technical assistance for key stakeholders asthey develop and implement intervention effects arevital to establishing and maintaining meaningful class-room, school-wide, and community support.

Supporting System ChangeBoth research and experience have shown that school-wide behavior supports and school-based wraparoundplanning practices are only as good as the systems thatsupport the adults who use these practices (e.g., Eber etal., 1997). Three elements of successful developmentand implementation have been identified. Theseinclude (a) active participation of all team members, (b)dissemination of plans, and (c) systematic and sus-tained instruction and coaching in the teaming

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 13

19

processes and the behavior competence skills forimplementing the programs.

First, it is essential to facilitate active participationof all school personnel. Teams must recognize the sig-nificance of the skills and perspectives classroom teach-ers, education assistants, and other school personnelbring to the teaming process by asking them what theyneed, validating their concerns, building on theirstrengths, and brainstorming new strategies withwhich to redefine the structure and culture of theschool.

Second, results of team planning sessions must bedisseminated to all key stakeholders in the professionaleducation communitythe students, teachers, andstaffas well as family members. Everyone workingwith the student must have full knowledge of the planand what their roles and responsibilities are in imple-menting it.

Finally, research underscores how important it is todirectly and systematically train and provide follow-uptechnical assistance to those responsible for applyingintervention strategies designed to produce positiveoutcomes for students with E/BD (Colvin, Ainge,Nelson, 1997; Eber et al., 1997; Scott & Nelson, 1999;Walker et al., 1995). Teaching the behavior competenceskills and providing ongoing instruction and coachingsupport as teams implement the behavior plans isessential to achieving successful outcomes.

While schools report that training and support arebeing offered, some teachers and other school person-nel acknowledge that they do not feel adequately pre-pared to work with students who exhibit challengingbehaviors. Perceived competence in working with thesestudents is as important as actual support and techni-cal assistance in the development and implementationof systems approaches to challenging behaviors. AsHenry Ford said, those who think they can and thosewho think they can't are both right. It follows thatbuilding the capacity for schools to change must be amajor priority to which education and community per-sonnel dedicate themselves across time.

Building the Capacity for Change

Today, students who exhibit challenging behaviors areno longer the sole responsibility of specialists such asschool psychologists and teachers of students withE/BD. Even so, these school professionals often bring asignificant knowledge and skill base to program plan-ning and implementation for students who do notrespond to universal, school-wide discipline programs(Eber et al., 1997; Scott & Nelson, 1999; Todd, Homer,Sugai, Sr Colvin, 1999). So a key question is: What arethe attitudes and actions that change agents and keyteam members need to focus on during the team meet-

ing and ultimately communicate to all school person-nel?

Charting the Course for ChangeAt the risk of oversimplifying system change and in anattempt to narrow the focus of our discussion, I suggestthat we consider the "3 A's" that will contribute signifi-cantly to system change: Attitude, Awareness, andAction.

Change in Attitude

Those who are able to effect positive system changereport that traditional reactive responses must bereplaced by proactive instruction in dealing with chal-lenging behaviors.

Reactive Responses. Teachers often use a reactiveframework when confronted with challenging studentbehaviors. A teacher who views student misbehaviorfrom a reactive perspective often makes assumptionsabout the student and his or her misbehavior that fol-lows this pattern. First, when the behavior occurs, theteacher assumes the student is not trying to do theexpected behavior or that the student knows the correctbehavior and is refusing to cooperate. Accordingly, theteacher employs a series of negative consequences thatsend an "I get tough" and if that doesn't work, an "I gettougher" message to the student. Negative conse-quences include clamping down, reviewing again andagain the rules and consequences, extending the con-tinuum of negative consequences, improving the con-sistency of negative consequences, and finallyestablishing the bottom line, which is stated as "orelse."

Second, in a reactive framework, withdrawal of the.-,tudent from the context in which the behavior occurs(e.g., no recess, office referral, detentions) is often theconsequence of choice. While no practice in the expect-ed behavior is provided, the assumption of teachers andschool systems is that after experiencing a series ofmore severe negative consequences, a student will"learn a lesson" and behave more appropriately the nexttime (Colvin et al., 1993; Walker et al., 1995). Finally,when this series of negative consequences doesn't pro-duce the expected behaviors, school personnel are like-ly to get tougher by implementing even more punitivepractice resulting in exclusionary options (e.g., suspen-sions, expulsion) as a way to deal with severe andchronic behavior challenges.

A Proactive Instructional Focus. If students fail to learnan academic skill, teachers assess pupil performance inan effort to pinpoint the learning error, reteach the

14 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

2 0

skill, and provide the student with additional practiceopportunities to build fluency. A similar proactiveinstructional approach can be applied to challengingbehaviors and is the focal point of PBIS and wrap-around planning.

Proactive steps for addressing challenging behaviorsinclude the following:

1. Identifying the purpose of the behaviors through afunctional behavioral assessment.

2. Identifying the expected or acceptable behaviors andactively teaching those behaviors.

3. Modifying the environment to support practice ofexpected behaviors.

4. Providing differential reinforcement.

5. Teaching generalization of the expected behaviors toother environments.

6. Introducing specific strategies to promote the main-tenance of acceptable behaviors.

I recognize that these are not simple procedures, butthey can unlock doors for students with challengingbehaviors by providing a framework of meaningfulinstructional practices and supports.

Heightened Awareness

According to Daniels (1998), effective use of verbal (andnonverbal) feedback in the learning paradigm is toooften neglected. Teachers and school personnel areunaware of the power of language when interactingwith students who present challenging behaviors andthus underestimate its importance. For example, whena teacher expects a student to follow a direction orrespond to a request and anticipates a problem with thestudent, the language the teacher uses can providefeedback about what the expected behavior should"look like" and/or "sound like." Even when negativeconsequences are necessary following an unacceptablebehavior, the language the teacher uses can provideinformation about why the student's behavior did notmeet the expectation.

Likewise, school personnel must be skilled in regu-lating verbal and/or nonverbal interactions they havewith students who are on the brink of exhibiting con-frontational behavior. They can either defuse the behav-ior before it occurs or respond to the behavior in waysthat could readily escalate it to more serious levels thatthreaten the safety of both staff and students. It followsthat administrators, faculty, and staff all must be awareof the impact of their behavior on students.

Purposeful Action

Simply moving from a reactive to a proactive perspec-tive and developing a heightened awareness of facultyand staff behavior are not enough to support systemchange without purposeful action. Purposeful action onthe part of school personnel hinges on a commitmentto high-quality faculty and staff training and technicalassistance. Teaching school personnel proactive strate-gies and methods that prevent challenging behaviorand defuse and deescalate potentially explosive behav-ior is essential. As school personnel become more com-petent and confident in using these strategies andmethods, the school's capacity for system change willgrow and become stronger and more sustainable.

Taking Preventive Actions. First, team members mustexplore difficult questions. Could the students' inap-propriate and unacceptable behavior be the result of aninappropriate curriculum or ineffective instruction(Daniels, 1998; Scott & Nelson, 1999; Zirpoli & Melloy,2001)? The connection between classroom instructionand student behavior is well established (Englemann,Becker, Carnine, & Gersten, 1988; Kame'enui & Darch,1995; Nelson, 1996). For example, sometimes studentmisbehavior is a cover-up for an inability to meet aca-demic expectations or a healthy response to boredom inthe classroom. A student may be bored because she orhe has already learned the material, the pace is tooslow, or the instructional delivery is poor. Finally, thestudent may perceive the material to be irrelevant orculturally nonfunctional for his or her needs or inter-ests.

Second, schools must teach school personnel to har-ness the power of precorrection. Precorrection, as aproactive instructional method, includes a specificstatement designed to prompt or cue the occurrence ofan expected, appropriate behavior (Colvin et al., 1993;Scott & Nelson, 1999; Walker et al., 1995). In a precor-rective statement, the teacher states the key rule(s) orexpectation and the associated positive or negative con-sequences. For example, "When I'm working with thisgroup, all of you need to complete your work so we cango to recess on time."

Precorrection as a proactive instructional manage-ment strategy has several benefits for both students andschool personnel. First, it provides systematic supportfor desired behavior. Using precorrection increases thelikelihood that appropriate behavior will occur andlessens the need for negative contingencies. Second, itgives students who may need additional prompts, cues,or supports a "heads-up" regarding behavioral expecta-tions before the behavior occurs. In many instances, itinvolves direct instruction of the expected behavior.Finally, precorrection draws upon the instructionalskills staff members already apply to academic prob-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 15

Precorrection Checklist and Plan Sample Plan for: J. SportyTeacher: Mr. CoachDate: 12/2/

Context. Identify the context. Pinpoint where Students play games during recess that requirethe behavior is occurring, turn taking.

El Predictable behavior. Identify the inappropri-ate behavior that is occurring within the con-text

El Expected behavior. Clearly specify the expectedreplacement behavior(s). (What does thebehavior "look like" or "sound like"?)

CI Context modification. Modifications caninclude instruction, tasks, explanations, seat-ing arrangements, scheduling, etc.

fl Behavioral rehearsal. Present the student withtraining on the expected behaviors before thestudent enters the target context.

El Strong reinforcement. The replacement behav-ior must be strongly reinforced (initially, thenfade).

CI Prompt expected behavior. Acknowledgeappropriate behavior, state expectations duringactivities, and present the consequences as adecision for the student to make.

El Monitor the plan. Use the checklist and plan asform of progress report.

J. runs out the door at recess to line up and havehis turn first. If not first, J. pushes to head of lineand tries to take ball.

Walk out the door to the play area and take hisplace in line with no pushing if he is not first.

Teacher will walk with J. to the recess door,reminding J. that he must walk to the game areaand take place in line without pushing to be firstin the game.

Just before announcing recess the teacher asks J.to tell what he must do when he goes out the doorfor recess. J. practices the behavior while going torecess.

Teacher tells J. he can have his turn first the nextday if he remembers to walk to the game area andtake his place and turn in the game without push-ing to be first in line. Teacher also provides specif-ic verbal praise when J. comes in from recess.

Teacher walks with J. to the door of the play area.Reminds J. to walk to the play area and take hisplace and wait for his turn.

Count the number of times J. walks to the playarea and takes his place in line to wait for histurn.

Note. Adapted from Colvin, G., Sugai, G., Sz Patching, B. (1993). Precorrection: An instructional approach for managing pre-dictable problem behaviors. Intervention in School and Clinic, 28(3), 143-150.

Figure 1. Sample Precorrection Plan

lems and teaches the staff to use the same skills to man-age behavior problems.

The PBIS team also can develop an individualizedprecorrection plan as a positive behavior interventionsupport for a student with chronic and predictablebehaviors and use it in the context(s) in which the mis-behavior typically occurs (e.g., classroom, hallway, cafe-

teria). To be effective, a precorrection plan must beimplemented consistently. Although often the teamdevelops the plan based on information obtainedthrough the functional behavioral assessment process,the plan must be communicated to all personnel andimplemented by everyone who interacts with the stu-dent to provide this consistency. Figure 1 contains a

16 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

Defuse Minor Attention-Getting Behavior

Attend to student(s) exhibiting expected behav-ior and ignore the student(s) displaying theproblem behavior.

Redirect the student privately to the task athand ("Susie, it's math time. Let's go.") andpoint to seat.

Present a choice between the expected behaviorand a small negative consequence (e.g., loss ofprivilege). (Colvin, 1992; 1995; 1999; Colvin etal., 1997; Sprick, Garrison, & Howard, 1998).

Defuse Confrontation for a Rule Violation

State the rule or expectation.

Request explicitly that the student "take care ofthe problem."

Present options (privately) for the student onhow to take care of the problem.

Benefit: Lessens the chance of confrontations.Options focus on how the student might decideto take care of the problem rather than whetherstudent follows a specific direction (Colvin et al.,1997).

Reduce Confrontation in a DemandSituation(Present the limits and choices without being con-frontational.)

Present expected behavior and negative conse-quence as a decisionit's the student's respon-sibility.

Allow time for the student's decision.

Withdraw from the student and pay attention toothers.

Follow through on the student's choice.

Disengage and Delay Responding forSerious BehaviorBreak the cycle of interactions:

Delay responding. Briefly look at the student,look at the floor, look detached, and pause.

Make a disengaging response.

Return to the student, redirect, and withdraw.

Follow through.

Debrief to help the student problem solve.

(Colvin et al., 1997; Walker et al., 1995)

Figure 2. Strategies for Defusing and Deescalating Behavior

sample precorrection plan adapted from Colvin and col-leagues (1993).

Defusing and Deescalating Behavior. Often teachers andother school personnel are inadvertently trapped in anescalating interaction that proves to be extremely dis-ruptive and can turn ugly. As I mentioned previously,staff members must recognize the potential for escala-tion and actively defuse a potentially volatile interactionearly in the chain of events. Staff responses to con-frontational or challenging behavior make a differencein whether it is defused or spirals out of control.

The following is an example of a confrontationalstudent/adult exchange. First, the student engages insome defiant, challenging, or otherwise inappropriatebehavior. The teacher reacts to the behavior by issuinga directive to the student that opposes the behavior.Then, the student issues a "so what" challenge.Frustrated, the teacher reacts to the student's increasedverbal defiance and issues an "or else" or "bottom line"statement. Finally, the student becomes even more

defiant and hostile or explosive (Colvin, 1999; Colvin etal., 1997; Walker et al., 1995).

The primary goal of defusing and deescalating aproblem situation is to calm the student and assist himor her in reestablishing behavioral control and engag-ing in the prescribed activity. It is important to recog-nize that these strategies are supportive and need to beintroduced before the behavior becomes too severe;otherwise, there is a risk of reinforcing the endlesschain of serious behavior problems. In that the timingof intervention is critical, school personnel mustbecome skilled at identifying student-specific earlywarning signs and aligning selected strategies with theneeds of particular students.

Figure 2 outlines several strategies that may be help-ful in defusing and deescalating student behaviors. Thebehaviors range from least intrusive to those that aremore serious and confrontational. For example, minorattention-getting behavior, such as talking out in classor moving out of a seat, is less intrusive to the class-room climate than the behavior of a student who ver-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 17

23

bally challenges the teacher, knowing that you willreact by giving a direction that he or she can refuse.

It is important to note that if a student is already inan agitated state due to in-school or out-of-school trig-gers, even reasonable prompting to get to work or fol-low a directive can quickly spiral out of control to moreserious behavior such as storming out of the room,crumpling paper, or throwing books. Although beyondthe scope of our discussion, Colvin (1992; 1999) andothers (Walker et al., 1995) have detailed a series of pos-sible responses according to stages of aggression.Understanding the phenomenon of escalating patternsof behavior and having a repertoire of defusing strate-gies minimizes the likelihood that interactions betweenschool personnel and students will escalate to moreserious and out-of-control behavior.

ConclusionFocusing on increasing the capacity of school person-nel to deal more effectively with challenging behaviorshould be one of the top priorities in schools. Forschools to succeed, administrators and faculty will needto remember the "3 A's" that will provide meaningfulbehavior supports to students with challenging behav-iors and the school personnel who work with them:attitude, awareness, and action.

First, a change in attitude from a reactive to proac-tive perspective is vital. Behavior problems must beaddressed the same as instructional problems. Second,school personnel must develop a heightened awarenessand understanding that their responses to studentbehavior can make a significant difference. Admin-istrators, faculty, and staff must commit themselves topreventing misbehavior from occurring and defusingand deescalating problem behaviors that do occur toprevent them from becoming more serious.

Finally, purposeful action strategies that teachschool personnel how to (a) prevent or minimize mis-behavior and provide student supports and (b) defusepotentially serious adult/student or student/studentconfrontations can open the doors to positive interac-tions and provide meaningful support for both studentswith challenging behaviors and the staff who work withthem.

ReferencesColvin, G. (1992). Managing acting-out behavior: A staff devel-

opment program to prevent and manage acting-out behavior.Eugene, OR: Behavior Associates.

Colvin, G. (1999). Defusing anger and aggression: Safe strategiesfor secondary school educators. Eugene, OR: Iris Media.

Colvin, G., Ainge, D., & Nelson, R. (1997). How to defuse con-frontations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(6), 47-51.

Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Patching, B. (1993). Precorrection: Aninstructional approach for managing predictable problembehaviors. Intervention in School and Clinic, 28, 143-150.

Daniels, V. I. (1998). How to manage disruptive behavior in inclu-sive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(4),26-31.

Dwyer, K. P., Osher, D., & Warger, W. (1998). Early warning,timely response: A guide to safe schools. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education.

Eber, L., Nelson, C. M., & Miles, P. (1997). School-based wrap-around for students with emotional and behavioral chal-lenges. Exceptional Children, 63, 539-555.

Englemann, S., Becker, W. C., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1988).The direct instruction follow through model: Design and out-comes. Education and 7Yeatment of Children, 11, 303-317.

Kame'enui, E. J., & Darch, C. (1995). Instructional classroommanagement: A proactive approach to behavior manage-ment. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Lewis, T. J., & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior support: A sys-tems approach to proactive schoolwide management. Focuson Exceptional Children, 31, 1-24.

Lohrmann-O'Rourke, S., Knoster, T., Sabatine, K., Smith, D.,Horvath, B., & Llewellyn, G. (2000). School-wide applicationof PBS in the Bangor-Area school district. Journal of PositiveBehavior Interventions, 2, 238-240.

Nakasato, J. (2000). Data-based decision making in Hawaii'sbehavior support effort. Journal of Positive BehaviorInterventions, 2, 247-251.

Nelson, J. R. (1996). Designing schools to meet the needs of stu-dents who exhibit disruptive behavior. Journal of Emotionaland Behavioral Disorders, 4, 147-161.

Sadler, C. (2000). Effective behavior support: Implementation atthe district level. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,2, 241-243.

Scott, T. M., & Nelson, C. M. (1999). Universal school disciplinestrategies: Facilitating positive learning environments.Effective School Practices, 17(4), 54-64.

Sprick, R., Garrison, M., & Howard, L. (1998). CHAMPs: A proac-tive and positive approach to classroom management.Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Sugai, G., & Homer, R. H. (2000). School-wide behavior support:An emerging initiative. Journal of Positive BehaviorInterventions, 2, 231-232.

Taylor-Greene, S., Brown, D., Nelson, L., Longton, J., Gassman, T.,Cohen, J., et al., (1997). School-wide behavioral support:Starting the year off right. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7,99-112.

Taylor-Greene, S. J., & Kartub, D. T. (2000). Durable implementa-tion of school-wide behavior support: The High Five Program.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 233-235.

Todd, A. W., Homer, R. H., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1999).Individualizing school-wide discipline for students withchronic problem behaviors: A team approach. EffectiveSchool Practices, 17(4), 72-82.

Todd, A. W., Homer, R. H., Sugai, G., & Sprague, J. R. (1999).Effective behavior support: Strengthening school-wide sys-tems through a team-based approach. Effective SchoolPractices, / 7(4), 23-33.

Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behav-ior in school: Strategies and best practices. New York:Brooks/Cole.

Zirpoli, T. J., & Melloy, K. J. (2001). Behavior management appli-cations for teachers (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.

18 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

2 4

MANAGING KIDS:

DIRECT ANSWERS FOR TRICKY ISSUES

ANTHONY MORIARTY

MORIARTY AND ASSOCIATES

OLYMPIA FALLS, BC

Traditionally, schools have responded to matters of stu-dent discipline by imposing various punitive sanctions.For most schools, this involves student suspensions forserious behavioral problems. The message conveyed tothe student and the community is that the student is inneed of punishment rather than in need of help. Withmedia coverage of the spate of tragic episodes of schoolviolence that have occurred across the United States,the "get-tough" response is met with a great deal ofpublic approval. Witness, for example, the proliferationof so-called "zero-tolerance" policies that have beenadopted by school boards across the country. Schoolsare encouraged by the public to tighten up their rulesand regulations and increase the consequences for stu-dent misbehavior. There is a prevailing belief that wewill better solve problems of student aggression andviolence by making the consequences more punitiveand oppressive.

Notwithstanding the popularity of get-tough poli-cies, these responses contradict a basic purpose of edu-cationnamely, to provide knowledge and skills toresolve problems. Greater punishment as a singleresponse to students, especially those who are eligiblefor services under the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation Act (IDEA), is too simplistic to be of value toschool administrators. The causes of violence andaggression are many and varied; so, too, must be thesolutions to these problems. From this perspective,everyone holds a part of the solution. We are all stake-holders in the prevention of violence and in the main-tenance of a psychologically and physically safelearning environment.

The challenge of managing the behavior of youngpeople is increasingly difficult. We have witnessed ashift in many aspects of education that have exacerbat-ed this challenge. Changes in our culture, the litigiousnature of society, and the emphasis on student rightsover responsibilities has made the job of school person-nel a challenge of a proportion not previously seen inour schools.

Many would argue that the shift in the perception ofthe school from that of an academic institution to thatof a social institution has left educators with the ardu-ous task of trying to be all things to all people. In fact,we may be one of few professions who do not defineourselves by spelling out what we are not. As a result,we seem to have become the default institution to pro-vide service for any condition that may impair, in anyway, the ability of a child to receive a high-quality edu-cation. Consequently, we are beset with before-school,after-school, breakfast, and lunch programs as well asproviding for medical, psychological, and social needs,along with a range of special education needs thatmight have a positive academic impact on the child. Bycontrast, other professionsnotably the legal and med-ical professionsare quick to say what they do not door what they do not have responsibility for.

In some instances, we have observed a shift fromneeds to wants to "gimme, gimme" in our attempts todefine the needs of a child. Student individualized edu-cation program (IEP) and Section 504 conferences havesometimes deteriorated to a wish list for frustrated par-ents. Some school officials have expressed the feelingthat the IEP coordinator has been cast in the role of aneducational version of Santa Claus. Educators arereluctant to reject parent requests in the face of thethreat of costly litigation and the further burden of pay-ing litigants' legal costs. Paying for the services thatresult from an IEP conference can be more cost effec-tive.

We have witnessed a growing number of lawyers try-ing to cash in on public money. As a result, the prospectof being sued for the most remote or obscure actionlooms large over the heads of most educators in thenation's education system. A number of schools haveagreed to parent demands in the face of threatened law-suits. This phenomenon will likely continue unless wedevise new ways to balance rights and responsibilities.

Young people are too often parented in a context ofsituational ethics. Any inappropriate behavior can bepersuasively rationalized by the right apologist who will

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 19

argue for the lack of individual culpability and person-al responsibility for even the most heinous of crimes.Affixing blame is rampant in education. Given the rightlawyer and the ability to pay for that representation,almost anyone can be excused for almost any behavior.As educators, we have seen that mentality creep intoour profession far too pervasively. The legal professionhas established a new specialty that was a rarity in thepast decadeschool law. Some attorneys, with little orno school-related experience, are wading into complexeducational issues.

In addition, educators are finding it increasingly dif-ficult to fulfill their role as societal change agents.Education is the key to a better future, and any socialchange rests on the pivotal prerequisite of education.However, we frequently justify our actions in relation todiscipline and management of students on the premisethat we are simply reflecting the prevailing mores ofthe community we serve. At the same time, we bemoanthe social, cultural, and structural failures of our com-munities. As a result, we argue in defense of disciplinepolicies and procedures to reflect the deteriorating cul-ture we have such concerns about. Our original mis-sion has been derailed by the failure to stand inopposition to the changes in the culture that foretellthe demise of our role in society.

We have also seen a growing curricular emphasis onself-esteem, which conveys to young people the mes-sage that feeling good makes you perform better,whereas in the real world performing better makes youfeel good. This reversal of priority has led to confusionover what constitutes good emotional health. Someauthorities have asserted that this confusion con-tributes to the problem of learned helplessness, drugdependence, and other issues so devastating to the cur-rent generation of young people.

So what do we do: cling to the status quo or changethe fact that our profession is so resistant to change? Istrongly support the latter option. We can becomemore relevant in providing for the needs of young peo-ple. We can adapt quickly and effectively to the studentswho enter our doors each year, eliminating the growingchasm between what we know and what we do. We canassume a leadership role in providing for the needs oftoday's students. We can resurrect the role of educationas the change agent in society and maintain that posi-tion in the face of so many social forces that wish tokeep us in a reflective mode. We can define ourselvesprofessionally as educators and articulate what we do inconcert with what we do not do. In so doing, we willshift the role of many social services to the rightfulproviders in our society. We will focus on teaching andlearning. Everything we do must be in accordance withthe primary tasks of teaching and learning.

Given this position, how do we deal with youngsterswho are defiant, adversarial, and simply unwilling to

comply with our expectations? We must create a systemthat manages people fairly and meets the emotional,academic, and social needs of the individual. But herewe face another challenge: How do we do all this withlittle or no money?

We do not need new knowledge, nor do we needexpensive packaged innovations that represent the cur-rent fad of the day. We need to reevaluate what wealready know in our profession and make better appli-cation of this existing knowledge. We need to balancepunishment with therapeutic intervention. We need tobalance rights with responsibilities. We need to assumeleadership in educational reform and better assert whatwe know and what we can do.

The solution is two-dimensional. First, the entireschool system needs an inclusive yet simple plan thatrepresents our current state of knowledge. It mustenjoin all stakeholders in finding interventions thatprotect kids, ensure an effective academic and nonaca-demic learning environment, and provide appropriateconsequences for student behavior. Second, there needsto be an intervention system tailored to the needs of theindividual student. While fairness for all and consisten-cy of response is sacred, different kids succeed or fail fordifferent reasons. The challenge is to address students'diverse needs within the context of the existing finan-cial resources, faculty and staff, and problems of anindividual school.

We believe the CHAMPS plan and its complement,the confluence model, represent a practical and work-able solution to the dilemma of dealing with today'syoung people even in the context of rules and regula-tions applicable to the young person from a previousgeneration.

This approach has two dimensions. First, there is asystem-wide program that enlists the aid of everyone inthe school system. Every stakeholder has an area ofresponsibility in the development of the CHAMPS plan,which comprises a Crisis plan, a Hall supervision plan,an Alternative-to-suspension program, Mediation, aPolice liaison, and a Safety plan. School safety and theeffective management of young people cannot be left toany one group in the school. Thus, another issueremains: Can special education continue to be thedefault decision for serving students who do not prop-erly fit the mold of traditional education? We believethe proliferation of educational diagnoses is dispropor-tionate to the number of young people who legitimate-ly need these services. As a result, we think there is aflood of students into special education who can beserved adequately within the confines of regular educa-tion if we can be more creative and smarter in how weapproach the problems of today's young people.

Second, our response to learning or behavior needsmust be tailored individually to the behavior of the stu-dent. These needs are not, in many cases, related to a

20 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

2 6

need for special education services. Too often, schoolswith no other options for effective programming turnto special education without examining the long-rangeimplications of doing so. A student's inability to benefitfrom the traditional classroom might be a function ofthe need for that learning environment to change morethan it is an indication of the need for special educationservices. The confluence model, we believe, adequatelyaddresses this concern.

CHAMPS: The System Dimension

CHAMPS is an acronym that represents the six dimen-sions of a system that is committed to a safe and pro-ductive educational environment. As previously noted,these are crisis planning, hall supervision, an alterna-tive to suspension, mediation that is peer based, policeliaison, and a safety plan for the movement of people inand around the school. Its essential prerequisite is thesimultaneity of responsibility. The CHAMPS plan ispredicated on the assumption that every stakeholder inthe system is equally responsible for establishing andmaintaining a productive educational environment. Noone associated with the school can shed the responsi-bility for order and safety.

A crisis plan must be developed that is comprehen-sive enough to address a variety of potentially cata-strophic events, yet simple enough to be enacted on amoment's notice. We have developed a four-dimension-al system: Lockdown, Levels, Links, and Lists. Whilethere are many details embedded in the plan, it can beexecuted with great speed if it is needed (see Moriarty,Maeyama, & Fitzgerald, 1993).

Most problems in school occur in the halls, duringthe time between classes and before and after school.The involvement of every adult in the school building isessential to the success of any attempt to provide effec-tive supervision. Our solution has been to ask all staffmembers to be in the hall during any two passing peri-ods of their choosing. These agreements are tallied andreturned to all teachers, who are then aware of who isin the hall with them. Without negotiations or theinvolvement of union representatives we were able toget every teacher to agree to volunteer for this pro-gram. An honest and accurate explanation of theimportance of teacher involvement was essential andsufficient to make this program operate. In addition, weconducted staff training on confrontation managementand effective interventions, both of which were wellreceived. The responsibility for this training was givento the police liaison officers.

An alternative to suspension is the major componentof the CHAMPS plan. Essentially, students who act outinappropriately, especially when aggression or violenceis involved, must learn ways to respond that will

improve their chances of handling their conflictsappropriately in the future. This will be discussed infurther detail as it applies to the confluence model.

With the CHAMPS plan, students play a key role inthe solution of school-based problems. Peer mediationis necessary not only for what it does for the disputantsin conflict situations, but also for the emotional well-being of the mediators. Our experience in developingmediation programs for the past 13 years has resultedin some excellent results that have enhanced the cul-ture of the school and reduced the number of studentproblems (McDonald & Moriarty, 1999; Moriarty &McDonald, 1999; Tolson, McDonald, & Moriarty, 1992).

A police involvement in schools may seem, at firstglance, an overreaction in a school that has not had actsof major violence. However, given the evolution of theprofession of law enforcement and the skills police offi-cers have developed, we view their help as a necessity,not a luxury. The police liaison officers assigned to ourschool assume a variety of roles, from protector to con-sultant to community liaison. In addition, the com-bined expertise of school personnel and lawenforcement personnel has led to a significant trainingcomponent for the staff and the community. Presenta-tions on topics such as predicting violence, school safe-ty, and crisis management have been offered to manygroups in and around the community. More details canbe found in Moriarty and Fitzgerald (1992a, 1992b).

Finally, the management of the flow of traffic in alarge high school is a challenge that must be addressed.The safety plan developed in consultation with thepolice liaison officers has enhanced this process greatly.

No one of these programs is more or less importantthan any other. If one part breaks down, the entire sys-tem will suffer. However, when everyone assumes his orher responsibility, the environment for effective teach-ing and learning is optimized.

The Individual Dimension:The Confluence Model

A confluence model adds a number of elements to thepractice of school-wide management. For example, aninterdisciplinary approach to management leads tomore effective solutions. The confluence of all stake-holders in the resolution of a student's challenges rep-resents a response of multiple solutions proportionateto the multiple causes of the student's behavior prob-lems. Several dimensions of this concept may differfrom the traditional approach to management, themost important of which I discuss in the next severalsections.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 21

2

Positive Nonpunitive Interventions

The CHAMPS plan involves the use of a positive inter-vention, one that is educationally sound and behav-iorally structured. It includes the development ofcurriculum designed to teach students the skills theylack as evidenced by the nature of the discipline prob-lem. In addition, the "what" of a discipline problem isbrought into balance with an equal concern for the"why" of the behavior. This concern for why the behav-ior has occurred over what the behavior consists of isboth collaborative and interdisciplinary. At one schoolwe accomplished this by referring the student to thecounselor for a consultation and parent conferencebefore deciding on any disciplinary action. We do noteliminate the use of negative consequences, but westrive to balance it with positive and therapeutic strate-gies.

Professional Collaboration

The crux of the confluence model is the collaborativeefforts of counseling personnel, the dean of students,law enforcement personnel, and whatever communityagencies are available. Together, they plan a program ofpositive intervention tailored to the unique needs of thestudent. The counselor intervention involves an in-depth interview designed to ascertain preexisting emo-tional and cognitive areas of difficulty that influencedthe problem. This interview follows the student's com-pletion of a Rational Situation Analysis (RSA) formdesigned to identify antecedent emotional and cogni-tive conditions. This questionnaire requires the studentto analyze his or her behavior from a therapeutic per-spective by looking into what that student "brought" tothe school on the day a problem arose. (A copy of thisquestionnaire is available from the author.)

Parent Input Before Disposition

In a traditional system, the disposition of a disciplineproblem occurs before parent input is solicited. In theconfluence model, parent involvement is initiated bythe counselor before any disposition of the problem sit-uation. A specific format for this dialog has been devel-oped for this program. Upon reviewing the results ofthe RSA form with the student, the counselor calls theparent to review any pertinent information about thecauses of the student's problem. This approach preventsthe commonly adversarial response of parents who aremost concerned with the disposition of the problem atthe expense of discussing the problem and discoveringits causes through a dialog with the counselor.Through this proactive response to parent resistance,an alliance develops between the parent and the school,better enabling them to focus on the common interestsof the student.

Recently, we added some interesting and revealingelements of parent involvement. First, the PASS(Parents Accompanying Suspended Students) programis available to any parent who may think an out-of-school suspension is inappropriate. With PASS, wereduce any student's suspension by 50% if the parentagrees to accompany the student to school and staywith him or her for the day. The success of this ventureled to the PATS program (Parents Accompanying TardyStudents). In this case, the parent of any student whobegins to accumulate too many incidences of being lateto class is invited to accompany the student from oneroom to another to actually see how the time is spentduring the passing period. As might be expected, all ofour parents who took advantage of this option foundthat the student did not spend time wisely in the hallbetween classes.

Variable Suspension Time

In the past, student suspension equated with studentexclusion from school for a fixed period of time duringwhich nothing is expected from the student. Thatstrategy can accelerate the rate of school avoidanceand acting-out problems. The confluence modelrequires the student to show mastery of new copingskills before being allowed to return to class.Consequently, the length of the intervention variesaccording to the time it takes to teach the content ofthe curriculum. The duration of an interventionbecomes a function of the amount of informationlearned rather than a fixed amount of time. We believethis represents an accurate application of the best prin-ciples of mastery learning to the disposition of studentproblems. Initially, we adapted a number of preparedintervention curricula developed by Advantage Press(http://www.advantagepress.com). These curricula havebeen adapted and others developed as a by-product ofthe implementation of this program.

Positive Collaboration with LawEnforcement Personnel

Since some school problems are inherently conflictual,they have the potential to become a concern of the lawenforcement community. Using police officers in anumber of broadly defined nonpolice roles assists in thedevelopment of a proactive relationship with students.This approach holds promise for conflict prevention,since police officers are able to help students regularlyand establish positive relationships that will be helpfulin times of crisis. It is this critical time of need that isoften the most opportune time for impacting thebehavior and emotional development of the student.

22 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

2 8

Curriculum Areas

To address school problems in a more effective and edu-cationally sound manner, the issue of effective curricu-lum development must be addressed. To this end, wehave developed curriculum materials to address specif-ic areas that commonly lead to school suspension,including the following:

1. Fighting Management: a curriculum addressingalternatives to violence.

2. Anger Management: curriculum materials to teachstudents alternative means to express anger.

3. Time Management: a program to teach studentsvalues and methods of being on time.

4. Confrontation Management: curriculum materialsto teach students methods of assertiveness that donot escalate emotional tension or levels of preex-isting aggression.

5. Gang Activity Management: a curriculum thathighlights the negative elements of gang involve-ment and develops strategies for students to copewith gang involvement.

6. Drug and Alcohol Management: curriculum mate-rials to promote student acquisition of knowledge,skills, and attitudes essential to avoiding the use ofdrugs and alcohol.

7. Multicultural Awareness Management: curriculummaterials to promote understanding between cul-turally and linguistically diverse groups.

8 Management of Life Decisions.

9. Civility.

10. Others determined to be locally relevant.

We encourage schools to develop curriculum units thatrelate most directly to their unique needs and to devel-op assessment materials directly related to these mate-rials. For example, we recently developed a unit oncivility in response to a growing faculty concern thatstudent behavior generally is lacking in this quality.

Conclusion

The CHAMPS plan is a strategy for promoting sharedresponsibility for establishing and maintaining a posi-tive school environment. Its elegance is found in itssimplicity. Nothing new or revolutionary is included;rather, it brings together all stakeholders and empha-sizes shared responsibility. No one is more importantthan any other person in the broad scheme of effectivestudent management.

The confluence model uses the best elements ofschool discipline, curriculum development, and schoolguidance practice. While it is nonpunitive, it still con-veys a powerful message to the student. Time is nolonger fixed for suspensions; it becomes secondary,thereby enabling students to learn new behavior.Antecedent conditionsemotional and cognitiveareformally evaluated before the disposition of any disci-plinary problem. Finally, we feel strongly that parentinvolvement is meaningful and should be obtained in aproactive manner, thereby reducing the possibility ofadversarial encounters that too often typify the rela-tionship between the school and parents of troubledstudents.

ReferencesAdvantage Press. P.O. Box 3025, Lisle, Illinois, 60532.

http://www.advantagepress.comMcDonald, S., & Moriarty A. R. (1999). Conflict resolution: An

overview. In R. Constable, S. McDonald, & J. P. Flynn (Eds.),School social work: Practice, policy and research perspectives(4th ed.). Chicago: Lyceum.

Moriarty, A., & Fitzgerald, P. (1992a). A rationale for policeschool collaboration. Law and Order, 40(5), 47-51.

Moriarty, A., & Fitzgerald, P. (1992b). Consulting with schools:Principles of effective dialogue. Law and Order, 40(6), 76-78.

Moriarty, A., Maeyama, R., & Fitzgerald, P. J. (1993). A CLEARplan for school crisis management. Bulletin of the NationalAssociation of Secondary School Principals, 77(52), 17-22.

Moriarty, A. R., & McDonald, S. (1999). Mediation as a form ofpeer-based conflict resolution. In R. Constable, S. McDonald,& J. P Flynn (Eds.), School social work: Practice, policy andresearch perspectives (4th ed.). Chicago: Lyceum.

Tolson, E., McDonald, S., & Moriarty, A. (1992). Peer mediationamong high school students: A test of effectiveness. Journal ofSocial Work in Education. 14(2), 86-93.

BESTCOPY AVAILABLE

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 23

29

DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE BEHAVIORAL

INTERVENTION PLANS AND POSITIVE

BEHAVIORAL SUPPORTS

RICHARD VAN ACKER

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO

While addressing challenging student behavior con-sumes considerable time in the school and classroom,most school personnel feel inadequately prepared todeal with issues of student discipline (Romi St Freund,1999). Teacher preparation programs often devote littletime to problem behavior and classroom management(Reschke St Hegland, 1999). There often exists a naïvebelief that a solid curriculum will eliminate the needfor behavior management strategies because the stu-dents will be too interested in the lesson to misbehave.While a meaningful and effective curriculum is neces-sary, it is hardly sufficient to prevent all behavior prob-lems in a classroom. Dramatic changes in familystructure, demographic shifts in the school-aged popu-lation, and increased poverty have resulted in a largerproportion of children who enter school with increasedrisk for emotional and educational problems (Griffith,1999; Snyder, 1993). It follows that school personnelmust be better prepared to address these needs if theyare to prevent the development of serious behavioralproblems.

School personnel have long relied on punitive con-sequences to deal with undesired student behavior inthe hope that punishment will discourage the futureoccurrence of the target behavior(s). In fact, punish-ment was the sole consequence for over 90% of theinfractions observed in one study of school disciplinarypractices (Colvin, Sugai, & Kame'enui, 1992). Whilethe application of a mild aversive response may curbthe undesired behavior of many students, it has beenshown to be ineffective as a means of improving thebehavior of the small minority of students who displaythe majority of challenging behaviors. The use of pun-ishment has often been shown to further alienate thesestudents and to exacerbate their disruptive behavior(Gable, Quinn, Rutherford, Howell, St Hoffman, 1998).

The current "get tough" and "zero tolerance" poli-cies adopted by many school boards and school faculties

have resulted in an inclination to address student dis-ruption through exclusion from the classroom and theschool (e.g., referral to the dean or principal's office,suspension, expulsion). Although there is little evi-dence to support the fact that suspension and expulsionare effective in changing student behavior, their use hasincreased in schools across the nation (Skiba StPeterson, 1999; Skiba, Peterson, St Williams, 1997).Students at the greatest risk for academic and socialfailure are frequently "pushed away" from the educa-tional settings that are perhaps best equipped to meettheir needs. Once alienated (or removed) from theschool setting, where will these students turn to gainthe knowledge and skills necessary to function as pro-ductive citizens within our communities?

Fortunately, there is a growing realization thatschool personnel must begin to find ways to address thebehavior of challenging students through the use ofproactive, preventative, and positive behavior supportsrather than punishment. The 1997 Amendments to theIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), forexample, require the use of positive behavioral supportswhen addressing the behaviors of students with educa-tional disabilities that interfere with their learning orthat of their peers (Conroy, Clark, Gable, St Fox, 1999).The challenge is to identify effective strategies fordeveloping these more positive and proactive approach-es. In what follows, we will explore some of the empiri-cally validated procedures educators can use to developeffective behavioral intervention plans and the positivebehavioral supports needed for student success. We willexamine the need to explore a school's existing datarelated to behavioral offenses. With knowledge of whatbehaviors constitute significant concerns, educatorscan begin to develop and implement systemic programsto address these target behaviors on a variety of levels.

24 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph31,

Exploring the Existing DataAn important first step in developing a school-wide orclassroom discipline program involves the systematicexamination of existing behavior problems as well asthe current practices to address these problems withinthe school or classroom. This is facilitated by the factthat federal law requires school administrators to keepreferral information for students whose behaviorresults in suspension or expulsion (U.S. Department ofEducation, 1980). Additional data that identify a morecomplete record of discipline problems can help edu-cators pinpoint behavior problems that, while notresulting in suspension or expulsion, monopolize aconsiderable amount of time and energy on the part ofschool personnel. Figure 1 shows a sample disciplinaryreferral form that has proven helpful in many schools.Information from a form such as this can be enteredinto a typical computer spreadsheet for ease in recordmaintenance and data manipulation.

Together, administrators and faculty can review stu-dent discipline records to identify the following:

The nature of common offenses. What are the mostcommon offenses that result in students beingreferred for disciplinary action? High numbers ofreferrals for specific problem behaviors will help toidentify areas in which students require additionalskill instruction. Programs of skill instruction andstudent behavior monitoring can be implemented toteach and reinforce desired alternative behaviors.

The time and location of high-rate or serious behav-ior problems. The time and location of problembehaviors can be used to assist school personnel inthe identification of needed behavioral supports andservices (e.g., additional staff supervision in the hall-ways during transition times). Increased skillinstruction, supervision, or support can be providedat those times and in those locations that appear tooccasion problem behaviors.

Students with a record of repetitive offenses.Students with a high number of referrals for repeat-ed offenses often require a level of support and serv-ice beyond that provided to the typical student.Repeated offenses suggest that current disciplinaryefforts may be ineffective.

Common consequences delivered for various offens-es. Exploration of the consequences imposed on stu-dents would allow faculty to determine whether theconsequences are reasonable and instructional. Dothese consequences hold the promise of promotingstudent success (e.g., an instructional consequence),or do they simply suppress the display of undesiredbehavior through the delivery of an aversive?

Gender, ethnic, and cultural demographics of stu-dents referred for disciplinary action. A carefulexamination of disciplinary referrals and conse-quences can allow school personnel to identify anypatterns of differential treatment of students or stu-dent groups that might indicate cultural misunder-standing, misinterpretation of student behavior, orcultural bias.

Teachers and staff members who refer students fordisciplinary action. This information may help iden-tify teachers or other staff members who might ben-efit from additional skill development or support.For example, teachers who refer high numbers ofstudents may lack the skills necessary to avoid powerstruggles with students or might employ ineffectivepractices to prevent problem behavior. On the otherhand, these teachers may have an unusually chal-lenging group of students who require additionalteacher support. However, teachers who display lowreferral rates may also need additional training andsupport, since a low level of referral does not neces-sarily signal effective behavior management. Insome cases, these teachers may exhibit an unwill-ingness or inability to enforce behavioral expecta-tions.

Drawing on this information, school personnel canidentify areas in which current practices appear to beeffective as well as those in which they appear to beinadequate. Together, the staff can develop an actionplan to address problem areas in a way that encouragesstudent success and the development of appropriatealternatives to problem behavior.

Developing a UnifiedCode of DisciplineVirtually every school has a student or parent handbookthat, among other things, identifies critical schoolrules and general behavioral expectations for all stu-dents (e.g., students are expected to solve social conflictpeacefully; aggression will not be tolerated). As schoolsattempt to develop clear expectations for studentbehavior, these rules may need to be carefully reviewed.Both students and adults must have a clear under-standing of the rules if the school is to develop a posi-tive school climate aimed at the promotion of sociallycompetent behavior (White, Algozzine, Audette, Marr,& Ellis, 2001).

While it is reasonable and desirable for schools tohave a unified set of rules and expectations, a rigid,standardized set of consequences for each studentinfraction (e.g., physical aggression will result in a min-imum of a 3-day suspension) is problematic and gener-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 25

School Disciplinary Referral

Date:

Name of Student:

Name of Person Making the Referral:

Time the Offense Took Place: :

For Office Use: Recorded / /

Age: Grade

Gender (circle): Male Female

Ethnicity

Student ID#

a.m.P m.

Location of Offense:

Others Involved:

Nature of the Offense:

0 TardyO TruancyEl Leaving the Instructional

AreaO Failure to Accept

Responsibility for BehaviorEl Failure to Complete Work0 Failure to Follow

DirectionsE l Swearing111 Excessive Out of Seat0 Other (Please specify)

Consequence Provided:

El Discussion and VerbalWarning

O Time-Out fromReinforcement

E l Sent to Office/ PrincipalReferral

El Rude or DisrespectfulBehavior

0 Teasing/Taunting0 SwearingEl Verbal Aggression/

ThreatsO Excessive Talk-Outs/

Making NoisesO Lying/Cheating/

Dishonesty0 Vandalizing or TrespassingO Burglary, Robbery, or TheftO Temper Tantrum/

Uncontrolled Anger

El Loss of Privilege (specify)

El DetentionO Saturday SchoolO Parent NotificationO Restitution

O Physical Aggression/Fighting

O Gang ActivityO Arson or Fire Alarm

ViolationO Possession of Controlled

SubstanceIdentify:

O Weapons OffenseIdentify:

O Suspension (specify length:days)

El Expulsion0 Police Notification/Arrest

AgencyO Other (specify)

Alternative Behavior: Specify the desired alternative behavior to be taught and reinforced.

Figure 1. Sample Disciplinary Referral Record

26 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

3 64.

ally ineffective. The etiology of student behavior prob-lems may vary considerably even for the same surfacebehavior (e.g., aggression). Determining an appropriateconsequence on the basis of the surface behavior alonefails to take into account these differing etiologies. Forexample, a student with a severe communication disor-der may employ aggression as a means to communicateher needs (e.g., discomfort, a need to escape a task).Another student may engage in aggression as a meansto gain popularity with his peer group. A third studentwho has been teased, taunted, and subjected to racialand ethnic slurs from a specific group of peers mayfinally strike back aggressively at one of his tormenters.The etiology and the function served by aggression foreach student may be quite different.

The disability of the first student impacts her behav-ior and contributes significantly to her display ofaggression. She needs an intervention that will providean alternative approach for signalling her need(s). Thesecond student appears to desire peer affiliation andpopularity and has selected aggression as his means togain this desired attention. For many students, acts ofaggression have proven to be an effective means to gainattention and popularity (Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl, & VanAcker, 2000). Effective interventions for these studentsrequire efforts to strengthen their bonding with schoolpersonnel and the provision of alternative means togain peer acceptance and popularity. The events sur-rounding the third student's aggression suggest theinterplay of cultural issues (both the cultural attitudesand beliefs of the students and the school culture). Inthis instance, the question arises: Does the school cul-ture encourage and support racial and ethnic intoler-ance?

School personnel often defend efforts to deliver uni-form consequences for similar infractions as anattempt to maintain fairness for all students. However,if a school administrator were to deliver a standardizedconsequence (e.g., a 3-day suspension) to each of thethree students we just discussed, there is little reasonto believe that the consequence would have the desiredeffect for each child. The first student might fail to con-nect the consequence to the offense and, without amore appropriate means to signal her needs, be leftwith increased frustration. The second student mightactually be held in higher esteem by his target peergroup for having been suspended. The third studentmight feel even greater alienation from the school andfaculty, increasing his desire for justice and revenge. Isthere anything fair in this type of discipline? The con-cept that fair means equal is a kind of moral reasoningthat typically is found in children 10 years of age oryounger (Kohlberg, 1984). For adults, the concept offairness within the school should equate to giving eachstudent what he or she needs to succeed.

There is little question that when rule infractionsoccur there should be some kind of consequences.School personnel should give serious thought to thenature of common infractions and discuss reasonableconsequences for such infractions. A common sense ofwhat constitutes an infraction and a predictable conse-quence for such infractions will help to establish a safeand sensible school environment. However, the selec-tion of consequences for given infractions cannot beinflexible. Consequences may need to be more pre-scriptive for some students (e.g., those with disabilitiesthat impact behavior, those for whom common disci-plinary practices have proven ineffective). Moreover,these consequences should serve to directly teach andsupport desired behaviornot simply punish unde-sired behavior.

Employing the Three-Tier Modelof Prevention and InterventionFor years, epidemiologists in the fields of psychiatryand mental health have supported the three-tier modelof prevention and intervention suggested by Caplan(1964). In this model, efforts to address the disease ordisorder are delivered at three distinct levels: primary,secondary, and tertiary.

Primary or universal interventions are delivered tolarge groups of individuals who may not yet showany signs or symptoms of the problem beingaddressed. These primary intervention programs areaimed at the prevention of the problem before itarises. Primary prevention programs may be proac-tive or reactive (Catalano & Dooley, 1980). A proac-tive primary program is designed to eliminate causalor risk factors related to the development of theproblem. Programs aimed at promoting a caringschool climate, making adjustments to the schoolsetting or routines (e.g., lunch procedures), andteaching rules and expected behavior are examplesof proactive primary prevention efforts. Reactive pri-mary prevention programs seek to improve copingresponses and to augment the individual's resistanceto potentially harmful stressors. Within the school,universal social skills instruction programs andsocial problem-solving skill programs might bedelivered as primary reactive programs. Effectiveprimary prevention programs are estimated to beeffective at addressing the behavioral needs of up to75% of a typical school's student population (Sugaiet al., 2000).

Secondary or targeted interventions are designed tomeet the needs of individuals who have been exposedto causal agents or who live in conditions that place

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 27

them at significant risk for the development of thetargeted problem. Secondary programs also are pro-vided to individuals who are showing the first symp-toms of the problem but may not have the full-blowndisease or disorder. Secondary interventions provideservices to increase resistance to the problem and toprevent the exacerbation of symptoms. Examples ofsecondary programs for behavior problems mightinclude supportive programs to help at-risk studentsachieve academically (e.g., peer tutoring, homeworkclubs, intensive instruction, curricular accommoda-tions and modifications) and/or socially (e.g., adultmentoring programs, intensive anger-managementprograms). For many students with disabilities, theirindividualized education program (IEP) may identi-fy supports (e.g., providing written directions) andaccommodations (e.g., providing material on audio-tape for reading disorders) that help prevent thedisplay of challenging behavior and, when imple-mented correctly, eliminate the need for moreintensive intervention strategies (i.e., formal behav-ioral intervention plans). Approximately 20% to 25%of students require the additional support providedby secondary prevention/intervention programs.

Tertiary or specified programs are intensive inter-ventions provided to individuals who display the dis-ease or disorder. These interventions attempt toimprove the course of the disease or to minimize theharmful sequelae once illness has been diagnosed.Tertiary programs are typically specific to the indi-vidual and generally target both the individual andthe social contexts in which he or she interacts.Tertiary programs developed to address challengingbehavior(s) often involve a functional assessment ofthe challenging behavior(s) and the development ofindividualized behavioral intervention plans.Behavioral intervention plans should identifystrengths and resources within the student, theteam, and the resources and services that will beneeded to promote desired alternative behavior andhelp eliminate undesired behavior. Strategies toaddress the needs of students with serious behaviorproblems may require so-called wrap-around servic-es that provide intervention and support within mul-tiple social contexts (e.g., the school, the home, thecommunity). Between 5% and 7% of the students ina typical school may require intervention at a terti-ary level (Sugai et al., 2000).

Most Behavior Is PurposefulThe fact that a particular behavior displayed by a stu-dent is a problem may often be obvious; the reason(s)why the student engages in the behavior may be more

difficult to discern. Like the rest of us, children andyouths have needs and desires. To get these needs anddesires met, they behave. Much of what we call misbe-havior is for the child a simple act of attempting to geta need or desire met. A number of common functionsfor behavior have been postulated (Neel SE Cessna,1993). These include:

Attention.

Escape or avoidance.

Power, control, or competence.

Peer affiliation.

Self-gratification or self-expression.

Justice or revenge.

For example, a student might display noncompliant oreven disruptive and insubordinate behavior when askedby a teacher to participate in a given academic task. Inmany classrooms, the teacher response would involve averbal interaction with the student that might escalateto the point of telling the student to leave the class-room. In essence the student is allowed to escape theundesired activity. While the teacher intends for theremoval from the classroom to serve as an effectivedeterrent to the display of future classroom outbursts,this response is likely to reinforce the behavior and, inturn, increase the likelihood that it will occur in thefuture. In contrast, an effective intervention wouldrequire the teacher to identify why the student wishesto escape (e.g., Can the student do the work as expect-ed? Does the nature of the task trigger emotionalstress?) If the student lacks the skill to complete thework, the teacher must increase the student's skill levelor make curricular accommodations so that the workfits the student's ability level. If the student can do thework but chooses not to do it, the issue is one of confi-dence and/or motivation.

One of the most important philosophical shifts thateducators must make to move away from a punitiveapproach to discipline toward one that is more proac-tive and positive is the understanding that most behav-ior serves a function for the student. Moreover, in mostcases, the function served is a legitimate need or desire.The problem arises from the specific behavior(s) thestudent employs to meet these needs. However, it isunreasonable and sometimes unethical to expect that astudent will surrender an effective, albeit problematic,means for meeting a legitimate need unless we provideanother reasonable and equally effective means to meetthe same need (i.e., replacement behavior). The taskconfronting school personnel is not how to stop theundesired behavior, but rather how to promote a social-ly acceptable means for students to meet their needssuccessfully.

28 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

3 4

Functional Assessment of BehaviorAs they attempt to find ways to address undesiredbehavior, many school personnel routinely question theeffectiveness of daily classroom practices and gatherinformation that will help them to understand thefunction a particular behavior serves for the student.When a student displays serious or chronic problembehavior, best practice calls for educators to engage ina functional assessment of that student's behavior(Gable et al., 1998). This process allows school person-nel to explore student behavior in light of the contextin which it occurs to help identify the function of thebehavior and to elucidate the variables in the environ-ment that serve to occasion and maintain the behavior.This formal procedure is typically reserved for thoseproblem behaviors that appear resistant to primary andeven secondary interventions applied as part of theschool-wide discipline program. As mentioned earlier,the 1997 IDEA Amendments mandate the use of func-tional assessments and the development of behavioralintervention plans for any students with disabilitieswhose behavior impacts their learning or that of theirpeers.

The functional assessment of behavior involves anynumber of possible procedures, depending on the cir-cumstances surrounding the behavior. Regardless ofthe procedures used, the process generally involves thefollowing steps:

Identifying the specific behavior or behaviors ofinterest. Before accurate information can be gath-ered related to a student's behavior, a clear definitionof the target behavior must be developed. The behav-ior must be described in observable and measurableterms to allow everyone involved to direct attentionto the same behavior and to report on its occurrencein a similar manner.

Forming an informed hypothesis as to the functionthe behavior serves. Initially, the individual or indi-viduals conducting the functional assessment willwork with the student and those adults who play asignificant role in the student's life to generate pre-liminary hypotheses related to the function(s) thebehavior(s) may serve for the student. These consti-tute the best guess of those familiar with the stu-dent.

Collecting and analyzing data to either support thehypothesized function or identify an alternativefunction. Data collection might involve a review ofstudent records; interviews with parents, teachers,other significant adults, and/or the student; comple-tion of specific rating scales or checklists; and/or thedirect observation of the student within the context.

The selection of the data-collection procedures to beused depends on a number of factors, including thenature of the behavior (e.g., high-frequency vs. low-frequency), the setting in which the behavior mostlikely occurs (e.g., public setting vs. private setting),and the student's current placement (e.g., a studentmay be referred to an alternative setting for safetyreasons and will not be able to be directly observedin the setting where the target behavior took place).A minimum of three independent sources of data aretypically required to support a given hypothesizedfunction (i.e., triangulation of the data) prior to thedevelopment of the behavioral intervention plan.

Testing the hypothesis. When possible, the hypothe-sis should be tested to provide further confirmationregarding the function(s) of the behavior. For exam-ple, the hypothesized function for a student's behav-ior (e.g., refusal to complete assigned work) may beavoidance (e.g., the student does not want to risklooking incompetent). The teacher might providethe student with an opportunity to serve as a peertutor for work within the student's current masterylevel. If the student complies with this type of task(e.g., one in which he or she can clearly demonstratecompetence), we may more readily accept thehypothesis that noncompliance for more difficulttasks serves the function of escape or avoidance. Themanipulation of the hypothesized variable in aneffort to test the impact on the target behavior hasbeen termed the functional analysis of behavior.

Developing the behavioral intervention plan. Oncethe function of the behavior has been identified, aplan can be developed to alter the student's behavior.As mentioned previously, this plan will typicallyinvolve two separate but related procedures.

An acceptable alternative behavior must be iden-tified that the student can use to meet the func-tion currently being met by engaging in theundesired target behavior. If no such behaviorcurrently exists in the student's repertoire, a newbehavior must be taught. This alternative behav-ior will need to be encouraged (i.e., occasioned)and systematically reinforced. We should alsoensure that the alternative behavior is culturallyrelevant for the student and that the amount ofeffort expended to engage in the response is sim-ilar to that of the target behavior.

At the same time, the teacher must implement aplan designed to curtail the effectiveness of theundesired target behavior in meeting the identi-fied function. This will generally require theapplication of some specified consequence eachtime the behavior is observed. The exact nature of

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors

3 5 ; ESTCOPY AVAILABLE

29

the consequence, however, will depend upon thefunction served by the behavior.

Monitoring the integrity of the implementation ofthe behavioral intervention plan and the evaluationof effectiveness. Once developed, the behavioralintervention plan will need to be implemented con-sistently in the manner prescribed in the plan. Fartoo often, school personnel expend considerableenergy to conduct a functional assessment of behav-ior and develop a behavioral intervention plan onlyto implement that plan haphazardly. The implemen-tation should be systematically monitored and datashould be collected to ensure that the desiredchanges in behavior are taking place.

Changing Student BehaviorTypically Requires ChangingTeacher BehaviorThe success of any discipline program will ultimatelyrest upon the willingness and ability of the school staffto implement the procedures outlined in the plan. Alack of necessary skills, misunderstood expectations, ora basic unwillingness of teachers or others to imple-ment the program faithfully can threaten a school'sbest efforts to implement an effective discipline pro-gram. Likewise, staff behavior that belittles, embarrass-es, or demeans students will undermine school-wideefforts to support student success.

As with the identification of expected student behav-iors, administrators and school staff will need to identi-fy the behaviors that will be expected of the adults inthe school setting (e.g., treat students with respect atall times). Data derived from the school discipline refer-rals, student progress and achievement records, andboth formal and informal observation of the student-teacher interaction can be used to identify the expectedbehaviors. The school faculty should actively partici-pate in an honest examination of the role of adultbehavior in the school. For example, many faculty iden-tify student disrespect as a critical concern in theschool. Most teachers suggest that appropriate behav-iors should be taught at home. It is true that some stu-dents have not learned to respect adults in their homes,and they are not going to learn to do so outside educa-tional settingsfrom television, for example. In fact,the school may be the only setting for these students tolearn this important skill. Consider your school and thestudents who are most likely to display disrespectfulbehavior. Do the adults in your school consistentlyaddress these students in a respectful manner?Hopefully, you can answer in the affirmative. However,some school personnel would have to acknowledge that

while most students are dealt with respectfully, some ofthe students who are most at risk experience a very dif-ferent situation.

Behavior change is a complex and often difficulttask. This is as true for teachers as it is for students. Theneed to monitor teacher behavior and provide clear,honest, and frequent feedback is critical. Teachers can-not observe themselves as they teach. They depend onothers to provide the feedback they need to enhancetheir instruction. Unfortunately, far too little adminis-trator time is devoted to the task of monitoring andsupervising instruction. Administrators spend much oftheir time addressing minor disciplinary incidentsinstead of providing teachers with feedback related totheir interactions with the students.

When monitoring teacher behavior, it is essentialthat administrators collect data that allow teachers tosee the relationship between their behavior and that oftheir students. Effective data collection allows adminis-trators (or others) to share with teachers as theyattempt to interpret the implications of the data. Thepresentation of intelligible data can often go a long waytoward presenting the facts; freeing the administratorto support teachers and staff in the process of neededchange. A number of effective strategies for gatheringdata on teacher and student interaction are available toteachers and school administrators (e.g., Sugai et al.,2000; Van Acker, 2002)

Change does not happen simply because school per-sonnel have identified the need for change to occur.Typically, they will have to develop plans and activelysupport change. Both teachers and students may needaccommodations and systematic monitoring to providefeedback related to behavioral change. Teachers, forexample, may engage in a particular behavior that,while effective for most students, interferes with thelearning of some specific students. The goal of moni-toring is not to identify poor teachers or generally inef-fective teaching, but to provide teachers withinformation and feedback related to their teaching. Thepurpose of providing feedback is to assist the teacher inthe identification of more effective teaching strategiesfor all students. This type of monitoring is needed byexcellent teachers as well as less effective teachers andby experienced teachers as well as those who are new tothe profession.

ConclusionThe task of developing effective school-wide and class-room-based discipline programs, behavioral interven-tion plans, and a system of positive behavioral supportsfor challenging students requires a significant commit-ment of time and energy. As detailed in the preceding

30 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monographir) fr-J

0

discussion, those involved in the process must engagein a number of activities.

An assessment of school discipline records and theexamination of the school social context to identifywhere current strengths and problems exist.

Identification of intervention targets and goals forthe school-wide and classroom discipline programs.This will include the identification and effectivecommunication of expected behavior for both stu-dents and school personnel.

Implementation of a continuum of positive behav-ioral supports that meet the needs of students whosebehaviors cross a continuum of seriousness andseverity.

Development of key support programs for students(e.g., peer mediation programs, homework clubs,structured activities during key unstructured times)and teachers (e.g., peer mentoring, effective teacherassistance teams).

Active monitoring (systematic observation) ofteacher and student interaction.

Effective school-wide discipline involves far morethan the identification of agreed-upon consequencesfor specified rule infractions. Any school discipline pro-gram that does not concentrate first and foremost onthe prevention of behavior problems is seriously flawed.There is far more empirically supported research iden-tifying effective prevention practices than there is relat-ed to the effective intervention and remediation ofestablished problem behavior.

ReferencesCaplan, G. (1964). Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York:

Basic Books.Catalano, R., & Dooley, D. (1980). Economic change in primary

prevention. In R. H. Price, R. F. Ketterer, B. C. Bader, & J.Monahan (Eds.), Prevention in mental health: Research, pol-icy, and practice (pp. 21-40). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Kame'enui, E. (1992). Staff survey onschool-wide discipline. Project PREPARE: Promoting respon-sible, empirical and proactive alternatives in regular educa-tion for students with behavior disorders. Unpublishedmanuscript. College of Education, University of Oregon,Eugene.

Conroy, M., Clark, D., Gable, R. A., & Fox, J. (1999). A look atIDEA 1997 discipline provisions: Implications for change inthe roles and responsibilities of school personnel. PreventingSchool Failure, 43, 64-70.

Cable, R. A., Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Jr., Howell, K., &Hoffman, C. (1998). Addressing student problem behavior.Part II: Conducting a functional assessment. Washington DC:Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice.

Griffith, J. (1999). The school leadership/school climate relation:Identification of school configurations associated with changein principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35,267-291.

Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: Thenature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper &Row.

Neel, R. S., & Cessna, K. K. (1993). Behavioral intent:Instructional content for students with behavioral disorders.In K. K. Cessna (Ed.), Instructionally differentiated program-ming: A needs-based approach for students with behavior dis-

orders (pp. 31-39). Denver: Colorado Department ofEducation.

Reschke, K. L, & Hegland, S. M. (1999). Emotional and discipli-nary responses to pre-service teachers to young children'smisbehavior. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED431525)

Rodkin, P., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Theheterogeneity of popularity in boys: Antisocial and pro-socialconfigurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14-24.

Romi, S., & Freund, M. (1999). Teachers', students', and parents'attitudes towards disruptive behavior problems in highschool. Educational Psychology, 19, 53-70.

Skiba, R., & Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance:Can punishment lead to safe schools? Phi Delta Kappan, 80,372-382.

Skiba, R., Peterson, R., & Williams, T. (1997). Office referrals andsuspensions: Disciplinary intervention in middle schools.Education and TYeatment of Children, 20, 295-315.

Snyder, T. D. (1993). Trends in education. Principal, 73,9-14.Sugai, G., Homer, R., Dunlap, C., Heinemann, M., Lewis, T. J.,

Nelson, C. M., et al. (2000). Applying positive behavior sup-ports and functional behavioral assessment in schools,Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 131-143.

U.S. Department of Education. (1980). Nondiscrimination underprograms receiving federal assistance through theDepartment of Education effectuation of Title VI of the CivilRights Act of 1964. (45 FR 30918, May 9,1980). WashingtonDC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Van Acker, R. (2002). Establishing and monitoring a school andclassroom climate that promotes desired behavior and aca-demic achievement. In L. M. Bullock, J. Chapple, & R. A.Cable (Eds.), CASEICCBD Mini-Library Series: Safe, Drug-free, and Effective Schools. Arlington, VA: Council forExceptional Children.

White, R., Algozzine, B., Audette, R., Marr, M. B., & Ellis, E. D.,Jr. (2001). Unified discipline: A school-wide approach for man-aging problem behavior. Intervention in School and Clinic,37, 3-8.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 31

:3

PROACTIVE APPROACHES TO WORKING

WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS:

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

HOWARD S. MUSCOTI"RIVIER COLLEGE

NASHUA, N H

ANTHONY MENENDEZ

COLLIN COUNTY SPECIAL EDUCATION COOPERATIVE

WYLIE, TX

DARLENE M. JAMESFREEHOLD HIGH SCHOOL

FREEHOLD, NJ

JODY JACKSON

RUDDER MIDDLE SCHOOLSAN ANTONIO, TX

The issue of school discipline is one of the greatest con-cerns facing teachers, administrators, and families.Mirroring society at large, responses to misbehavior inschool tend to be reactive and punitive, and they arerarely individualized. However, there is little empiricalevidence to support these responsesparticularlywhen dealing with students whose behavior problemsare longstanding (Gottfredson, 1997). The accumulatedevidence suggests that the adoption of district-widezero-tolerance policies that result in suspensions andexpulsions from school, in particular, do not improvestudent behavior or make a positive contribution toschool safety (Skiba, 2002). For these reasons, there isgrowing consensus that proactive discipline and indi-vidualized approaches are more effective with this pop-ulation (Council for Children with BehavioralDisorders, 2002; Gottfredson, 1997; Skiba, 2002).

In response to the challenge of responding proac-tively to students with behavior problems, the Councilfor Children with Behavioral Disorders (CCBD) spon-sored a working forum on the topic in February of 2002in Tampa, Florida. Through keynote presentations andfacilitated discussion groups, the forum addressed anumber of broad themes, including behavioral issues inthe schools, using school personnel to make accommo-

dations and modifications, and creating high-qualitybehavioral intervention plans to promote school suc-cess. What follows are the most significant aspects ofdiscussions among teachers, behavior consultants,mental health providers, administrators, family mem-bers, and higher education faculty involved in teacherpreparation who met throughout the 2-day forum.

Behavioral Issues in the Schools

We began our discussions with unanimous agreementthat using positive, proactive academic and behavioralapproaches was the preferred method for working withstudents with behavior problems. However, the groupalso agreed that the ability of school personnel toimplement positive approaches to discipline is compli-cated by the increasing demands being placed on them.We singled out the following three demands as majorchallenges facing educational personnel in their effortsto implement proactive approaches to discipline: theincreasing demands for academic achievement andhigh-stakes testing; the complexity of students' behav-ior; and the lack of trained, qualified personnel.

32 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

38

The group initially discussed the fact that schoolswere being asked to increase standards for academicachievement and accountability through high-stakestesting. Destefano, Shriner, and Lloyd (2001) noted thatover the past 10 years, use of standardized testing hasincreased dramatically and students are required topass more intense district and state testing. We allagreed that the intense focus on academic accountabil-ity and high-stakes testing are added stressors for gen-eral and special educators. The participants agreed thatthis policy shift has resulted in a narrowing of the cur-riculum and increased pressure on teachers to "teach tothe test."

Discussion revealed general agreement that academ-ic achievement is important, but that many studentswith challenging behaviors require differentiatedinstruction and an expanded curriculum to be success-ful in school. Many of the participants lamented thatteachers rarely match instructional strategies to theneeds of individual students. The group struggled withthe paradox that school personnel are being asked toincrease students' academic performance while simul-taneously expanding the curriculum to address socialand emotional development and to provide comprehen-sive services to students who are most in need. Highstandards and high-stakes testing without appropriatesupports, the group concluded, would lead to more stu-dents with challenging behaviors failing or droppingout of school.

We discussed the fact that schools are faced with theadded challenge of educating a population of studentsthat is becoming increasingly more culturally, linguis-tically, and economically diverse. These demographicshifts in the student population give teachers the addi-tional job of understanding many diverse cultures. Weagreed this demand is further complicated by the factthat the negative behavior of some students is becom-ing more severe and their needs increasingly complex.Despite national data indicating an overall decrease inviolent acts in school over the past few years, somegroup members commented that violence, crueltytoward others, bullying, and manipulation were on therise in their schools.

There was general agreement that family, school,and societal factors strongly influence student behav-ior. Group members were keenly aware of social learn-ing theory as it relates to aggression in particular. Wediscussed a number of the causal factors associatedwith conduct disorders outlined by Patterson and hiscolleagues (Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992), includ-ing temperamental characteristics, poor parenting,exposure to violence, peer rejection, and academic fail-ure. Group members commented at length that a greatdeal of student stress is caused by a lack of structureand supervision in the home and unpredictability out-side of school. Participants acknowledged that children

who are exposed to frequent acts of violence andaggression often begin to believe that these behaviorsare socially acceptable (Myles & Simpson, 1998), whichfurther complicates matters for school personnel.

Next, we discussed the reality that some parents areunable to cope with the demands of parenting and areill equipped to manage the behavior of their childrenwithout support. The challenges of linking families toservices and navigating the complex organizationalstructures of differing organizations that sometimeshave conflicting and/or competing goals were identifiedas barriers to parents' obtaining support. In addition,we identified problems associated with time schedulesand systems of accountability (Woodruff et al., 1998).We agreed that the more students, families, and educa-tors struggle with these complicated issues, the moredifficult it becomes for teachers to meet students' emo-tional and academic needs (Brownell & Walther-Thomas, 2001).

We also discussed the problems stemming from anationwide shortage of teachers and trained, qualifiedpersonnel in the field of special education (Council forExceptional Children, 2001). Participants commentedon the difficulty their school districts were experienc-ing in recruiting and retaining individuals who areeffective with students with significant behavioral chal-lenges. Consistent with national trends, several groupmembers commented that teaching positions in theirdistricts were staffed with uncertified personnel andthat many general educators received little or no train-ing in managing the complex behavior of many of theirstudents. Moreover, group members indicated that bothspecial and general educators were feeling over-whelmed by the number of students with challengingbehaviors being placed in their classrooms or on theircaseloads.

There was consensus in the group that teacherswithout specific training were more likely to rely onpunitive, reactive approaches to disciplinesuch asimmediate referral to the office for minor misbehav-iorthan were their peers with training. We know thatwithout proper staff development and administrativesupport it is extremely difficult to teach students withbehavior problems effectively. Moreover, participantsacknowledged that some teachers were unable to disen-gage from power struggles with their studentsespe-cially their adolescent students. According to somegroup members, this lack of skill in deescalating behav-ior often exacerbated the problem and, on occasion,resulted in triggering acts of aggression. Long (1995)has described the escalating conflict cycle that resultsin counteraggression, and techniques for deescalationhave been suggested by Muscott (1995) and Walker,Colvin, and Ramsey (1995).

The group concluded that students with challengingbehaviors require highly trained, caring professionals

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors

35 BESTCOPYAVAILABLE

33

who engage in collaborative practices and have specificexpertise on the nature of students with challengingbehaviors and strategies that promote their school suc-cess. Fortunately, research suggests that a coordinated,collaborative approach to training can enhance teach-ers' knowledge and skills in working with these youngpeople (Cheney, Barringer, Upham, & Manning, 1996).

Using School Personnel to MakeAccommodations and Modificationsto Promote Student SuccessIt is critical for special educators to build caring, trust-ing, and respectful relationships with both students andgeneral educators. To meet the increasing demand forservices to students with challenging behaviors, profes-sionals are finding it beneficial to collaborate, pooltheir resources, and coordinate assistance in a systemof care (Skiba, Polsgrove, & Nasstrom, 1996). Ourgroup agreed that the general educator has a dauntingnumber of responsibilities in today's classroom thatsometimes include coteaching with colleagues. We dis-cussed the fact that collaborative teaching can supportclassroom teachers in four different ways: consultingteacher services, cooperative teaching in the classroom,supportive resource programs, and instructional assis-tants (Idol, 1997). Regardless of the activity, groupmembers agreed that collaboration requires a realisticappraisal of needs, mutual classroom ownership, andfollow-through on participant commitments. Addi-tional aspects of successful collaboration discussed bythe group included active listening, common planningtime, modeling interventions, data-driven approaches,and strong leadership from the principal or programadministrator.

We examined the fact that accommodations andmodifications are similar, but not identical, concepts(No let & McLaughlin, 2000). Accommodations refer toservices or supports that help students with disabilitiesto access the general education curriculum. They donot typically change the content of instruction or stu-dent performance expectations. Common accommoda-tions include changes in the way information ispresented to students; changes in the way studentsdemonstrate learning; and content enhancements suchas visual displays, study guides, or peer-mediatedinstruction. In contrast, modifications refer to actualadjustments in either the curriculum or expected stu-dent performance. Common modifications includeteaching less or different content and requiring stu-dents with disabilities to master less information thantheir general education peers.

There was unanimity among the group membersthat an efficient way for school personnel to promote

student success would be to develop and implementaccommodations and modifications based on individualstudent needs. The consensus was that many studentswith challenging behaviors might benefit from differ-entiated instruction, peer mediation, cooperative learn-ing experiences, and direct instruction in social skillsor affective education. Whether teachers are willing toexpand and individualize their instructional practicesor not, they must realize the negative impact of inef-fective practices on student performance. Group mem-bers agreed that classroom environments in whichstudents experience academic failure, punitive disci-pline, rejection/isolation from peers, or public humilia-tion hinder the progress of collaborative services forstudents and potentially exacerbate the emotionalproblems of youth.

One group member raised the issue of "withitness."Kounin (1977) has described an inherent classroomwithitness, in the absence of which teachers will expe-rience decreased control and students will feelincreased tension in the classroom. We agreed thatbehavior can be reshaped with positive reinforcement,relevant curriculum, and effective instructional prac-tices for people of any age and that teachers, as well asstudents, need to see replacement behaviors as a moreeffective way to meet students' needs in the classroom.Group members commented on the need to reinforceand thereby strengthen positive behaviors by "catch-ing" colleagues, as well as students, "being good."

Group members also shared their thoughts on thebenefits of teaming and proactive approaches to studentdiscipline. In general, the discussion centered on thethemes of enhancing teachers' capacity through profes-sional development opportunities and providing sup-port throughout the change process. The following keyitems emerged during our discussions:

General education teachers need training in proac-tive discipline approaches and differentiated instruc-tion as urgently as do special educators.

Teachers must use strategies that work for studentsinstead of relying on techniques just because theyare common or preferred.

Teachers must see that the benefits of changingtheir teaching outweigh the risks.

Teachers must be rewarded for taking risks andchanging instructional practices to meet the needsof diverse learners.

Along with a basis of respect for students' varyingneeds, paraprofessionals coming into special educa-tion need adequate training prior to and after theybegin to work with students.

Collaboration needs to be proactive and ongoing,rather than merely a problem-driven process.

34 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

4 0

The discussion group celebrated the fact that manystudents with challenging behaviors are being recog-nized as intelligent and academically capable. However,some expressed concern that the push for high academ-ic standards may inadvertently decrease behavioral suc-cess for students with challenging behaviors. We allagreed that effective instruction prevents behavior prob-lems and a collaborative effort is the key to success.

Promoting Student SuccessThrough High-Quality BehavioralIntervention PlansThe 1997 Amendments to the Individuals withDisabilities Education Act (IDEA) require the individu-alized education program (IEP) team to explore theneed for strategies and supports to address any problembehavior that impedes either the learning of the childwith a disability or the learning of peers. Moreover,when school personnel impose certain disciplinary con-ditions on a student with a disability, the IEP team isrequired, within 10 days, to formulate a functionalbehavioral assessment (FBA) to collect data to develop,review, and, if necessary, revise a behavioral interven-tion plan (BIP) to ensure that it addresses the behaviorupon which the disciplinary action was predicated.

The group members agreed that the schools inwhich they work are responding to these mandates bydeveloping a process for generating FBAs and creatingBIPs. However, consistent with the findings of Conroy,Katsiyannis, Clark, Gable, and Fox (2002), a number ofthe participants indicated there were problems withimplementation that had yet to be fully addressed.Further discussion identified the following challengesto the creation of high-quality BIPs:

A lack of trained personnel with the necessaryexpertise for combining and integrating the variousparts of the process into a cohesive plan.

Overreliance on consequences for misbehavior,rather than prevention and differentiated instruc-tion.

A continued focus on "one-size-fits-all" interven-tions in general and interventions that are matchedto the identified underlying function of behavior inparticular.

Inconsistent implementation of strategies delineat-ed in the plans.

In spite of these limitations, we reached consensuson several points about BIPs that are supported by theliterature. First, a BIP is a written set of interventionstrategies designed to either decrease the problem

behavior or increase the prosocial behavior of theoffending student. Second, the BIP should be based onthe FBA and the resulting hypothesis statementsregarding the function of the student's behavior(Jolivette, Barton-Arwood, & Scott, 2000). Group mem-bers agreed that using the results of an FBA to developinterventions is a valuable approach because it relies onlooking beyond surface behavior to the underlyingcauses of the behavior (Center for Effective Collabor-ation and Practice, 1998). Third, once the underlyingmotivations for problem behavior are identified andverified, a BIP should be developed to address theunderlying causes, rather than the surface behavior.Group members voiced concern that some teachers donot put much stock in the idea of a replacement behav-ior and would rather just try to suppress the behaviorthrough punishments. Others indicated that whenplans address underlying motivations and reasonablereplacement behaviors, behavior does indeed changefor the better. The latter view is consistent with theanalysis by Gable and Hendrickson (2000), who notedthat research supports the conclusion that students aremore likely to cease misbehavior when interventionsare designed to promote a replacement behavior that"more effectively and efficiently satisfies the sameneed." (p. 287)

There was general agreement that the developmentof a high-quality BIP results from gathering and ana-lyzing data from multiple sources and engaging in acollaborative process among the stakeholders. One dis-cussant described her success with a process wherebyplans were developed with the full input and participa-tion of all team members, including parents. Othersnoted a less-than-ideal process in which data were lim-ited and participation cursory, at best. One participantshared an example we hope does not happen anywhereelse: "In my schools it [i.e., the BIN is done in a fewminutes, and then referrals are written." We acknowl-edged that we have a long way to go before the field asa whole embraces the best-practice approach. The dis-cussion led us to identify a number of strategies forinvolving a greater number of contributors in develop-ing plans that will be implemented faithfully:

Develop relationships with school personnel andfamily members outside the context of disciplinaryinfractions.

Reduce the use of professional jargon and speak inthe language of teachers and family members.

Gain an understanding and appreciation of the cul-tural differences of team members and interactrespectfully.

Seek to understand the differing motivations andinterests of each of the participants.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 35

41

Identify common interests among the different par-ticipants and act upon those interests.

Spend time in each other's classrooms so that inter-ventions discussed and developed are feasible.

Develop relevant replacement behaviors.

Incorporate the knowledge and expertise of all of thestakeholders.

Involve the various stakeholders in joint trainingactivities.

We know that in creating an effective interventionplan to address problem behavior, the IEP team shouldconsider positive strategies, program or curriculummodifications, and supplementary aids and supports(Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice, 1998).The group spent considerable time discussing the ele-ments of an effective BIP. Many of the strategies high-lighted during the discussion were consistent withthose identified by Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, and Hagan-Burke (1999-2000):

Teaching the desired and alternative replacementbehaviors to compete with occurrences of problembehavior.

Manipulating antecedent events that decrease thelikelihood of problem behavior and increase theprobability of desired and alternative replacementbehaviors.

Manipulating consequence events to discourageproblem behavior and encourage desired replace-ment behaviors.

Eliminating setting events or neutralizing theimpact of setting events.

Preventing and responding to emergency or crisissituations.

Monitoring the implementation effectiveness andimpact of the plan on student behavior.

ConclusionParticipants in this 2-day working forum agreed thatschools must embrace positive, proactive approaches toserve students with challenging behaviors adequately.Appropriate service delivery is dependent upon a high-ly trained group of educators who collaborate effective-ly in the implementation of best-practice approaches.We also identified some of the major challenges facedby public school personnel, including high-stakes test-ing, which results in a narrowing of the curriculum,and the demographic shift in student populations,which necessitates cultural competency. In addition,we examined some of the correlates of challenging

behaviors, including ineffective teaching, poor parent-ing, exposure to violence, peer rejection, and tempera-mental characteristics. To respond successfully to thesechallenges, educators must use supports that are basedupon the individual needs of the student.

As a group, we felt strongly that behavioral interven-tion plans that are developed via a collaborative processare a key component in assisting children and adoles-cents with challenging behavior. These plans can beeffective vehicles that address the underlying causes ofproblem behavior and promote prosocial replacementbehaviors. These positive supports were seen by groupmembers as much more efficacious than reactiveand/or punitive measures.

References

Brownell, M. T., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2001). Stephen W. Smith:Strategies for building a positive classroom environment bypreventing behavior problems. Intervention in School &Clinic, 37, 31-36.

Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. (1998).Addressing student problem behavior: An IEP team's intro-duction to functional behavioral assessment and behaviorintervention plans (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: AmericanInstitutes for Research.

Cheney, D., Barringer, C., Upham, D., & Manning, B. (1996).Project Destiny: A model for developing educational supportteams through interagency networks for youth with emotion-al or behavioral disorders. Special Services in the Schools, 10,57-76.

Conroy, M. A., Katsiyannis, A., Clark, D., Gable, R. A., & Fox, J.(2002). State office of education practices implementing theIDEA disciplinary provisions. Behavioral Disorders, 27,98-108.

Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders. (2002). Schooldiscipline and IDEA 97: What works is keeping kids in school.Arlington, VA: Author.

Council for Exceptional Children. (2001). Report on special edu-cation from the Council for Exceptional Children.Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, 76(3), 8-11.

Destefano, L., Shriner, J. G., & Lloyd, C. A. (2001). Teacher deci-sion making in participation of students with disabilities inlarge-scale assessment. Exceptional Children, 68, 7-22.

Gable, R. A., & Hendrickson, J. M. (2000). Strategies for main-taining positive behavior change stemming from functionalbehavioral assessment in schools. Education and Treatmentof Children, 23, 286-297.

Gottfredson, D. (1997). School-based crime prevention. In L.Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Ruter, & S.Bushway (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works, what doesn't,what's promising: A report to the United States Congress (pp.1-74). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office ofJustice Programs.

Idol, L. (1997). Creating collaborative and inclusive schools.Austin, TX: Eitel.

Jolivette, K., Barton-Arwood, S., & Scott, T. M. (2000). Functionalbehavioral assessment as a collaborative process among pro-fessionals. Education and Treatment of Children, 23,298-313.

36 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

4 2

Kounin, J. (1977). Discipline and group management in class-rooms (Rev. ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Long, N. J. (1995). Why adults strike back: Learned behavior orgenetic code? Reclaiming Children and Youth, 4, 11-15.

Muscott, H. S. (1995). Techniques for avoiding counteraggressiveresponses when teaching youth with aggressive behaviors.Reclaiming Children and Youth, 4, 41-44.

Myles, B. S., & Simpson, R. L. (1998). Aggression and violence byschool-age children and youth: Understanding the aggressioncycle and prevention/intervention strategies. Intervention inSchool and Clinic, 33, 259-264.

No let, V., & McLaughlin, M. J. (2000). Accessing the general cur-riculum: Including students with disabilities in standards-based reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1992). Antisocialboys. Eugene, OR: Castalia.

Skiba, R. J. (2002). Special education and school discipline: Aprecarious balance. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 82-97.

Skiba, R. J., Polsgrove, L., & Nasstrom, K. (1996). Developing asystem of care: Interagency collaboration for students withemotionallbehavioral disorders. Arlington, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Sugai, G., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Hagan-Burke, S. (1999-2000).Overview of the functional behavioral assessment process.Exceptionality, 8, 149-160.

Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behav-

ior in schools: Strategies and best practices. Pacific Grove,CA: Brooks/Cole.

Woodruff, D. W., Osher, D., Hoffman, C. C., Gruner, A., King,M. A., Snow, S. T., et al. (1998). The role of education in a sys-

tem of care: Effectively serving children with emotional orbehavioral disorders (Monograph). In Systems of care:Promising practices in children's mental health [On-line].Available: http://cecp.air.org/promisingpractices.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 37

4 2

IMPROVING SCHOOL CLIMATE:

MOVING FROM "YOUR KIDS" TO "OUR KIDS"

KAREN BARNES

GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITYGRAND RAPIDS, MI

PAULA FLINTUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS, DENTON

BERNIE TRAVNAKAR

MICHIGAN POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT

PONTIAC, MI

The multiple perspectives of members of our discussiongroup provided a unique insight regarding how proac-tive approaches are faring in the schools. Participantsexpressed the feeling that school officials who support-ed the participation of personnel in this forum are morelikely than others to be either involved in proactiveapproaches or open to change in disciplinary practices.However, many of the group members were seekingways to overcome barriers to redefining the currenteducational scene from reactive to proactive approach-es to discipline and instruction. We hope that what fol-lows captures the essence of the points that ourcolleagues felt were critical to that discussion.

Behavioral Issues in the SchoolsWe began our discussion by exploring trends in theschools that have implications for improving the schoolenvironment for students with emotional or behavioraldisorders (E/BD). Members of the discussion groupshared some of the major challenges they experiencedin their districts and communities. These challengeslargely related to changing student demographics,accountability issues, safe schools efforts, and theinclusion of students with disabilities in general educa-tion.

Participants identified the rapidly changing natureof the school-age population as one phenomenon towhich schools are attempting to respond. Many schoolsare struggling to address the educational and socialneeds of an increasing number of students with diverselanguage and cultural backgrounds. In addition, themedical and mental health needs of some students and

their families place increasing demands on localschools and communities. At the same time, school dis-tricts, communities, and states find that their resourcesare stretched and they must establish priorities thatanger or disappoint many in the schools. Services thataddress the diverse needs of the students with whom wework are being subjected to cutbacks or outright elim-ination.

While we emphatically support efforts that enhanceacademic excellence in our schools, when academicoutcomes are at the expense of the emotional and socialdevelopment of students with challenging behaviors,we protest! Care must be taken that students withlabels such as being at-risk or having a behavioral dis-order are not perceived as roadblocks to achieving aca-demic excellence for the general student population.

There is widespread confusion and considerable con-troversy about what constitutes an appropriate conse-quence for a student with a disability who "acts up" inschool. Group members agreed that school securityefforts have increased significantly in recent years, asadministrators and parents attempt to ensure the safe-ty of the students. Given the current climate, studentswho evidence poor self-control, social skill deficits, oraggression become known as "troublemakers"; tempo-rary or permanent removal from the school is too oftenthe accepted remedy.

At the same time, schools struggle to find ways tofully include students with disabilities in general edu-cation settings. The most common challenges includeproviding individualized accommodations, supportingteachers with paraprofessionals and consultants, andcreating collaborative teaching relationships amonggeneral and special educators. Some school districts are

38 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

4 4

willing and able to dedicate needed resources to accom-plish these tasks, while others seem resistant, especial-ly when students require extensive support and/or aredisruptive.

In light of these challenges, it is understandable thatforum participants were motivated to attend by thedesire to discover more effective ways to address prob-lems associated with the education of students withchallenging behaviors. Mirroring problems nationwide,our concerns tended to revolve around the issues of theindividual student, the collaborative team, and school-wide practices.

The first set of issues we focused on related to thestudent whose behaviors are perceived as interferingwith the education of the larger student body. Most ofthese issues pertained to the school personnel's percep-tions of the student and the development of appropriateinterventions and supports:

Excessive use of suspensions to address behaviors.

Students associated with labels and past perform-ance.

Punitive approaches to behavior intervention.

Failure to identify and provide appropriate interven-tions.

Students not prepared for transitions and inclusion.

The second set of issues focused on individual teach-ing skills and collaborative relationships among educa-tors working with students with challenging behaviors.Several participants stressed that the ability of theteachers to analyze the impact of their behavior on stu-dent behavior was critical to producing positivechanges. Discussion about collaboration emphasizedhow these relationships can ensure the success or fail-ure of inclusion efforts. The issues discussed includedthe following:

Resistance to change among school staff (e.g., "Weknow what to do. Now, how do we get staff tochange?").

High turnover of special education teachers.

Uncertified teachers; lack knowledge of methodolo-gy.

General education teachers who are not ready forinclusion.

Ill-defined roles of team members.

The third set of issues related to school policies andsystems that impact students with challenging behav-iorsstudents with and without labels. It was apparentduring our discussions that many in our group wereexperiencing frustration in providing supports to their

students and that some elements were missing fromthe service delivery system. The problems mentionedincluded:

Limited early intervention and prevention plans.

Lack of systems for reintegrating students (e.g., self-contained to general education).

Lack of systems for helping students make the tran-sition from other settings (e.g., residential treat-ment or juvenile justice back into the schoolenvironment).

Out-of-school suspension policies.

Identification and implementation of best practices.

We recognized that many of these issues are interrelat-ed, with some probable cause-and-effect relationships.Finally, group members asserted that we would beremiss if we failed to point out that some schools anddistricts were experiencing success in their efforts tomeet the diverse learning and behavioral needs of theirstudents through individual, collaborative, and school-wide efforts.

The goals our group identified focus on preventionand intervention. Consistent with the accumulated lit-erature, we agreed that early identification of childrenwho are at risk for developing E/BD is critical. If wewant to see increased success, then intervening whenchildren are in preschool and early elementary school isimperative. As students progress through the grades,negative experiences accumulate and problems multi-ply and diversify. If these problems go unabated,increasingly more intrusive and intensive interventionswill be needed. Finally, goals for the individual studentinclude both improved social adjustment and academicperformance.

That social skills development was seen by our groupas a primary goal for students with challenging behav-iors is certainly no surprise. For a student to be accept-ed in educational settings, she or he will need todevelop skills to gain teacher approval and peer accept-ance. Students with behavioral challenges benefit fromoverlapping academic and nonacademic instruction todevelop self-management and interpersonal skills. Ourgroup agreed that working with students to demon-strate positive social skills across settings is a continu-ing challenge.

While academics are emphasized for the general stu-dent population, academic skills too often take a backseat to the classroom conduct of students with E/BD.Unfortunately, because of their repeated frustration andfailure, the educational setting is often an aversive envi-ronment for these students. For them to succeedboth behaviorally and academicallyit is essential thateducators find ways to promote positive academic

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 39

A

engagement that can provide opportunities for thesestudents to be motivated, challenged, and successful.

The purpose of providing support for students withE/BD is so that they may become empowered to self-manage their behavior and have equal access to educa-tional opportunities. The ultimate goal is to ensure thatstudents have social and academic experiences that leadnot only to positive outcomes, but also to integrationinto the larger community as contributing, fulfilledadults.

Using School Personnel to MakeAccommodations and Modificationsto Promote Student SuccessThe challenges surrounding improving the workingrelationship between special education and generaleducation brought to mind the saying "You can catchmore flies with honey than you can with vinegar!"Group members offered various recommendations forimproving the quality of student support by improvingthe relationships between general educators and thespecial educators who are providing that support,whether in settings that employ behavior specialists,collaboration models, consultation, or coteaching. Therecommendations included the following:

Market the kidstalk about their strengths!Share noninstructional duties (e.g., lunch, recess,bus) equally.

Listen to each other; be empathetic regarding thechallenges of colleagues.

Periodically take responsibility for a general educa-tor's classroom for a class period.

Eat in the teachers' lounge and use that opportunityto increase professional bonding by sharing bothpersonal and professional interests.

Praise student and teacher success.

Provide colleagues with practical suggestions foraccommodations that are easy to implement formultiple students in general education inclusiveclassrooms.

In concert with the improvement of relationshipsamong colleagues comes a closer scrutiny of the mod-els of collaboration that are being considered or arealready in place in our schools. We were fortunate tohave educators in our group who had positive experi-ences with coteaching. The coteaching partnerships ofgroup members were predicated on mutual trust,respect, and responsibility; special education teacherswere not viewed as "assistants" supporting students in

the general education setting. There was some discus-sion about the consultant model and the value of theconsultant being someone in house who is able to pro-vide an added degree of continuity and stability for stu-dents and staff. Several in the group expressed interestin an enlarged role for behavior interventionists andthe supportive role of these educators, especially as itrelates to early identification and intervention. It is nosurprise that providing adequate time for support staffto work directly with teachers is a challenge in mostschools. However, we were in full agreement that ifschool personnel are going to shift from reactive toproactive approaches to discipline and instruction, sup-port is essential.

We cannot emphasize enough how critical a well-functioning team is to the success of students withE/BD. The team is instrumental in creating a positivelearning environment by preparing the students andthe receiving teachers, providing direct instruction andsupport as students face the challenge of adjusting tonew settings, and routinely interacting with the stu-dents and faculty to troubleshoot and resolve academicand nonacademic problems, thereby increasing thechance of sustained success.

Group members also emphasized the importance ofbringing parents onto the support team along withschool personnel. They shared ideas for contacting par-ents in positive wayssuch as letting them know whentheir child was doing wellrather than contributing toparent aversion to school contact. (We can hardly faultweary parents who might resort to checking caller IDbefore answering a call.)

Promoting Student SuccessThrough High-Quality BehavioralIntervention Plans (Systems ofPositive Behavior Support)Our discussion group was in agreement that district-wide commitment to improving the school climate andschoolcommunity relationships is a promising trend.We were very enthusiastic about the ideas presented byothers at the forum (see monograph article by AnthonyMoriarty). We agreed with the practice of serving stu-dents who have violated school rules in the school set-ting rather than suspending them. There is littleevidence that suspension is an effective intervention; itonly enables students to hang out with others in out-of-school settings and to increase their behavioral prob-lems. Our group expressed interest in the plan to havestudents complete what were described as social skillsmodules.

Regardless of the intervention plan, we did recognizethat there are myriad problems associated with systems

40 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

b

change. Research and experience show that it takes sev-eral years for a school to fully implement a systematic,school-wide program of positive behavioral supports.School-wide positive behavioral support systems havethe potential to address the dual demands for safety andacademic excellence in the schools. Data are collected inareas such as behavior incidents, office referrals, truan-cy, and reading and other academic scores. Being able toanticipate positive academic and nonacademic changeswould certainly be a powerful motivator for schools toconsider implementing school-wide models. Even so,district-wide systems change can be overwhelming tocontemplate. A member of our group related how a sin-gle school in their district was selected that was enthu-siastic about embracing positive behavior supports. Thisschool will serve as a model for other schools in the dis-trict to adopt a proactive approach to discipline andinstruction.

Our group agreed that the transition from behavioralintervention to positive behavioral support provides anopportunity to impact attitudes and practices. While theterm intervention appears to have become associatedwith punishment, the term support connotes a proac-tive team approach. We know that terminology isimportant and often has an impact on attitudes. Thejudicious use of functional behavioral assessment (FBA)as part of a proactive approach to discipline and instruc-tion provides an opportunity for school personnel toexplore the behavior of the student in relation to peersand adults. Equally important, it affords an opportunityfor teachers and others to evaluate critically their inter-actions with students and try new approaches to solvinglearning and behavior problems.

Finally, the consensus of our group was that a criti-cal need exists for systematic support for both studentswith challenging behaviors and the personnel who pro-vide services for these students. Students reentering anacademic setting or moving from setting to setting ben-efit from a system that supports their needs for safetyand security. As one member of our group put it, stu-dents need a "tether" approach, a system for temporar-ily returning to a safe and familiar environment whenthe stress in the new academic setting becomes toogreat.

ConclusionThe importance of administrative commitmentemerged as key to the success of school-wide imple-mentation and maintenance of support systems for stu-dents with challenging behaviors. School personnelmust be given assurance that systems change will sur-vive leadership changes. For systems to change, weneed to advocate for the application of research-basedinterventions and early identification of children whoare at risk for E/BD. Partnerships with parents of youngchildren can be built by providing support and creatingopportunities for positive communication.

Educators working with students with challengingbehaviors should evaluate the reintegration and transi-tion models that are in place in their schools. Thereshould be clearly defined personnel responsibilities anda commitment to maintaining and improving supportsystems.

Furthermore, collaborative relationships are essen-tial to creating a positive school environment. In mostinstances, significant, ongoing training must be pro-vided for all school personnel. And, school officialsmust build partnerships with community agencies andwork toward shared resources in order to create aseamless array of service options. In that high-qualityinteractions among teachers and students are prerequi-site to promoting positive affiliation and academic suc-cess for students with challenging behaviors,stakeholders must continually strive to provide moreeffective programs for students.

Recommended ResourcesMichigan Department of Education, Office of Special Education

and Early Intervention Services. (2000). Positive behaviorsupport for ALL Michigan students: Creating environmentsthat assure learning [Electronic version]. Retrieved March15, 2002, from http://www.mde.state.mi.us/off/sped/LIBRARY/

DUE_PROCESS/PositiveBehvSuptExSum.pdfOSEP Technical Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and

Supports. (1999). Applying positive behavioral support andfunctional behavioral assessment in schools. TechnicalAssistance Guide [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 15,2002, from http://www.pbis.org/english/Center_Products.htm

BESTCOPYAVAILABLE

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 41

4 ri

PRACTICING AN ETHOS OF CARE:

LAYING A FOUNDATION FOR SCHOOL-WIDE

PROACTIVE APPROACHES

TERESA L. TEAFFUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS, DENTON

CATHY KEANORTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL STATE UNIVERSITY

GREENSBORO, NC

Proof that big things come in small packages was evi-denced in a recent dialog among a diverse group of pro-fessionals at the recent CCBD Forum on PositiveAcademic and Behavioral Supports. A small, but ener-getic group of special educators, vocational educators,program coordinators, counselors, university profes-sors, and principals came together to critically and con-structively examine current school-wide approaches toworking with students with challenging behaviors.

Over the course of the forum, participants discusseda range of issues in practical and realistic terms andbrainstormed solutions in a hopeful manner. A senseemerged that just as our nation is at a critical cross-roads of change, as educators of students with chal-lenging behaviors, we have a unique opportunity todraw upon the support, tools, and momentum createdby the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of1997 (IDEA '97) to provide successful academic andbehavioral outcomes for students with challengingbehaviors. A true ethos of care, which has brought thisnation together, can and should serve to guide educa-tors as we navigate the waters of uncertainty andchange.

Behavioral Issues in the Schools

Demands and Response

Demand, as defined by Merriam-Webster (1996), is anyurgent requirement or need. For teachers facing a suc-cession of educational reforms, there is little room formisinterpretation of the definition when discussing thenature of their daily demands. When asked to reflect onthe many requirements placed on schools today andhow districts are responding to those demands, little

time elapsed before group participants responded withan almost urgent riposte. Standardized testing, inclu-sive education, diversity of student populations, andtime constraints have placed increasing demands onteachers (Van Acker, 2002). Participants delineated var-ious daily challenges. They indicated that standards oflearning, increased pressure for accountability, higheracademic expectations, lack of fully qualified teachers,paperwork demands, large caseloads, increasing stu-dent diversity, and changes in federal legislation (i.e.,IDEA '97) have placed extraordinary demands onschools. Striking a balance between academic andnonacademic instruction has and will continue to be achallenge for all educators.

In addition to demands on schools, the intersectionof so-called "zero-tolerance" policies regarding behav-ior and the push for general classroom inclusion hasplaced new demands on students with challengingbehaviors. Students must now learn to interact sociallywith one another, share materials and space, and per-form publicly (Van Acker, 2002). For students whorequire behavioral accommodations, disciplinary poli-cies and practices may be enforced unfairly and with lit-tle flexibility. Participants agreed that generaleducation classrooms may be more inclusive, but theirstructure may be poorly aligned with the needs of stu-dents from special education classrooms. An ongoingissue in the field of emotional or behavioral disorders(E/BD) that was reaffirmed by participants is the highrate of student academic failure. Students are choosingnot to complete work, they are sleeping in class, and arepreoccupied with issues unrelated to the classroom.Dissonance between school and home cultural expecta-tions create uncertainty as well. In other words, stu-dents in general and those with E/BD in particular arebecoming more alienated from the school environment

42 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

4 6

since it appears to be meeting fewer and fewer of theirneeds. Participants expressed an additional concernthat a growing number of parents are opting for char-ter schools, which may not be designed to adequatelyaddress the needs of students with E/BD.

Critical Issues and BehaviorConsiderable discussion focused on previously reporteddemands placed on school districts, teachers, and stu-dents. Critical issues surrounding these demandsemerged from the group. With an increase in high-stakes testing and standards of learning have comehigher academic expectations for all students. By virtueof inclusion, expectations of appropriate behavior andacademic achievement have increased for all studentswith disabilities. Unfortunately, many teachers are illprepared to deal with the diversity of disabilities, aca-demic levels, and behavior while seeking to satisfyaccountability standards. Discussion within the groupled to the identification of the most critical issues relat-ed to these demands:

State assessment demands have created a conflictbetween the special education and general educationcurriculums, specifically individualized educationprogram (IEP) goals versus a curriculum driven bytests.

Inclusion has raised the bar for social skills andbehavioral expectations, while zero-tolerance poli-cies and increased academic demands on teacherslessen the time given to teach behavioral and socialskills.

Rigidity in classroom structure and instructionallows little flexibility for differential teaching andlearning.

IEPs should include more social and behavioralgoals, objectives, and support programs.

Wraparound services are limited, and implementa-tion is hindered by inadequate funding; lack of time;and communication problems among agencies,schools, and parents.

Special educators have limited opportunity to meetthe various demands of sustaining effective inclusiveclassroom instruction.

There is a lack of understanding about the natureand impact of social/emotional behaviors by bothgeneral and special educators.

The complexity of society requires students tobecome prematurely independent, even though theylack the prerequisite skills. Technology affords stu-dents immediate gratification and encourages social

isolation, resulting in a decline in social interactionand social learning.

Goals for Intervention andPrevention

A long-term goal of creating an ethos of care becamethe resounding theme and hope for the group mem-bers. Short-term intervention and long-term preven-tion will require great resolve and commitment.Collectively, the participants agreed that our goal aseducators is to teach children who are intrinsicallymotivated, able to cope and thrive in general education,and working at or above grade level. Unfortunately,these are rarely the characteristics associated with stu-dents with E/BD. Notwithstanding the challenges, chil-dren should be taught the social tools necessary forsuccess. They should have the tools to take what theylearn and apply it to their personal experience and lifeby learning the basic concepts, capturing the essence ofthe subject matter, and generalizing relevant informa-tion across settings. Relevant curriculum and adequateresources should be available to all students. For stu-dents with E/BD to be successful learners, we mustactively target and change maladaptive behaviors andteach new behaviors. We believe it will take more aca-demic support, improved curriculum, and better-prepared teachers and paraeducators to accomplishthat goal.

Short- or long-term goals should include anincreased level of competency for general and specialeducators accomplished through high-quality teacherpreparation programs and professional developmentactivities. Several participants suggested that there bedual preparation between general and special educatorsand that time spent in professional development activi-ties should include hands-on, field-based experienceswith students. We must lower teacher turnover ratesand increase the quality of their knowledge, skills, anddispositions. Together, these efforts may increase stu-dent access to general education and lessen reliance onpull-out programs for students with E/BD.

Utilizing School Personnel to MakeAccommodations and Modificationsto Promote Student SuccessWith IDEA '97, students with disabilities have greateraccess to the general education classroom and curricu-lum than before. However, students with E/BD are stillthe least desired of the disability categories and the lastto be placed in inclusive settings (Kea & Teaff, 2000).

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 43

49

For students with challenging behavior, instructionalaccommodations, curricular modifications, and IEPsare the sine qua non for success in the general educa-tion classroomin other words, the elements that setthe stage for successful outcomes. School personnelshould be prepared to make modifications to the learn-ing environment, vary teaching strategies, and provideservices that afford students opportunities to performessential functions (Hazelkorn, 2002). Participants sug-gested that most general educators are now aware ofrecent federal legislation and its mandates; even so, stu-dents with challenging behaviors are not fully benefit-ing from these mandates for various reasons.

Participants' greatest concern was a lack of commonvision among school personnel related to positivebehavioral supports (PBS), behavioral interventionplans, and IEPs. Additional concerns voiced by mem-bers of the group centered around dispositions, percep-tions, and preparation levels of educators, as well asvarying support for collaboration and the attentiongiven to group individualization of instruction. In apositive vein, group members had little trouble agree-ing on what is needed to ensure the implementation ofcritical academic and behavioral accommodations andmodifications for students with E/BD.

Participants were in agreement that a need existsfor a systematic philosophy regarding behavioralaccommodations and PBS. PBS provides a systemsapproach to behavior using interventions to achievesocially important behavior change (Sugai, Horner, &Sprague, 1999). Group members highlighted the neces-sity of reaffirming the efficacy of PBS as an alternativeto the use of punitive consequences schools have longembraced. Initial uncertainty regarding appropriate useof functional behavioral assessments and behavioralintervention plans has begun to decline, as school per-sonnel gain experience in the process. There is consid-erable concern, however, over implementation andevaluation associated with functional behavioral assess-ments. Several in the group suggested that implemen-tation may be improved if teams examine the behaviorslisted on the behavioral intervention plan, and, whenthe plan does not match new behaviors, take steps tofind effective interventions beyond those listed.Participants generally believed that the majority of edu-cators support inclusion of students with E/BD butspend a majority of their time dealing with behaviorproblems of students without disabilities, which leaveslittle time for students with E/BD.

For students with E/BD to access the general educa-tion curriculum as successfully as their peers, variouscurricular and instructional accommodations andmodifications are required (Mathur, Nelson, Si

Rutherford, 1998). Participants doubted the currentfeasibility of these practices. Significant discussion cen-tered on the perceptions, dispositions, and roles of gen-

eral educators in the modification and accommodationof classroom instruction. Several in the group citedexamples of possible misperceptions of their colleagues.For some general educators, role identity does notinclude teaching students with disabilities. Teachersmay have received sparse or inconsistent traininginvolving the inclusion of students with special needs,which would understandably evoke feelings of inade-quacy. For others, the concept of fairness associatedwith uniformity is a barrier to making instructionalaccommodations. Finally, the group pointed to theenormous importance placed on standardized tests, cit-ing lack of time to inclusively prepare, teach, and mod-ify instruction. In addition, there may be amisperception that students with E/BD are low func-tioning and cannot benefit from general classroominstruction.

As special educators, we feel confident that studentsare being taught the necessary cognitive strategies thatenable them to succeed in the general education class-room. What may be lacking is time to share successfultechniques and strategies collaboratively with col-leagues. It is imperative that administrators take aleadership role by providing high-quality staff develop-ment to better prepare general educators and settingaside time for regular collaboration between generaland special educators. Time provided for both increasesthe likelihood that positive alliances will be formed thatwill benefit general and special educators and their stu-dents.

Establishing Alliances andEmerging Best Practices

It is well established that school personnel who share acommon school-wide vision and philosophy are moresuccessful in meeting the needs of all students(Tonelson & Butler, 2000). Indeed, collaborationamong educators is essential to meeting the needs ofstudents with E/BD (Bullock Sz Gable, 1997).Participants were resolute that both a common visionand collaboration are necessary. A common visionamong special and general educators is necessary toestablish collaborative alliances and to work towardpositive outcomes for students with E/BD. Successfulcollaboration is predicated on a common vision as well.Special educators must be clear about the direction oftheir program and must be unafraid to initiate collabo-ration.

We discussed the fact that few school professionalshave received appropriate staff development withregard to their roles and responsibilities in collabora-tion (Korinek, 2000; Wood, 1998). School personnelcan build collaborative bridges if they receive supportfrom administrators and if effective teaching strategiesand team problem-solving techniques are included in

44 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

50

teacher preparation programs. While acknowledgingthat collaboration is no easy undertaking, participantsoffered a number of suggestions for promoting a posi-tive working relationship between special and generaleducators:

Offer high-quality staff development, based on abuilding-level needs assessment initiated by proac-tive administrators.

Provide opportunities for general and special educa-tors to attend professional development and/ortraining sessions together.

Ask general and special educators to switch jobs fora day (or a portion of the day) to examine the otherside.

Apportion ample time for joint staffing and curricu-lum planning.

Delineate specific expectations for students andteachers in general education.

Incorporate a unified approach to discipline, rules,consequences, and rewards (i.e., do away with "funFriday" type activities just for students with E/BDand include them in school-wide rewards).

Create consistency within each department involvedin collaborative efforts.

Set up specific staffing procedures prior to transitioninto general education classes.

Have general and special educators view in actionone another's instructional content, enhancementroutines, and strategies.

Develop relationships with the general educationteachers who are most accepting of students withE/BD, and provide them with meaningful supportand recognition.

Have general educators meet the students on thestudents' "turf" before integration into the generalclassroom.

Share after-school tutoring by general and regulareducators.

Share instructional materials and other resourcesbetween general and special educators.

Use a variety of coteaching and inclusion modelsthat maximize personnel and abilities.

Share the responsibility of meeting and communi-cating with parents.

Share ownership of all students.

Innovative Partnerships

Schools are increasingly turning to natural communi-ty networks to establish a true ethos of care when work-ing with students. Participants cited a number of

innovative outreach efforts being used by schools.Community partners such as Big Brothers, Big Sisters,Boy Scouts, Boys and Girls Club, sororities, churches,and community centers are being utilized in a wrap-around effort that has in the past, been somewhatinconsistent. Sponsors from various communitygroups are being used as contacts and surrogates whenparents and guardians are unavailable. Schools areincreasingly encouraging outreach and involvementamong churches and as a result, churches and otherfaith-based organizations are starting to revisit avail-able services and how they are provided to families.There is little doubt that these types of grass-rootsefforts and natural community networks are powerfulstakeholders in the lives of students.

Traditionally, partnerships in schools have existedprimarily with businesses, but a number of partner-ships with institutions of higher education haveemerged. Some participants expressed ongoing con-cern that while business partnerships are welcomedand provide needed tangible assistance and job oppor-tunities for students, many business unions are not"hands-on in nature." In one hands-on approach to col-laboration, North Carolina A&T State University Schoolof Education faculty members partner with schools andassist in supervising students in the halls and consult-ing with teachers and special education departments.The special education faculty is working with schoolpersonnel on ways to conduct responsible inclusion. Apartnership of this type provides unlimited dividendsfor all involved.

Participants questioned traditional school/businesspartnerships, with examples given from states withhigh percentages of senior citizens. In these states,businesses often utilize seniors in lieu of hiring specialeducation students for low-paying jobs and volunteer-ing opportunities. A viable solution may be creativepartnerships with vocational rehabilitation services.Dual enrollment in general education and vocationalschools is also becoming more common. Other schooldistricts are contracting with local mental health agen-cies and private providers to deliver related servicessuch as counseling and therapy. A few innovative schooldivisions have initiated in-district training programs inthe area of hotel/motel management, art, and technol-ogy, to name just a few. Unfortunately, the group dis-cussants reported that more high-tech programs tendto exclude students with disabilities.

In addition to school/business partnerships in thearea of job training and career planning, many schoolshave tapped businesses to support school-wide behaviorsystems by providing tangible items for rewards. Stillother districts draw upon business employees for men-toring and tutoring programs. Discussants shared oneexample of a creative method of recruiting retiredteachers from mobile home and retirement communi-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

45

ties to provide morning, afternoon, and summer tutor-ing and mentoring services free of charge. Districtswith military bases in the vicinity are forming partner-ships to provide tutoring and social skills instruction tostudents with E/BD. Regardless of the nature of thepartnership, participants agreed that when planningwork and career training and transition services for stu-dents with challenging behaviors, all agencies andresources should be included at the planning table tomaximize opportunities for students.

Promoting Student SuccessThrough High-Quality BehavioralIntervention Plans

School-Wide and District-Wide BestPractices

Participants confirmed that, although it is a slow andarduous process, many schools now incorporate dis-trict-wide and school-wide PBS, resulting in functionalbehavioral assessments and behavioral interventionplans that are more individualized and functional. Theintent of the inclusion of PBS in IDEA '97 as anapproach to increasing the capacity of schools to designeffective environments is now being realized by a grow-ing number of schools. Participants pointed out thatdespite incorporation of school-wide supports, actualadministration of PBS is somewhat inconsistent, per-haps because of the recency of such programs. Even so,the success of PBS requires a consistent employment ofcommon practices among all school staff, a proactiveapproach to dealing with behavior within and acrosssettings, careful monitoring of adult and student per-formance, and shared decision making (Lewis, 2000).One admonition given by participants is that all toooften current systems consist primarily of a "one-set-of-rules-and-consequences-for-all" mentality. In contrast,those schools with an approach that more accuratelyreflects the intent of IDEA '97 are using systems inwhich students, teachers, and staff are all stakeholdersin the planning and implementation process. In theseprograms, students have input regarding rewards andconsequences, thus making the system relevant to theneeds of all stakeholders. Participants shared a numberof examples of school-wide systems in use today:

The Renaissance-One program, wherein attendance,tardies, absences, and homework are all tied to setgoals for each student. All students have a chance tomake positive changes, and progress in achievingindividual goals is rewarded.

Integrated school-wide social skills instruction.

Level systems structured to afford students ways tolearn about friends, family, interpersonal conflictresolution, and career opportunities.

Positive reward systems using token economies forall students and specific programs to address moreintense problem behaviors.

Under unified approaches, teachers, janitors, cafete-ria workers, and other staff members are trained in thesystem and everyone understands the importance ofconsistency and common language used with students.PBS is a natural fit when considering the developmentof an ethos of care as student expectations and out-comes are clearly defined, the culture of both theschool and the community is considered, and facultyand community members take ownership of PBS.

Ways to Involve Stakeholdersin Positive Behavioral Supports

Integral to PBS is the appropriate use of functionalbehavioral assessments to build useful behavioral inter-vention plans for students who require more intensiveintervention (Lewis, 2000). Our discussion quickly ledto key issues surrounding functional behavioral assess-ments and behavioral intervention plans: What we do topromote each? How we provide high-quality trainingand accurate record and data keeping are among themost critical issues. Collection and analysis of variouskinds of data is an arduous but necessary part of PBS.Unfortunately, teachers, social workers, administrators,and counselors do not always possess the knowledge orskills to keep accurate records, which undermines theintegrity of the functional behavioral assessment andbehavioral intervention plan process. Discussantsagreed that more often than not, poor data collection isthe norm and that steps must be taken to better prepareand support school personnel in that effort.

Appropriately involving necessary stakeholders inthe functional behavioral assessment and behavioralintervention plan process will depend on systematicand consistent preparation by preservice teacher educa-tion programs, as well as school division inservice staffdevelopment.

Nation wide, professional development has sufferedbecause of budget cuts. The missing piece is overallplanning for training, implementation, and evaluation.The challenge remains. Schools must root out flawedand ineffective practices and misperceptions currentlyin place and replace them with more effective, efficient,and relevant practices based on the prioritized needs oftarget students (Gable, 2002). Unfortunately, there isno single blueprint that serves to spell out the process,so that many school personnel are left to muddlethrough sometimes conflicting information as to the

46 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

how, when, where, and why of functional behavioralassessments and behavioral intervention plans.

Improving Collaborative Relationships

Mirroring sentiments of colleagues across the country,we felt strongly about improving collaborative relation-ships across school, home, and community settings toensure positive outcomes and the appropriate develop-ment and implementation of behavioral interventionplans for students with E/BD. The quickest way to buildcollaborative rapport suggested by participants is to fol-low through by doing what you say you will do.Teachers need to count on and trust one another.Administrators can build rapport with and amongteachers by providing time for planning, meaningfulstaff development, and ongoing technical support.Furthermore, we must rid ourselves of the longstand-ing "us versus them" mentality between general andspecial educators. Collaboration under IDEA '97 canand should combine the special educator's knowledgeof behavior management, learning strategies, cognitiveintervention strategies, and authentic assessment withthe general educator's expertise in curriculum, contentknowledge, scope and sequence, and group assessment.Collaboration offers school personnel the chance tocome together and capitalize on the wealth of knowl-edge and specialized training of both general and spe-cial educators (Wood, 1998). Careful planning,differentiated instruction, and shared decision-makingresponsibility can serve as the benchmark of successfulschool-wide systems.

School/family relationships can be built throughimproved communication, explaining rights, seekingparental input on IEPs and behavioral interventionplans, listening, and eliminating negative perceptionsof differing norms and expectations. We must look forthe strengths of the family, recognize and value cultur-al and linguistic diversity, and find ways to involve thefamily in the process. Participants highlighted a num-ber of ways schools are involving parents:

Parents volunteering as teacher for the day orhelper.

Monthly newsletters developed by students.

Calls to parents once a week.

In-class phones for prompt use (positive as well aspunitive).

E-mail and class Web sites.

Home visits and worksite visits.

With the changes in student demographics andgrowing diversity within the school-age population,education personnel must now become culturalresearchers, seeking information about students and

their families that will allow us to support them. Toconnect culturally with families, educators must gainknowledge of cultures, values, beliefs, and differences;communicate effectively with families; and be cultural-ly sensitive when developing group or individual inter-ventions (Kea, 1997, 2002).

ConclusionIf we are committed to and sincere about creating anethos of care for all studentsincluding those withE/BDwe must ask ourselves some difficult questionsand be willing to answer with appropriate action. Arewe setting aside our preconceived ideas about studentswith E/BD? Do we have the commitment and structuresin place to support effective school-wide systems andallow them to function? Are we using learning strate-gies, motivation techniques, and curricular accommo-dations that are meaningful, relevant, and interesting?Are we then individualizing instruction? Do teachershave the time, resources, and support necessary to beeffective and to avoid burnout? Are we enthusiasticabout what we are teaching? Are we willing to learnhow to collaborate with other educators? Are we regu-larly seeking to build relationships with students,teachers, and families that show we care? Above all, thequestion is whether we are practicing an ethos of carefor a highly challenging but very deserving populationof students.

ReferencesBullock, L. M., & Gable, R. A. (Eds.). (1997). Making collabora-

tion work for children, youth, families, schools, and commu-nities. Arlington, VA: Council for Children with BehavioralDisorders and the Chesapeake Institute.

Cable, R. (2002, February). Lessons learned. Paper presented atthe meeting of the Council for Children with BehavioralDisorders on School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Workingwith Students with Challenging Behaviors, Tampa, FL.

Hazelkorn, M. (2002, February). Accommodations and modifica-tions for students with challenging behaviors: Collaboratingwith general education. Paper presented at the meeting of theCouncil for Children with Behavioral Disorders on School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Working with Students withChallenging Behaviors, Tampa, FL.

Kea, C. D. (1997). Reconnecting with African-American families.Reaching Today's Youth, 2(1), 57-61.

Kea, C. D. (2002). Issues in familyschool relationships. In L. M.Bullock & R. A. Gable (Eds.), Addressing the diverse needs ofchildren: Programs that work (pp. 45-53). Arlington, VA:Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.

Kea, C. D., & Teaff, T. (2000, October). Is violence as American ascherry pie? Maybe there is a better way. In L. M. Bullock &R. A. Gable (Eds.), Effective and nurturing schools for all stu-dents: Highlights of the 2000 CCBD Forum (pp. 53-57).Arlington, VA: Council for Children with BehavioralDisorders.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 47

53

Korinek, J. (2000). Establishing school environments that ensurepositive professional relationships. In L. M. Bullock & R. A.Gable (Eds.), Positive academic and behavioral supports:Creating safe, effective, and nurturing schools for all students(pp. 23-33). Arlington, VA: Council for Children withBehavioral Disorders.

Lewis, T. (2000). Establishing and promoting disciplinary prac-tices at the classroom and individual student level that ensuresafe, effective, and nurturing learning environments. In L. M.Bullock & R. A. Cable (Eds.), Positive academic and behav-ioral supports: Creating safe, effective, and nurturing schoolsfor all students (pp. 17-22). Arlington, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Mathur, S. R., Nelson, J. R., & Rutherford, R. B. (1998).Translating the IEP into practice: Curricular and instruction-al accommodations. In L. M. Bullock & R. A. Gable (Eds.),Implementing the 1997 IDEA: New challenges and opportu-nities for serving students with emotionallbehavioral disor-ders (pp. 17-22). Arlington, VA: Council for Children withBehavioral Disorders.

Sugai, G., Homer, R. H., & Sprague, J. (1999). Functional assess-ment based behavior support planning: Research to practiceto research. Behavioral Disorders, 24, 223-227.

Tonelson. S., & Butler, C. J. (2000). At promise for success:Improving academic and behavioral outcomes for studentswith emotional and behavioral disorders. In L. M. Bullock &R. A. Gable (Eds.), Positive academic and behavioral supports:Creating safe, effective, and nurturing schools for all students(pp. 41-46). Arlington, VA: Council for Children withBehavioral Disorders.

Van Acker, R. (2002, February). Behavior in the schools: Issuesrelated to students with challenging behavior. Paper present-ed at the meeting of the Council for Children with BehavioralDisorders on School-Wide Proactive Approaches to Workingwith Students with Challenging Behaviors, Tampa, FL.

Webster's Dictionary. (1996). Webster's II new riverside diction-ary (Rev. ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Wood, M. (1998). Whose job is it anyway? Educational roles ininclusion. Exceptional Children, 45, 181-195.

48 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

54

THE ACADEMIC/BEHAVIORAL CONNECTION:

WORKING EFFECTIVELY WITH STUDENTS

WITH CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS

BEVERLEY H. JOHNSTHE GARRISON ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL

JACKSONVILLE, I L

Behavioral Issues in the Schools

Today's schools face numerous challenges. There is auniversal push for high-stakes testing based on a cur-riculum that is standards based. The school-age popu-lation is becoming increasingly more diverse. Schoolsare experiencing serious shortages of fully qualifiedpersonnel. The standard curriculum may not be appro-priate in meeting the needs of students with disabili-ties, including those with emotional or behavioralproblems. Due to the heavy emphasis on academicachievement, schools are sacrificing important nonaca-demic areas such as social skills instruction.

Educators face the burden of increased paperwork inthe area of education that is the most litigiousspecialeducation. With budget cuts, educators are expected todo more for less. At a time when there are many careerchoices available to young people, salaries for educatorshave not met the competitive market, and as a resultcollege students are not choosing education as a career.Furthermore, educators currently in the field are leav-ing for more lucrative positions, while many teachersclose to retirement leave out of frustration over what ishappening in the schools.

Schools are expected to do more to resolve society'sproblems. Children may not have sufficient clothing, soschools provide clothing. Children may not be fed athome, so some schools provide breakfast, lunch, andeven dinner. Children may not be supervised at home,so schools provide after-school activities. The list isendless.

With the inclusion movement, special educators areexpected not only to provide specially designed instruc-tion, but also to collaborate with general educationteachers to meet students' needs. To perform this tasksuccessfully, special educators must have a knowledgeof the general education curriculum and the skills todeliver specially designed instruction.

While some districts are adopting new supports tomeet these challenges, many schools have disenfran-chised students through negative approaches such asacademically unfriendly environments and punishmentfor inappropriate or unacceptable behaviors.

Although the challenges we face are formidable, wecan meet these challenges. Just as we teach our chil-dren the value of hope, we must also have that sense ofhope that we can do our part in meeting children'sneeds. Together, we can create a sense of optimism andsustain it with development of a plan of action to meetthe needs of the students we serve. Just as we mustteach students to replace negative behaviors with posi-tive behaviors, we must also replace any negative mind-sets of our own with positive, action-oriented behaviorsthat will make a difference in children's lives. A corner-stone of the Working Forum sponsored by the Councilfor Children with Behavioral Disorders has been thatwe must look proactively for ways to make studentsacademically successful while teaching them the socialskills necessary to get along in school and beyond.

Forum participants realized there are no quick fixes.Given the overlapping nature of learning and behaviorproblems, educators must effectively assess both aca-demic and nonacademic behavior and pinpoint solu-

Special thanks to Wade Fish for his compilation of the comments made during our small-group sessions.

Special thanks also to these members of our facilitation group who contributed a wealth of excellent ideas: Ruth Aberasturi,Sharon Atkins, Brian Blevins, Keith Bradshaw, Ed Conderan, Lynne DeSpain, Lena Falcone, Sister Joan Marie Gregg, MichaelHazelkorn, Theresia Jackson, Brenda Jones, Anita Kubo, James McAfee, Anthony Moriarty, Sister Mary Karen Oudeans, BarbPoole, Sonya Sansone, Susie Smith, Richard Van Acker, and Keturah Wilson.

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 49

55

tions for both. Any classroom management systemmust focus on academic success. The more academical-ly successful a child is, the fewer impeding emotionalor behavioral problems he or she has.

Utilizing School Personnel to PlanSpecially Designed Instruction andMake Appropriate Accommodationsand Modifications to PromoteStudent SuccessThe Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997(IDEA '97) has defined special education as speciallydesigned instruction to meet the needs of the individ-ual child. While there is a strong push for accommoda-tions and modifications for children with disabilities,few of us participating in the forum felt that is enough.Many students in special education struggle to main-tain a satisfactory level of classroom performance. Ourinstruction must include a prescriptive system forteaching each child. For instance, a student may have asignificant auditory memory deficit. The special educa-tor must work to improve the child's auditory memoryskills and teach the child to compensate for the pro-cessing deficit. If the child is being taught in the gen-eral education classroom, the special educator mustwork cooperatively with the child's teacher to ensurethat necessary accommodations are made (e.g., by writ-ing directions on the board that were given orally).

To meet the needs of students with challengingbehaviors, we must provide accepting and academicallychallenging and successful environments for all stu-dents. Teachers set that stage by espousing the beliefthat if students are academically engaged and meetingwith high rates of success, there will be a significantreduction in challenging behaviors. Although an enor-mous amount has been written about classroom man-agement, there is a dearth of information on meetingstudents' academic needs as a proven strategy to reducebehavior problems. Yet there is classroom research thatshows that simple curriculum modifications such asbeing allowed a choice of academic activity or allowingoral rather than written responses can lead to pro-nounced improvements in behavior. Frequently, aca-demic tasks are functionally related to classroombehaviors (Reid & Nelson, 2002).

Group members lamented the relative lack of high-quality teaching practices in classrooms for studentswith E/BD and the fact that their academic deficits maybe exacerbated by poor instruction, which acceleratesthe rate of disruptive behavior. Increasingly,researchers advocate the use of effective teaching tech-niques not only to ameliorate academic difficulties, but

50 Council for Children with

also to decrease levels of disruptive behavior(Sutherland, Webby, & Yoder, 2002).

Forum participants felt strongly that we must estab-lish classroom practices that include all students andpromote both group and individual progress. Johns,Crowley, and Guetzloe (2002) have provided a menu ofsuch practices as Think, Pair, Share or other small-group cooperative learning activities; written responsecards; controlled academic choices; and interest-basedinterventions designed to engage all students in theclassroom. Once those are established and in place, it iseasier to provide appropriate accommodations and, ifnecessary, modifications to the curriculum.

An accommodation does not change the curriculumcontent. A modification does change the curriculumcontent. An accommodation might include the use oflarge-print content materials. (Educators tend to thinkof this as an accommodation for a student with lowvision, but it might also be an appropriate accommoda-tion for a student with emotional or behavioral chal-lenges if the student is frustrated by small print and toomuch material on one page.) Group members identifieda variety of practical accommodations that can be madein instruction:

Motivational accommodationswhich may includeletting the student choose the order of the task or doa portion of the task and then receive a reinforcer,such as a short amount of time on the computerdoing a preferred task.

Setting accommodationswhich may includeallowing the student to work in a different area withfewer distractions or in a separate supervised room.

Lecture accommodationswhich may include uti-lizing Power Point to "pause" instruction or stoppingevery few minutes to check for student understand-ing. Another lecture accommodation may be for theteacher to provide a copy of his or her lecture notesto the student prior to the lecture. This allows thestudent to become more familiar with the materialbeforehand, resulting in the student's being morecomfortable and paying better attention during thelecture. Parents sometimes review lecture noteswith their child prior to the day of the lecture.

Material accommodationswhich may includealtering the physical appearance of the assignmentor highlighting the key points. Color coding assign-ments is another example of a material accommoda-tion.

Organizational accommodationswhich mayinclude providing visual prompts of where itemsshould be kept or plastic tubs in which all of the stu-dent's materials are kept except for those the studentis working on at a given time.

Behavioral Disorders Monograph

56

Assignment accommodationswhich may includealtering the amount of the assignment given at onetime or allowing the student to choose the order inwhich to do the assignments.

One or more of these accommodations must be incor-porated into daily instruction, paving the way foraccommodations that must be made when the studentis assessed. The teacher should not introduce a testaccommodation that has not been part of instructionthroughout the year. For example, it would not beappropriate to have the student use a calculator as atest accommodation without having had him or herlearn to use a calculator during instructional time. Onemember of our group pointed out that selection of aparticular accommodation should be predicated, atleast in part, on whether it will benefit a single studentor more than one student.

With the push toward including more students inhigh-stakes testing, it is critical that we prepare stu-dents not only to take the test (i.e., test-taking strate-gies) but also to utilize accommodations to maximizetheir comfort and ability to take the test successfully.While we know that many of our students are not espe-cially excited about test taking, they may be better ableto complete the test if they have been taught how toutilize accommodations during the testing.

Instruction, accommodations, and modificationscan only be designed effectively based on an accurateassessment of the child's strengths, deficits, and needs.The diagnostic-prescriptive approachthe termcoined by Samuel Kirkis critical. Participants dis-cussed the use of various assessment approaches to amultidisciplinary evaluation of the student. Figure 1depicts major aspects of assessment and the sequencethat should be used in planning instruction for stu-dents in both the general and the special classroom set-ting.

Figure 1 provides a framework for general and spe-cial educators to work together to meet the needs ofstudents with behavioral challenges. The general edu-cator possesses the critical knowledge of what is expect-ed of the student at a certain grade level-curriculumcontent, study skills, and social skills. The special edu-cator has knowledge of the diagnostic-prescriptiveapproach in meeting the needs of the child. The specialeducator knows the child's needs based on the evalua-tion and can plan instruction, including accommoda-tions and modifications needed to the generalcurriculum. Several participants suggested that wemust devote effort to building trust with general edu-cators and assurance that we will share the necessaryknowledge, resources, and support to work with stu-dents. Finally, time is a critical factor in building a col-legial relationship between special and generaleducators.

Ongoing professional development is another com-ponent of meeting the diverse needs of students withbehavioral challenges. Teachers' perceptions of theirskills concerning classroom management and theirbelief that they can influence student performancedespite factors that are beyond their control have beenshown to be significant factors contributing to educa-tional placement recommendations (Frey, 2002).

As members of the forum group acknowledged, staffdevelopmentespecially when and how to provide it-has become a major challenge in schools. The inabilityof school districts to get substitute teachers has pre-vented them from allowing faculty to attend workshopsor conferences to gain the latest information in thefield. After-school sessions are difficult for teachers toattend, not only because they are weary at the end ofthe day, but also because they have family priorities tomeet.

A practical model was shared by Rick Van Acker aspart of our discussion group. It consisted of a type ofpeer-mentoring program. Three teachers would teamup in observing and advising each other. During prepa-ration periods, a teacher would visit a colleague's class-room and would look for one positive instructionalactivity and one classroom practice that could beimproved. While the school division provided teacherswith financial incentives at the beginning of the pro-gram, those incentives are no longer available; even so,some teachers continue the process because they foundit beneficial. This program was designed solely as amethod of peer support. It was not part of an evaluationsystem, and the information was not used by an admin-istrator to determine future employment.

Group members acknowledged that their school dis-tricts engaged mainly in traditional teacher evaluationsystems, but, in at least one instance, there was a choicegiven in the methodology of evaluation. Teachers couldeither have the standard evaluation process with anobservation by the administrator or develop a self-improvement plan in which they identified goals towork on during the year. Several in our group pointedout that they were not well prepared to collaborateeither at the building level or with professionals outsideof the school.

Beginning teachers of students with emotional orbehavioral problems learn quickly that many of theirstudents are involved with other agencies such as men-tal health agencies, child and family services agencies,probation and/or parole departments, law enforcementagencies, vocational rehabilitation facilities, and drugand alcohol treatment centers. For both beginning andexperienced personnel, the goal is to establish a positiveworking relationship with individuals within thoseagencies. Education professionals discover that theseagencies have a completely different set of laws and reg-ulations that govern their ability to perform certain

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 51

51

The Individual Childanunderstanding of the needs of the child

based on thorough diagnosticinformation, including functional

assessment, strengths, deficits, interests

The Teacher in the'Classroom

Specially Designed InstructionDelivered by the Special Educator

and Consultation andCollaboration with the Classroom

Teacher

Classroom Instruction Designedto Include All Students

Pyramid Lesson Planning, KWL,Think-Pair-Share, Positive

Behavioral Supports

Access to and Progress in theGeneral Standards-Based

Curriculum and Assessment orAlternate Curriculum and

Assessment

AccommodationsWithin the Classroom

That DriveAccommodations in

Assessment

Necessary Modifications toCurriculum or Alternate

Curriculum and Assessment

Figure 1. A Framework for Working with Students with Special NeedsWithin the General Education Classroom

tasks and to share certain pieces of information. Oneperson in our group pointed out that school personnelmust understand that agency personnel may appearuncooperative when in fact they are operating withinthe parameters that govern their agency. Some of thoseagencies' personnel may be critical partners in the indi-vidualized education program (IEP) process. They maybe able to assist the parents in their participation. They

may bring to the table useful information about issuesfaced by the student.

Our group debated at length the range of possibleservices other agencies should provide in the schools.Participants asserted that it is easier for many familiesto come into the school as one stop for all necessaryservices, and many schools encourage agencies to pro-vide services on site and provide space to do so.

52 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

58

However, other participants contended that schoolsmust be careful in providing some services on site. Asan example, a day care center within the school for stu-dents who are parents might send the message thatschools support students having children in their teenyears. It follows that schools must decide on what con-stitutes the right balance between services that shouldbe provided within the school and services that mayappear to condone certain behaviors.

Promoting Student SuccessThrough High-Quality BehavioralIntervention Plans

Lewis (2001) outlined the strategies that are critical inestablishing training for positive behavioral supports atthe state, local, and building levels. Those includeproactive versus reactive management, social skillsinstruction, academic accommodations, parent train-ing, and individual interventions based on functionalassessment.

The growing number of schools establishing proac-tive management base their school-wide programs onpositive recognition of appropriate student behaviorand logical consequences (other than suspension andexpulsion) for inappropriate behavior. This can result ina friendlier, more accepting environment for studentswith behavioral problemsan environment thatresults in students' wanting to come to school. Socialskills instruction using direct instruction is an integralpart of such a program and stems from the convictionthat children must be taught how to behave within theschool environment and must learn alternative ways ofcoping with frustration and anger.

Here again, we discussed the importance of appro-priate instruction and academic accommodations toreduce student frustration and failure and, instead, setthe stage for academic success for students with behav-ioral challenges.

Along with high-quality classroom instruction, thegroup agreed that parent support is a must, as is estab-lishing a partnership with parents. Parents know whatmotivates their child and what strengths the childexhibits. Parents can reinforce appropriate behaviorthat occurs at school, and school personnel can assistparents by reinforcing appropriate behavior that occursat home. Not surprisingly, many parents of studentswith emotional or behavioral problems need even moresupport than other parents. For example, it is essentialthat they know that we have empathy for them and donot blame them for all the problems their childexhibits. They need to know that we value their opinionand see them as a partner in the IEP process. Parentsalso need positive recognition for their role in achiev-

ing positive outcomes. One common strategy is to callparents when the student has had a good day. Parentsneed positive communication with school personnel,including recognition when their child improves inattendance, academics, and/or behavior.

While positive behavioral supports are critical for allstudents, the individual needs of students with emo-tional or behavioral disorders often dictate that IEPteams develop effective behavioral intervention plansbeyond school-wide and classroom-wide systems. Allparticipants agreed that high-quality meetings amongfaculty are beneficial. The more educators learn aboutpositive behavioral interventions, the better they canserve on teams creating intervention plans based onfunctional behavioral assessment.

One educator mentioned the idea of "Clinic Time,"when teachers, social workers, and counselors meet todiscuss particular classroom problems. The Clinic teammeets on a rotating basis with classroom teachers todiscuss the behavioral issues they face. That timetogether is not only beneficial in generating ideas toassist the child, but also provides support to the teach-ers. Another member of the group commented that shebenefited from informal daily meetings with a peer inher school. Another term used to describe this conceptwas faculty reflection time. Finally, collaborative rela-tionships in which teachers visit a colleague's class-room to assist in collecting data for functionalassessment can be helpful.

The team approach to the functional assessmentprocess is critical to achieving positive outcomes. Whilethe teacher plays an integral part in the collection ofdata, there are times when the teacher is too close tothe situation to recognize the actual function(s) of thestudent's behavior. Team members participating in theconduct of a functional behavioral assessment mayinclude a psychologist, social worker, behavior manage-ment specialist, and teacher. Those who are part of theteam must understand not only the dynamics of behav-ior but also curriculum and instruction, in that there isample empirical evidence that effective academicinstruction can significantly reduce student behavioralproblems. Accordingly, the functional assessment mustinclude close examination of the academic tasks thatthe student is expected to do and the mode of instruc-tion.

A functional behavioral assessment will accomplishlittle if school personnel do not take the valuable infor-mation gained in this diagnostic activity and use it toprepare an individualized behavioral intervention planfor the student. Hours may have been devoted by teammembers to collecting data about the student and ana-lyzing the antecedents, behaviors, and consequencesonly to find that the behavioral intervention plan is notbased on available information. One participant

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 53

5 fl

expressed frustration over the use of point systems foran entire group of children and no individualizedstrategies being used to improve target behavior. Thebehavioral intervention plan must be aligned with thefunction(s) of the inappropriate behavior of the childand be based on the functional assessment information.Those persons who are expected to implement the planshould actively participate in its development withinthe IEP process. Finally, the behavioral interventionplan must place emphasis on student instruction inreplacement behaviors that serve the same function(s)as the problem behavior, positive recognition for appro-priate behavior, and any necessary accommodationsand modifications to ensure appropriate academicinstruction.

Conclusion: What Doesthe Future Hold?The commitment to improving the lives of studentswith emotional or behavioral challenges was clearlyevident throughout our discussions and is encouragingfor the future of our profession. Do we face many chal-lenges? No one could argue otherwise, but in seekingout those collaborative relationships with colleagues,families, and others within and outside the school, wecan make a difference. If we focus on making schools aplace where children can be academically successful,we can reduce behavioral challenges and increase thelearning of all students.

Those of us who work with students with challeng-ing behaviors should be proud of what we do andshould celebrate the successes we see in our students

no matter how small those successes. Special educatorsshould also share those successes with others so thatstate and local policymakers, administrators, schoolboard members see the value in working with our stu-dents. Special educators should pledge to continuetheir own professional development through attendingconferences and reading and learning about the mosteffective approaches in making the academic/behav-ioral connection.

Borrowing the words of Michael Jackson, we mustall commit ourselves one step at a time to "Heal theWorld, Make It a Better Place" for students with emo-tional or behavioral challenges.

ReferencesFrey, A. (2002). Predictors of placement recommendations for

children with behavioral or emotional disorders. BehavioralDisorders, 27, 126-136.

Johns, B., Crowley, E., Sz Guetzloe, E. (2002). Effective curricu-lum for students with emotional and behavioral disorders.Denver: Love Publishing.

Lewis, T. (2001). Building infrastructure to enhance schoolwidesystems of positive behavioral support. Beyond Behavior,11(1), 10-12.

Reid, R., & Nelson, J. R. (2002). The utility, acceptability, andpracticality of functional behavioral assessment for studentswith high-incidence problem behaviors. Remedial andSpecial Education, 23, 15-23.

Sutherland, K., Wehby, J., dz. Yoder, P. (2002). Examination of therelationship between teacher praise and opportunities for stu-dents with EBD to respond to academic requests. Journal ofEmotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 5-13.

54 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

60

MEETING THE NEEDS OF STUDENTS WITH

EMOTIONAL OR BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS

THROUGH PROACTIVE APPROACHES

MARY E. LITTLEUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

DAYTONA BEACH, FL

I watched the evening news and remember think-ing "How tragic" when I heard the report of themurder of a young mother by her boyfriend. Thestory was completely different the next day in myclassroom when I realized that the little girl inmy second grade class writing a story about howmuch she loved her mother was the deadwoman's daughter.

Teacher, 2002

At the heart of the American democracy is the beliefthat learning and education are the equalizers of thehuman condition. It is through a "free and appropriatepublic education" that every person realizes his or herindividual potential as a successful, contributing mem-ber of society. Today, the challenges to addressing thisgoal for all students, including students with emotion-al or behavioral disorders (E/BD), have increased innumber and complexity. Since our classroom commu-nities are subsets of society, they often reflect currenttrends, needs, concerns, and promises. Events reportedon the evening news have names and faces, some ofwhich appear the very next day in our classrooms.

Since education is mandated, it often is targeted as avehicle to address the needs of our youngest citizens.For education to be truly an equalizer, however, schoolsare expected to address more of the societal challengesinherent in providing a free and appropriate public edu-cation. As a result, the concept of education has broad-ened in scope beyond the traditional pursuit ofacademic excellence for students. Today, education forstudents with and without E/BD must often meet basicneeds (e.g., meals, social skills) before promoting aca-demic success. Due to the complexity and severity ofsome of these issues, schools are struggling to find newapproaches to success within a proactive system ofinstruction and continuous support.

This chapter examines, first, current issues relatedto outcomes for students with E/BD within the contextof schools that were raised by participants at theWorking Forum sponsored by the Council for Childrenwith Behavioral Disorders. The next section covers ourdiscussion of a proactive instructional process foraddressing individual student needs. Research-basedprograms that focus on educational accommodationsand high-quality behavioral intervention plans arehighlighted.

Behavioral Issues in the SchoolsA succession of national reports clearly document theneeds of our children (see Figure 1). Issues that relateto numerous aspects of basic human existence such aspoverty, hunger, and drug usage/dependence demandattention if society is to find solutions to these vexingproblems. Drawing from research by the Children'sDefense Fund, Marian Wright Edelman concluded:

Millions of children are not safe physically, edu-cationally, economically, or spiritually. The poor,black youths who shoot drugs on street cornersand the rich white youths who do the same thingin their mansions share a common disconnected-ness from any hope or purpose. (Children'sDefense Fund, 1999, p. 24)

Even within the schools, issues of safety, currenteducational practices, and academic achievement arewell-documented public concerns (Kozol, 1991).Forum participants were of one mindnamely, thattackling these issues poses an enormous challenge.

When we look at these issues as they relate to stu-dents with disabilities, outcomes are bleak. That is, one

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 55

Gi

Every day in the United States:

2,795 teens become pregnant.

105 babies die before their first birthday.

27 children die from poverty.

10 children are killed by guns.

6 teenagers commit suicide.

211 children are arrested for drug abuse.

1,849 children are abused or neglected.

1,512 teenagers drop out of school.

3,288 children run away from home.

Figure 1. A Chilling Look at Contemporary YouthSource: Children's Defense Fund, 1999

of every four students with disabilities drops out ofschool, with nearly 20% more unaccounted for in thereports. Of the remaining students who complete highschool, 43.9% do not receive a standard diploma,which, in turn, greatly impacts their postschool oppor-tunities. Furthermore, 85% of graduates do not returnfor higher education or vocational education, andalmost 63% remain living at home. linio of three stu-dents with disabilities are unemployed after highschool, and of the 33% who do work, 80% are not sat-isfied with their employment. While the documentedrates of arrest and incarceration vary by state and dis-ability category, the correlation between students withdisabilities and rates of both arrest and incarcerationremains high (National Longitudinal Transition Study[NLTS], 1996).

These issues have even greater magnitude as theyrelate to the educational efficiency of services for stu-dents with E/BD (NLTS, 1996). Students with E/BDhave lower grades than other students and a higher fail-ure rate, with a 63% failure rate on statewide minimumcompetency tests. The NLTS revealed that 44% of stu-dents with E/BD received one or more failing grades intheir most recent school years. Compared to other stu-dents with disabilities, students with E/BD are leastlikely to be educated in the least restrictive environ-ment. In local schools, fewer than 17% of students withE/BD are educated in general education classrooms. Infact, 18% of students with E/BD are educated outside oftheir local schools, compared to 6% of all studentswithout disabilities.

Only 42% of students with E/BD earn a high schooldiploma. The dropout rate for these students betweengrades 9 and 12 is almost 50%, with another 9% drop-ping out before grade 9. As we previously suggested,73% of students with E/BD who drop out of school arearrested within 5 years of leaving school.

Discussion among forum participants underscoredseveral critical issues that impact the classroom behav-ior and academic success of students with E/BD. Forexample, one member of the group asserted thatteacher isolation and lack of district support were bar-riers to addressing the challenging behaviors of chil-dren in the schools. Often, due to a lack of resources,appropriate skills, and technical support, solving prob-lems meant removing the problems. Not surprisingly,the need for high-quality teacher training and supportto address the changing needs of students were com-mon and consistent themes. At a time when challeng-ing behaviors are on the increase, resources aredwindling as teachers and administrators struggle toovercome a lack of classroom and programmatic alter-natives. Too often, students are removed from theschool, through either suspensions or separate educa-tional programs or systems, or they simply drop out.

In seeking to address negative outcomes for studentswith disabilities, Congress incorporated new require-ments into the Individuals with Disabilities EducationAct of 1997 (IDEA '97) to ensure proactive planning foralternatives for students with disabilities and their serv-ice providers. Instructionally, access to the general edu-cation curriculum was mandated in stronger language,describing specific academic strategies and accommo-dations for all students with disabilities. Other provi-sions challenged the educational community to probethe reasons (i.e., function) behind impeding behaviorsmanifested by individual students through the individ-ualized education program (IEP) process. The legisla-tion mandates that specific programs be developed toimplement changes that address the current issues forall students, including students with E/BD.

In one group discussion, several themes emerged asto programmatic issues that impact the behavior andacademic successes, or lack thereof, of students withE/BD in the schools. The following summarizes themajor approaches participants felt are essential tomeeting the needs of students with E/BD, both instruc-tionally and behaviorally.

Utilizing School Personnel to MakeAccommodations and Modificationsto Promote Student SuccessGiven the multiple needs of students in our schools,educators must first realize and accept the challenges

56 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

6 2

of meeting the needs of all students within the school.This underlying philosophy must be shared by all stake-holders in the school organization, including parents,community members, and businesses. A common com-mitment to creating a supportive and comprehensivenetwork for the school, family, and community must bearticulated. By creating classrooms, schools, and pro-grams around the concepts of connection, competence,self-control, and contribution (Little, 2001), educatorscan create caring classroom and school-wide commu-nities that address the basic developmental needs of allstudents within an educational circle of influence.

In the classroom, the teacher, in collaboration withmembers of the IEP team, is the ultimate decisionmaker for program development, curriculum mastery,and instructional techniques and strategies used foreach student. With the federal mandate of access to thegeneral education curriculum (IDEA '97), the teacher'sskills as a decision maker are critical to high-qualityinstruction of all students. Teachers must be knowl-edgeable of the specific class content and pedagogy andbe able to implement group/individual practices andstrategies competently while consistently monitoringstudent outcomes. To expertly address the needs of allstudentsespecially those with diverse behavioralneedsa teacher must have a rich and varied knowl-edge base of instructional strategies, methods, andmaterials. Given the rapidity with which new informa-tion emerges, teachers must receive support and tech-nical assistance through ongoing professionaldevelopment and peer coaching as well as other avail-able resources (e.g., professional development schools).

A proactive instructional process must be used toplan for both academic and behavioral instruction.Although content may vary across settings, classrooms,grade levels, and states, this framework for planninginstruction within any given classroom is based uponestablished curricular standards and proven effectivepractices for accommodating individual student needs.The consensus of the forum group was that the proac-tive process includes the following elements:

1. Outcomes and curriculum goals and objectives.Curriculum planning for instruction must beginwith clearly delineated outcomes and goals for learn-ing. Whether described by researchers, state depart-ments of education, school districts, or members ofan IEP team, the intended outcomes for studentsboth academic and behavioralmust be clearlydefined for academic and social success.

2. Prerequisite skills. Once knowledge of and agree-ment regarding intended outcomes have been estab-lished, it is critical to determine the needs of thestudents within the context of those expectations.Whether assessment is done formally or informally,

as a class or as an individual, the next step in thisdecision-making process is the determination ofeach student's current knowledge of the particularskill. Once preskills are assessed, there may bechanges to the planning with regard to the appro-priateness of the stated outcomes for each student.

3. Instructional delivery (content). The next two deci-sionsdecisions about the content (i.e., the what)and process (i.e., the how) of instructionoccuralmost simultaneously. What will the teacher do tofacilitate the student's learning of the stated contentoutcomes, both academic and behavioral? To be suc-cessful, teachers may need additional professionaldevelopment to learn research-based instructionalapproaches, social skills curricula, and classroommanagement based on expectations.

4. Engaging the learner (process). Research clearlyshows the need to engage the learner in the lesson(Brophy & Good, 1986; Good lad, 1984; Greenwood,2002). Increasing academic learning time (Berliner,1989) has direct positive benefits for student mas-tery of stated outcomes. Therefore, student partici-pation has a positive impact on student outcomes.When deciding specifically on the process to use, itis critical to ask the following questions:

How will the students demonstrate mastery of thestated objectives?

Will all of the students need this level of support?

If not, then what other supports are needed bysome of the students?

Will self-monitoring support be needed?

5. Specific academic and nonacademic needs and sup-ports. For students who have not typically beensuccessful in classrooms, either behaviorally or aca-demically, there may be other important goals.Some may be directly related to the lesson outcome,and some may not. For example, mastery of the sci-ence curriculum is important during a cooperativelearning lesson on insects. But mastery of appro-priate social skill interactions by all students, andespecially by students with E/BD, is a critical non-academic outcome that may also need to be taught,supported, monitored, and reinforced.

6. Accommodation of curricular outcomes. In a gener-al sense, accommodations are any adjustment oradaptation in the environment, instruction, ormaterials used for learning that enhances the stu-dent's participation and performance in the learningactivity. In addition, an accommodation allows theindividual to use his or her current skill repertoirewhile promoting the acquisition of new skills.Accommodations "level the playing field" by provid-

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors 57

6 ft'i

ing the assistance the student needs to achieve thegoals of the lesson.

There are seven types of accommodations: size,time, input, output, difficulty, participation, andlevel of support (e.g., Ebeling, Deschenes,Sprague, 1994). Any lesson can be accommodatedfor students with specific needs within the class-room. For example, strategic use of computer wordprocessors can help one student accommodate for alearning disability in spelling or can accommodateanother student's need to be actively engaged at alltimes. The overall list of accommodations is as var-ied as the needs of the students, the demands of thelesson goals, and the creativity of the teacher.

7. Modifications of curricular outcomes. Given theunique needs of some students with disabilities, itmay be necessary to modify or change the goal of thelesson, either partially or completely. In developingapproaches to do so, it is useful to differentiatebetween accommodations and modifications. Whenmodifying curriculum and/or instruction, theintegrity of the agreed-upon instructional goal isbeing changed, adapted, or discarded completely.That fact must be clearly communicated to themembers of the IEP or Section 504 team who areinvolved in the planning process.

Students with disabilities may be included in aclassroom for varying academic, social, and/orbehavioral goals. Outcomes of the lesson may berevised for these students, but the same materialsare used. Given the specific IEP goals for a studentwith disabilities, she or he could learn some but notall aspects of a particular lesson. Modification oflearner outcomes and activities should be deter-mined collaboratively among all team members. Attimes, students could be taught a related goal, butwith different materials (e.g., geography with puz-zles).

8. Evaluation by outcomes. The teaching/learningprocess is not complete without routine assessmentof student progress, which is perhaps best accom-plished by means of curriculum-based assessment.Curriculum-based assessment (Deno, 1987) refersto any approach that uses direct observation andrecording of a student's performance in the schoolcurriculum as a basis for obtaining information tomake further instructional decisions for the entiregrade level or an individual student, as appropriate.These data enable teachers to continue the instruc-tional process of targeting new outcomes and goalsfor instruction. In addition, knowledge of progressis reinforcing to students.

58 Council for Children with

Promoting Student SuccessThrough High-Quality BehavioralIntervention Plans

The goal of planning, implementing, and monitoringresearch-based instructional strategies is to improvestudent academic and behavioral performance, effectsthat are successful with most students. For studentswith more challenging behaviors, more complex andintrusive ways to pinpoint the exact nature of the prob-lem, collect data, and collaborate within a proactive,problem-solving approach have been developed, includ-ing functional behavioral assessment (FBA) and posi-tive behavior support (PBS). Together, FBA and PBSconstitute a multitiered process of intervention that isa proactive and effective way to support individuals whoexhibit disruptive and/or dangerous behaviors. Theapproach has evolved in clinical settings over the pastthree decades as an outgrowth of applied behavioranalysis (Alberto & Troutman, 1990) and has come todescribe a set of assessment and intervention strategiesintended to both reduce problem behavior and increasedesirable behavior, leading to more positive studentpostschool outcomes (Horner et al., 1990).

The central features of this approach to the develop-ment of high-quality, proactive behavioral interventionplans include

1. A foundational philosophy of respect.

2. Knowledge of the context of behavior in relation tothe function of the behavior.

3. Emphasis on directly teaching replacement skills,not merely suppressing inappropriate behaviors.

4. A collaborative approach to team problem-solving.

5. Plans that include multiple components, identifiedon an individual basis (Dunlap, Hieneman, Knoster,Fox, Anderson, & Albin, 2000).

In putting FBA and PBS into practice, multidiscipli-nary teams collaborate to identify the specific contextu-al needs for individual students with E/BD acrossmultiple settings and develop positive supports alignedwith those needs. This comprehensive, problem-solvingapproach is focused on skill building at the studentlevel and capacity building at the adult level to achievesuccess for the individual student. This proactiveprocess operates at the classroom and building levels; itcan include multiple agencies to better identify the spe-cific needs of students with challenging behaviors andcreate an action plan to meet those needs. Through col-laboration, increased training, and implementationsupport, new techniques will lead to student successes.

Behavioral Disorders Monograph

COLLABORATIVEPARTNERS

Parents/Family

Businesses

Agencies

Schools

Social Services

SCHOOL SUPPORTSTRATEGIES

Leadership

Parent Involvement

Proactive

School-wide

High Expectations

BEST PRACTICES

Social Skills

Research-based

Teach Self-Control,Contribution,Competency

Mastery ofChallengingAcademics

Create a supportive, comprehensivenetwork for the school, family, andcommunity to provide an educationalnetwork that is safe, caring, effective

Figure 2. Proactive Approaches to Meeting Needs of Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders:A Path to Success

ConclusionToday, school personnel are expected to not only pro-mote academic excellence among students, but alsoundertake the challenging task of improving students'social and behavioral functioning. The most effectiveprograms target both prevention and intervention foracademics and behavior by means of proactiveapproaches (Van Acker, 1995). Accomplishing the goalof high-quality programming for students with E/BDrequires a comprehensive, collaborative, and proactiveapproach (see Figure 2). Participants share a commonvision and accept the responsibility to create a support-ive, comprehensive network that encompasses theschool, family, and community for all of the students.This vision sets the standard for making decisions aboutchanges in one or more aspects of the students' ecosys-tem. School-wide faculty/student expectations, as wellas prevention and intervention programsincludingcounseling and mental health servicesmust be devel-oped and implemented. High expectations for academicand behavioral excellence must be communicated toeach collaborative member of the community (e.g., par-ents, agencies, social services).

Toward these ends, school personnel must createmultiple opportunities for students to master both aca-demic and behavioral curriculums. Research-basedinstructional practices (e.g., cooperative learning, peertutoring, strategy instruction) can offer multipleopportunities for students to succeed on a group/individual basis. Individual behavioral plans furtherdefine the contextual needs of students by providing a

supportive network. However, significant changes mustoccur at multiple levels, and new resources must beallocated (Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995). Compre-hensive professional development programs are neces-sary to create and implement these changes withinclassrooms and schools. Moreover, proactive program-ming within schools and across multiple agencies takestime. Notwithstanding the challenges, creating multi-ple pathways to success for all students through safeand effective schooling represents a worthy goal. If weconsider the current outcomes for our students, can weafford to do anything else?

ReferencesAlberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (1990). Applied behavior analy-

sis for teachers (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.Berliner, D. (1989). The place of process-product research in

developing the agenda for research on teacher thinking. In J.Lowyck & C. Clark (Eds.), Teacher thinking and professionalaction (pp. 3-21). Belgium: Leuven University Press.

Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and studentachievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of researchon teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Children's Defense Fund (1999). Special report: A Children'sDefense Fund report on children dying from gunfire inAmerica. Available on-line at http://www.childrensdefensefund.org/youthviolencereport/html

Deno, S. L. (1987). Curriculum-based measurement. TeachingExceptional Children, 20(1), 41-42.

Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Knoster, T., Fox, L., Anderson, J., &Albin, R. (2000). Essential elements of inservice training in

Proactive Approaches to Working with Students with Challenging Behaviors

6 5 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

59

positive behavior support. Journal of Positive BehaviorInterventions, 2(1), 22-32.

Ebeling, D. G., Deschenes, C., & Sprague, J. (1994).Adapting cur-riculum and instruction in inclusive classrooms.Bloomington, IN: Institute for the Study of DevelopmentalDisabilities.

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: Crown.Greenwood, C. M. (2002). Science and students with learning and

behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 37-52.Homer, R. H., Dunlap, G., Koegel, R. L., Carr, E. G., Sailor, W.,

Anderson, J., et al. (1990). Toward a technology of "nonaver-sive" behavioral support. Journal of the Association forPersons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 125-132.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997,P.L. 105-17,615 (K)(4)(C)(1997).

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities. New York: Crown.

Little, M. (2001). Reframing challenging behaviors by meetingbasic needs: A community circle of caring model for the class-room. Reaching Today's Youth, 4(2), 21-26.

National Longitudinal Transition Study. (1996). Digest ofEducational Statistics (NTLS Publication No. 96-012).Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Van Acker, R. (1995). School-based programs for prevention andtreatment of aggression and violence: Why aren't they moreeffective? In L. Bullock & R. Gable (Eds.), Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders: Highlights from theWorking Forum on Children and Youth Who Have Aggressiveand Violent Behaviors (pp. 9-17). Arlington, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995).Antisocial behav-ior in the schools: Strategies and best practices. PacificGrove, CA: Brookes/Cole.

60 Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders Monograph

6 '/

ISBN 0-86586-973-1

9 8 61 3 8

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

National Library of Education (NLE)Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

Reproduction Basis

41,

EFjCEducational Resources !Munition Center

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release (Blanket)"form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all or classes ofdocuments from its source organization and, therefore, does not require a"Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, may bereproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form (either"Specific Document" or "Blanket").