Carl Liaupsin & C. Michael NelsonDepartment of Special Education and

Rehabilitation CounselingUniversity of Kentucky

Positive Behavioral Support Positive Behavioral Support and Delinquency Preventionand Delinquency Prevention

• The Students and the Problem

• A Model for Delinquency Prevention: PBS

• Examples

Agenda

Labels for youth who manifest patterns of antisocial behavior

• Socially maladjusted (exclusion/illogical)• Juvenile delinquent (legal term/adjudicated)• Juvenile offender (age of majority/committed

a legal or status offense)

These labels are not educationally relevant• Do not relate to the characteristics or needs

of the individuals

Risk Factors

• Ethnic minority status

• Aggressive, antisocial behavior

• Difficulties in school

• School failure (including educational disabilities)

• Poverty

• Broken home

• Inadequate parental supervision

• Lax or inconsistent parental discipline

• Coercive family interactions

• Physical abuse• Substance abuse (self or

family)• Living in a high crime

community• Criminal or delinquent

relatives or peers

Where do you findjuvenile offenders?

• Most adjudicated youth are not incarcerated!

• Most youth (80%to90%) report having committed delinquent acts, but few are apprehended and fewer still are arrested.

Where do you findjuvenile offenders?

• General and special education classrooms

• Alternative schools• Day treatment programs• Detention or correctional facilities

Most

Few

How do Schools Respond to Student Behavior Problems?

• A suburban high school with 1400 pupils reported over 2000 office referrals from Sept. to Feb. of one school year

• In 1998-99, 74,565 suspensions and 3,603 expulsions were reported in Kentucky schools

ZERO TOLERANCE FOR UNDESIRED BEHAVIOR!

School Contributions to Problem Behavior

Reactive disciplinary approach Lack of teaching about rules, expectations, &

consequences Lack of staff consistency Failure to consider and accommodate

individual student differences Academic failure

(Mayer, 1995; Sugai & Lewis, 1998; Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1996)

Counterproductive Practices in the School

• Quality of instruction for students with behavioral problems is poor (Carr, Taylor, & Robinson, 1991).

• Teachers tend to lack knowledge of special education techniques and assume they will be unable to have an effect on behaviorally challenging students (Pfannenstiel, 1993)

• Educational settings for students with behavior problems tend to focus solely on behavior, to the exclusion of academics (Johns, 1994).

* higher rates of negative interactions with school personnel regardless of their behavior

* higher rates of punitive consequences than their peers

this tends to make behaviors worse

* lower rates academic engaged time with teacher perpetuates cycle of problem behavior(Wehby et al. 1996; Shores et al. 1996)

Student Interactions with the School

Counseling sending problem students to talk to the counselor

Reviews of over studies involving children with the most challenging behaviors (Gottfredson, 1997; Lipsky, 1996) indicate

Punishment reacting to behavior without facilitating success

Psychotherapy sending problem students to talk with psychotherapists

Ineffective Interventions

Students with academic failure and problem behaviors are far more likely to:

- drop out of school- be involved with the corrections system- be single parents- be involved with the social services system- be unemployed- be involved in automobile accidents- use illicit drugs

Predictable Failures

From 8 AM - 3 PM, students with challenging behaviors fail 7 of every 10 academic trials

Nearly half of third graders in New York’s high minority public schools cannot read at all (1996)

Identified poor readers at fourth grade have a .88 probability of remaining a poor reader forever (Adams, 1988)

Schools continue to ignore research on best practice in reading instruction (Carnine, 1998)

increase likelihood of behavior problems

The Academic-BehaviorConnection

Initial Failures Lead to Challenging Behavior

Poverty

Poor Modeling

ReadingDeficits

School Safety Issues

School Exclusion

Life-Long Failure

RISK FACTORS OUTCOMES

Long-Term Predictable Failure

• Students with a history of chronic and pervasive behavioral problems and associated academic deficits are more likely to go to jail than to graduate from high school

• Three years after leaving school, 70% of antisocial youth have been arrested (Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995)

• 82% of all crimes are committed by people who have dropped out of school (APA Commission on Youth Violence, 1993)

Poverty Predicts Early Failure

• Children from low income families are far more likely to have print related deficits (Adams, 1988), lower vocabulary skills, and lack of familiarity with following directions (Hart & Risley, 1995)

• Academic problems foster behavior problems(Maguin & Loeber, 1996)

• The quality of instruction for students with behavioral problems is poor (Carr, Taylor, & Robinson, 1991)

Interventions that improve academic performance co-occur with a reduction in the prevalence of delinquency (Maguin & Loeber, 1996)

Kentucky

Grade Level CTBS Predictors R-Square

Grade 3 1. Poverty level .4002. Attendance rate .4323. Number of expulsions .456

Grade 6 1. Poverty level .4582. Attendance rate .5463. Number of suspensions .555

Grade 9 1. Poverty level .5212. Attendance rate .6283. Dropout rate .6464. Enrollment .655

Illinois

• http://206.166.105.35/designation/indicators.htm

Summary of the Problem

So Far• Labels & characteristics• Ineffective School Responses• Need to Predict Problems

– Academic Behavior Connection– Poverty predicts failure

Next• A Model for Prevention: PBS

Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency

• Primary Prevention– Prevent initial offending

• Secondary Prevention– Prevent re-offending

• Tertiary Prevention– Ameliorate effects of persistent

offending

• Positive behavior—goal is for students to develop a repertoire of appropriate skills that enable them to participate successfully in a broad range of family, school, and community settings.

• Support—a continuum of strategies provided at the appropriate level of personalization, given the strengths, needs, and preferences of the student and family.

Positive Behavior + Support =

Positive Behavior Support

• A broad range of systemic and individualized strategies for achieving important social and learning outcomes while preventing problem behavior

• An integration of (a) valued outcomes, (b) the science of human behavior, (c) validated procedures, and (d) systems change to enhance quality of life and reduce problem behavior

• Use what works

• Build capacity

• Take responsibility for all students

• Be proactive

• Work smarter

BIG PBS IDEAS

Positive Behavior Support Model

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

Adapted from George Sugai, 1996

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

Adapted from George Sugai, 1996

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

ALL STUDENTS

UNIVERSAL SYSTEMS

•Clear expectations•Teach expectations•Facilitate success

•School-wide data•Rules, routines, and physical arrangements

•Planned and implemented by all adults in school

•Effective instruction•Increased prompts/cues•Pre-correction

•Functional assessment•Effective Interventions•Individuals/small #s

TARGETED INTERVENTIONS

•Key teachers and specialists implement

INTENSIVE PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION

•Wraparound planning•Alternative placements

•Effective instruction•Crisis management plans •Special Education

Positive Behavior Support Modeland Prevention

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

Adapted from George Sugai, 1996

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

Adapted from George Sugai, 1996

Universal School-Wide Systems of Support

(90% of students)

TargetedClassroom and

Small Group Strategies(7-9% of students)

IntensiveIndividual

Interventions(1-3% of students)

Tertiary

Secondary

Primary

• ElementsRules

agreed upon by team - willing/able to enforceposted, brief, positively stated

Routinesavoid problem contexts, times, groupings, etc.

consistent

Arrangementsclear physical boundariessupervision of all areas

Universal Interventions:Primary Prevention

Social skills training teach specific skills using effective instruction

Reviews of over studies involving children with the most challenging behaviors (Gottfredson, 1997; Lipsky, 1996) indicate

Academic curricular restructuring intensive instruction in reading

Behaviorally based intervention effective use of reinforcement/punishment to facilitate success

Targeted InterventionsSecondary Prevention

Intensive InterventionsTertiary Prevention

Elements• planning for involvement of community

resources as necessary

• in-depth and continuous assessment from a variety of sources and perspectives

• write activities into formal plans where necessary (IEP)

Summary of the Model

In This Section:

• Prevention of juvenile offending

• Positive Behavioral Support

• Primary/Universal

• Secondary/Targeted

• Tertiary/Intensive

Now:

• Examples

EXAMPLE Teaching Behavior

• Hands and feet to self or

• Respect others

• 2+2 = 4

Behavior: Peer Relations

Academic Skill: Addition

EXAMPLE Teachable Expectations

1. Respect Yourself -in the classroom (do your best) -on the playground (follow safety rules)

2. Respect Others -in the classroom (raise your hand to speak) -in the stairway (single file line)

3. Respect Property -in the classroom (ask before borrowing) -in the lunchroom (pick up your mess)

Example:KY KIDS Schools

Project

66% reduction in office referrals 64% reduction in suspensions and

expulsions

EXAMPLE Harrison School-Wide Objectives

• By the end of the year, number of referrals to SAFE will be reduced by at least 30% across all students

• By the end of the year, number of suspensions will be reduced by at least 30% across all students and minority students

• By the end of the year, reading scores will increase across each grade and across the school

Time Spent Away from Academics Due to Behavior

Convert Data from number of hours

To “Average Hours”

(standardizes data for comparisons)

61%

776.8 additional instructional hours

Student Days: School Suspension

76% 75%65%

CTBS Scores

Reading

Language

Math

21 19 27 42% 21 20 30 50% 26 20 30 50%

Academics: Baseline - Year 1

05

101520253035404550

Baseline 1997

Baseline 1998

Intervention1999

Reading

Language

Math

1997 1998 1999 % Baseline Baseline Intervention Change

Summary

• The Problem

• Prevention and Positive Behavioral Supports

• Examples

Acknowledgements

George Sugai Hill Walker

Rob Horner Jeff Sprague

Ron Nelson Glen Dunlap

Tim Lewis Randy Sprick

Geoff Colvin Terry Scott

OSEP Center for Education, Disabilities, and Juvenile Justice

www.edjj.org

• University of Maryland

• University of Kentucky

• Arizona State University

• Eastern Kentucky University

• PACER Center

• American Institutes of Research

OSEP Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support

http:www.pbis.org

• University of Oregon

• University of Kentucky

• University of Missouri

• University of Kansas

• University of South Florida

Job OpportunitiesDiscussion ForumsBehavioral InterventionsLinks to Other ResourcesBehavioral ConsultationLegal InformationMore . . .

Sponsored by The University of Kentucky and the Kentucky Dept. of Education

Questions?

Carl J. Liaupsin

cjliau0@pop.uky.edu

C. Michael Nelson

cpdmiken@pop.uky.edu

229 Taylor Education Bldg.

University of Kentucky

Lexington, KY 40506

606-257-4713