University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

(USC Thesis Other)

The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

1

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS
IN REDUCING EXCLUSIONARY SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

by

Elizabeth Cord

_____________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2017

Copyright 2017 Elizabeth Cord

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

2
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my family, without whose love, support, and encouragement it
could never have been completed. I would like to thank my parents, my brothers, my children,
and my grandchildren, each of whom inspire me every day. Most of all, I thank my husband,
Henry, without whose unfailing and uncomplaining support I could not succeed.
Finally, my students, families, teachers, staff, management, and peers, past, present, and
future, for whom I continually struggle to increase my knowledge, motivation, and
organizational skills to support high quality teaching and learning for the best possible
educational outcomes.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many thanks to Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores, my dissertation committee chair, whose
professionalism, enthusiasm, and strategic guidance supported me through the dissertation
process. Thank you also to Dr. Reynaldo Baca and Dr. Monique Datta, whose insightful
feedback, questions, and comments sharpened my thinking. Appreciation is also due to Dr. Ilda
Jimenez y West, whose editing assistance was invaluable, and raised my writing to a higher
level.
I would also like to acknowledge the dedicated and skilled professional educators who
gave their time and attention to answer my questions, providing data for my inquiry, and help me
understand the critical factors that support equity through successfully implementing positive
behavior support to prevent student misbehavior and reduce school suspensions.
Thank you to my USC Rossier Organizational Change and Leadership Cohort 1
colleagues, who kept the motivation level up and the frustration level down as we piloted the
Organizational Change and Leadership doctoral program. You are awesome and your support
and feedback clarified my thinking and kept me focused.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter 1: Introduction 10
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 10
Importance of Addressing the Problem 13
Review of Relevant Research 15
Organizational Context and Mission 19
Organizational Performance Goal 21
Description of Stakeholder Groups 22
Stakeholder Group for the Study 24
Purpose of the Project and Questions 25
Methodological Framework 26
Definitions 26
Organization of the Dissertation 27
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 29
Exclusionary School Discipline 30
School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems 35
KMO Conceptual Framework 39
Conclusion 55
Chapter 3: Methodology 56
Purpose of the Project and Questions 56
Conceptual and Methodological Approach 58
Research Questions Expanded 59
Conceptual Framework 60
Participating Stakeholders 63
Data Collection and Instrumentation 65
Data Analysis 70
Research Questions 71
Credibility and Trustworthiness 71
Ethics 72
Limitations and Delimitations 73
Conclusion 74

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

5
Chapter 4: Findings 75
Introduction 75
Participating Stakeholders 77
Findings 78
Knowledge Findings 79
Motivation Findings 92
Organizational Findings 99
Synthesis 108
Conclusion 109
Chapter 5: Discussion 110
Introduction 110
Discussion 110
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 112
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 125
Summary 142
Reflection 143
Conclusion 144
References 146
Appendices 162
Appendix A: USC IRB Approval 162
Appendix B: Informed Consent Form for Research 163
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 166
Appendix D: Training Evaluation Tool — Immediately After Training 168
Appendix E: Training Evaluation Tool — Delayed (Two–Four Weeks After 169
Training)

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals 23
Table 2. U.S. 10th Grade Boys Suspended or Expelled by Race (2001–2005 Data 31
Combined)
Table 3. Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Principals Implementing 44
PBIS to Achieve Organizational Goals
Table 4. Assumed Motivational Influences on Principals Implementing PBIS, and 48
Assessments
Table 5. Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences that May Impact Principals 51
in Implementing PBIS
Table 6. Assumed KMO Influences by Learning, Motivation and Organization 54
Theory
Table 7. Coding/Pseudonyms of Principals Interviewed 76
Table 8. Number of Suspensions per Academic Year in Selected District Schools 78
Table 9. Implementation of Constructs of Positive Behavior Interventions and 87
Supports (PBIS)
Table 10. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 114
Table 11. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 116
Table 12. Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations 120
Table 13. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 128
Table 14. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 129
Table 15. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 131
Table 16. Components of Learning for Principal Training Program 136
Table 17. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 137
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Out of school suspensions by race — boys 12
Figure 2. Multi-tiered systems of support 38
Figure 3. Conceptual framework 61
Figure 4. Theoretical framework 62
Figure 5. Characteristics of principals interviewed 77
Figure 6. Principal training and PBIS alignment 81
Figure 7. Comparison of principal’s knowledge of PBIS and motivation to implement 97
Figure 8. Knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors of principals 106
Figure 9. Knowledge, motivation, organizational factors impact on implementation 107
Figure 10. Kirkpatrick’s New World Evaluation Model 126
Figure 11. Results dashboard 140
Figure 12. Dashboard of Level 4 goals — Critical behaviors 141

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

8
ABSTRACT
Over three million U.S. school children are removed from their usual learning environments for
disciplinary reasons each year. These student disciplinary suspensions show persistent
inequities, with African American boys receiving three times more suspensions, and the disabled
twice as many suspensions, as their white peers, while Latino and Native American boys are
similarly overrepresented in school suspension statistics. Significant negative effects to the
individual and to the community are associated with student disciplinary suspensions, including
lower achievement, reduced school bonding, and school attrition through reduced on-time
graduation rates. Excluding students from school can result in safety issues from unsupervised
youths, increased exposure to the justice system, and reduced lifetime earnings, creating a
negative impact to the child and to the community. While state education codes articulate
specific criteria for suspension (California Education Code § 48900, for instance, lists
brandishing weapons, selling controlled substances, sexual assault, and terroristic threats as
student behaviors that may warrant disciplinary suspension), there is room for interpretation by
school administrators. Suspensions, which some agree should be reserved for actions that
significantly compromise school safety, are also implemented for minor offenses such as
tardiness or dress code violations. A promising practice that has demonstrated favorable results
in reducing exclusionary school discipline rates is the implementation of school-wide positive
behavior systems (SWPBS). In addition to a reduction of inappropriate student behaviors,
SWPBS support also improved other favorable school and student outcomes, including increased
achievement and an improvement in the overall school climate. School principals, who direct
and implement school policies and are responsible for implementing suspensions, are in a pivotal
position in the exclusionary school discipline problem of practice. This study provided
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

9
qualitative findings of in-person interviews of school principals regarding the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that support, or hinder, the implementation of school-wide
positive behavior systems, such as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). The
findings were analyzed through the Clark and Estes Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
(KMO) framework, and recommendations based on the findings were proposed. Due to the
small sample size, the findings reported are not generalizable, but illuminate the experiences and
perceptions of one subgroup of a population of public school principals in implementing PBIS
programs at their school sites. Further study is indicated into the knowledge, motivation, and
organization factors that will support a comprehensive, Tier I implementation of basic constructs
of PBIS (including explicitly taught behavior expectations, positive behavior recognition, and
location specific behavior support) to promote prosocial student behavior and reduce the
incidence of student disciplinary suspensions.
Keywords: suspension, positive, discipline, behavior, principal

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

10
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
A significant problem of practice in U.S. public schools is the application of exclusionary
school discipline, the practice of excluding children from school as a purported disciplinary
measure. Exclusionary school discipline, the removal of a student from his or her usual learning
environment on a temporary (suspension) or permanent (expulsion) basis (National
Clearinghouse on Supportive School Discipline, n.d.), is a practice that is applied inequitably, as
boys, racial minorities, and disabled students are overrepresented in exclusionary school
discipline (Losen, 2005). Correcting maladaptive student behavior through school exclusion is
ineffective and counterproductive, as it excludes students from learning but offers no alternative
behavior training (Lamont, 2013; Sautner, 2001). Separating students from their usual learning
environments may increase the risk of negative school outcomes, such as lowered achievement
(Arcia, 2006), reduced school bonding (Rumberger, 1995), and school attrition through reduced
on-time graduation rates (Velez, 1989). Excluding students from school can result in
unsupervised youths (Lamont, 2013) and increased exposure to the justice system (Fabelo et al.,
2011), creating a negative impact to the student and to the community. Additionally, removing
students from school may violate their right to a free and appropriate public education (Vincent,
Sprague, & Tobin, 2012; Wilson, 2014).
The purpose of this chapter was to understand the issues and inequities associated with
exclusionary school discipline by reviewing current, relevant scholarly literature on the topic.
The research study that follows will focus on preventing exclusionary school discipline through
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

11
the promising practice of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a leading
example of a School-Wide Positive Behavior System (SWPBS).
The application of exclusionary school discipline in the U.S. shows persistent inequities.
U.S. public school suspension data show that specific student subgroups are overrepresented in
school discipline, including boys, children of color, and special education students (Losen &
Martinez, 2013). Although boys account for about half of U.S. public school enrollment, over
70% of students receiving multiple out-of-school suspensions are boys (U.S DOE, 2016).
African American, Latino, and Native American students are 2 to 5 times more likely to be
suspended or expelled than White or Asian students (Wallace, Goodkind, Wallace, & Bachman,
2008). Students with disabilities are suspended at a rate almost double that of their non-disabled
peers (U.S DOE, 2016).
Racial disparities in school disciplinary measures were first noted in the 1970s and have
increased significantly since that time (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975; Losen & Martinez,
2013). Although school suspensions have increased in recent years, suspension rates of White
students have increased by only 1% since the 1970s; during that same interval, suspension rates
of African American students increased by 12%, widening the school discipline gap (Losen &
Martinez, 2013). African American youth represent 17% of the U.S. public school population,
but comprise 32% of the students suspended (Raffaele Mendez & Knoff, 2003).
The Latino population of the U.S., estimated at 54 million in 2013, represents the largest
minority group in the U.S. (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). Latino males comprise 10% of students
enrolled in U.S. public schools, but receive 14% of school suspensions (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2006). Latino students are 1.5 times more likely to be suspended than their
White peers, and twice as likely to be expelled (Advancement Project, 2010). Using U.S.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

12
Department of Education Civil Rights Data Collection statistics from 2011-2012, Figure 1 shows
that 20% of African American boys are suspended; followed by 13% of American Indian or
Alaskan Natives; 11% of students of two or more races; 7% of Hawaiian or Pacific Islander boys
are suspended, 6% of White boys, and 3% of Asian boys.

Figure 1. Out of school suspensions by race — boys

Special education students are overrepresented in exclusionary school discipline
(Sullivan & Bal, 2013; Vincent et al., 2012). Students with disabilities are suspended at a rate
almost double that of non-disabled students (U.S DOE, 2016). Students who present multiple
risk factors (gender, race, and disability) have the highest risk of receiving school suspensions
(Sullivan, Van Norman, & Klingbeil, 2014; Vincent et al., 2012). Nationally, 1 in 4 boys of
color with disabilities experiences at least one out-of-school suspension, compared to the 9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
African
American
American
Indian
Two or more
races
Latino Pacific
Islander
White Asian
Percent of U.S. Out of School Suspensions
by Race - Boys
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

13
suspension rate for White boys with disabilities (U.S DOE, 2016). The disparities are even
greater in some districts, with African American males experiencing suspension rates of up to
33% (Losen & Martinez, 2013; Raffaele Mendez, 2003).
Multiple negative consequences have been associated with exclusionary school
discipline. These include lost instructional time and lower achievement after suspension (Arcia,
2006; Losen, 2005), reduced school bonding (Balfanz, Herzog, & Mac Iver, 2007), reduced on-
time graduation rates (Bryant, Schulenberg, Bachman, O’Malley, & Johnston, 2000), and
increased exposure to the juvenile or criminal justice system (Fabelo et al., 2011). These
potentially limiting school outcomes illustrate another negative facet of the exclusionary school
discipline problem of practice.
The disparities with respect to race, gender, and disability status that characterize
exclusionary school discipline in the U.S. create a problem of practice with deep social impacts
to individuals and to the community. Multiple negative school outcomes associated with
exclusionary school discipline increase the potential consequences of an unbalanced,
punishment-focused, school disciplinary system that targets male students, the disabled, and
students of color.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
Persistent inequities in the application of exclusionary school discipline may place certain
student populations (male, African American, Latino, Native American, the disabled) at an
increased risk of negative school outcomes, such as lost instructional time, low achievement and
reduced graduation rates (Losen, 2005). The significance of this problem lies in the disparate
educational outcomes for students. Students showed reduced learning gains after suspension, a
pattern that increased with the number of days suspended (Arcia, 2006). Bryant et al. (2000)
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

14
found that disciplinary referrals were correlated with lower academic achievement and less
school bonding (interest in school work, positive perception of school). Graduation rates were
also negatively correlated with suspension; students who experienced the most disciplinary days
out of school were least likely to graduate (Arcia, 2006; Rumberger & Losen, 2017). A
longitudinal study of 12,000 students revealed that only 20% of students who had received out of
school suspensions graduated on-time (Balfanz et al., 2007).
A recent review of disciplinary data for one million Texas students found that nearly 50%
of students with multiple out-of-school suspensions (hereafter referred to as suspensions) were
involved with the juvenile or criminal justice system. Only 2% of students who have never been
suspended become involved in the justice system. The increased contact between suspended
students and the justice system imposes costs to the community in the form of increased
incarceration rates, and negative impacts to individuals, such as reduced lifetime earnings, and
limited ability to make productive contributions to the community (Bernburg & Krohn, 2003;
Fabelo et al., 2011).
Disciplinary exclusion from school is correlated with lower achievement, reduced
graduation rates, increased student risk of exposure to the justice system, and may violate
students’ rights to a free and appropriate public education (Arcia, 2006; Balfanz et al., 2007;
Fabelo et al., 2011; Wilson, 2014). “There seems to be little doubt that the persistent
disproportionate over-representation of African-American, American Indian/Alaska Native, and
Hispanic students in exclusionary disciplinary actions is inconsistent with the mission of the
United States public education system to educate every child” (Vincent et al., 2012, p. 595).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

15
Review of Relevant Research
Exclusionary school discipline, defined as time when enrolled students are temporarily
(suspension) or permanently (expulsion) removed from school for misconduct, has increased
significantly in recent years. Suspension rates in U.S. K-12 schools have more than doubled
since the 1970s (Losen & Skiba, 2010; Losen, 2011). Increasing by 250,000 from 2002 to 2006,
U.S. school suspensions reached 3.3 million by 2006 (Advancement Project, 2010). By 2012,
the number of U.S. school suspensions exceeded 3.5 million, as reported by the U.S. Department
of Education (U.S. DOE, 2016).
Zero tolerance policies have been widely implemented in U.S. schools, which may
further increase the use of exclusionary school discipline. Zero tolerance refers to policies that
reflect a disciplinary philosophy of immediate and often severe punishments to maintain school
safety (Skiba, 2014). Zero tolerance policies, with mandated consequences for specific offenses,
have been widely implemented in U.S. schools since the 1990s (Lee, 2005). The application of
zero tolerance policies is sometimes interpreted as a means of communicating, through harsh and
non-negotiable consequences, that certain behaviors will not be tolerated (Skiba & Peterson,
1999). By 1997, 94% of U.S, schools had implemented zero tolerance policies (Heaviside,
Rowand, Williams, & Farris, 1998).
The need for schools to maintain a safe learning environment is clear, however, evidence
that zero tolerance policies are effective is insufficient. Key school safety indicators remained
largely static through the 1990s. For instance, the rate of students who were threatened or
injured with a weapon while on school property hovered between 7% and 9% for the decade
from 1993–2003 (DeVoe et al., 2004). In its far-reaching review of school zero tolerance
policies, the American Psychological Association (APA) concluded that “the overwhelming
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

16
majority of findings from the available research on zero tolerance and exclusionary discipline
tend to contradict” the effectiveness of zero tolerance policies (APA, 2008, p. 5).
While suspension rates for all students have increased in recent years, the suspension rate
for specific racial subgroups has risen disproportionately. African American, Hispanic, and
Native American students are significantly more likely to experience school discipline than
White students (Hoffman & Llagas, 2003). The gap between suspensions of African American
boys and their White peers has widened substantially since the 1970s, more than tripling in size
(Losen & Gillespie, 2012). By 2006, 1 in 7 African American students in U.S. schools had been
suspended at least once (Losen, 2011). Although African American youth represent only 17% of
the U.S. public school population, they comprise 32% of the students suspended (Raffaele
Mendez & Knoff, 2003). The racial disparity in school suspensions increases in middle school,
where African American males experience a suspension rate nearly three times higher than white
students: 28% of African American males were suspended, compared to the 10% suspension rate
of their White peers (Losen & Skiba, 2010; U.S. DOE, 2016). African-American students also
receive more suspensions for subjectively perceived offenses, such as defiance or disrespect,
than White students (Rausch & Skiba, 2004; Skiba et al., 2011; Skiba & Sprague, 2008).
Exclusionary school discipline may target the most fragile learners, as students with
disabilities experience higher rates of exclusionary school discipline than the non-disabled.
Special education students are overrepresented in exclusionary school discipline (Sullivan & Bal,
2013). Arcia (2006) found that students who are suspended are typically two years behind their
peers in reading achievement before suspension. Students with disabilities are suspended at a
rate almost double that of non-disabled students (U.S. DOE, 2016).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

17
Although boys and girls each account for about half of U.S. public school enrollment,
boys are suspended at much higher rates than girls. Most girls do not experience exclusionary
school discipline (Jordan & Anil, 2009). Over 70% of students receiving multiple out-of-school
suspensions are boys (U.S DOE, 2016). Boys also experience the highest rate of school
expulsions (U.S DOE, 2016).
Boys experience disproportionately higher rates of exclusionary school discipline than
girls, but boys who present multiple risk factors have the highest rates of exclusionary school
discipline. African American boys experience the highest suspension rate of any racial subgroup
(U.S DOE, 2016). Latino and Native American boys receive disproportionately high rates of
suspension as well (Hoffman & Llagas, 2003). Students who present multiple risk factors
(gender, race, and disability) have the highest rate of receiving exclusionary school discipline:
nationally, 1 in 4 boys of color with disabilities experiences at least one out-of-school suspension
(U.S DOE, 2016); in some districts, the rate is even higher (Losen & Martinez, 2013; Raffaele
Mendez, 2003).
Policies that remove students from the learning environment are correlated with negative
student outcomes, including lower grades, lower achievement, and lower graduation rates.
Suspended students showed declining learning gains after suspension, a pattern that increased
with the number of days suspended (Arcia 2006). Graduation rates were also negatively
correlated with suspension; students who were suspended for the most days were least likely to
graduate (Arcia, 2006). Bryant et al. (2000) found that misbehavior in eighth grade students
(evidenced by office referral, after-school detention, skipping school, or suspension/expulsion) is
correlated with lower academic achievement and school bonding (interest in school work,
positive perception of school). Reviewing longitudinal data for 12,000 Philadelphia students,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

18
Balfanz et al. (2007) noted that, of students suspended out of school in sixth grade, only 20%
graduated on time.
Harsh, prescriptive exclusionary discipline policies were designed to increase school
safety, but are increasingly implemented in non-threatening situations. One analysis of state-
wide suspension data found only 5% of suspensions were for dangerous offenses, such as
weapons or drug possession; most suspensions fell in the categories of disruptive behavior or
other (Rausch & Skiba, 2004). Heaviside et al. (1998), using national suspension data from the
1990s, noted that most school suspensions were applied for such minor offenses as
tardiness/truancy, disruptive behavior, and insubordination. Relatively few suspensions were
enforced for behaviors that threatened the safety or security of the school.
Although school suspensions have increased dramatically in recent years, there is little
evidence to suggest that increased suspension rates result in safer schools. Raffaele Mendez, in a
longitudinal study of over 8,000 students found that “suspension does not appear to work as a
deterrent to future misbehavior” (2003, p. 31). Tobin, Sugai, and Colvin (1996) found that
students who were suspended in sixth grade were more likely to be suspended by eighth grade
than students who had never been suspended. Additionally, the number of students receiving
multiple suspensions may indicate that exclusionary school discipline, as well as being an
ineffective deterrent, may become a reinforcer for some students, rewarding poor behavior
choices with time away from a system they may find frustrating or have difficulty navigating
successfully (Raffaele Mendez, 2003). Research to support the effectiveness of exclusionary
school discipline or zero tolerance policies is inconclusive (APA, 2008).
Exclusion from school without appropriate supervision may also increase the risk of
contact with the juvenile or criminal justice system, imposing costs to the community in the form
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

19
of increased incarceration rates, and negative impacts to individuals, such as limited ability to
make productive contributions to the community. Reviewing data for almost one million Texas
students, a recent study found that nearly 50% of students with multiple out-of-school
suspensions were involved with the juvenile or criminal justice system, compared with only 2%
of students who have never experienced exclusionary school discipline (Fabelo et al., 2011).
The number of individuals incarcerated in U.S. correctional institutions has quadrupled since the
1970s (U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1981; West & Sabol, 2009), the same years in which
school suspensions increased significantly (Losen & Skiba, 2010; U.S DOE, 2016). The role
that schools, and specifically out-of-school suspensions and expulsions, may play in this so-
called “school to prison pipeline” is antithetical to the purpose of public education, defined by
the California Constitution as, “A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence . . . essential
to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people” (Article IX, Section 1).
In a recent comment, Fight Crime: Invest in Kids (2009), a non-profit organization of
police chiefs, sheriffs, prosecutors and other law enforcement leaders, stated:
While school safety must be maintained and truly dangerous students removed from the
school community as appropriate, suspension and expulsion often provide troubled kids
exactly what they do not need: an extended, unsupervised hiatus from school that
increases their risk of engaging in substance abuse and violent crime. (As cited in Losen
& Skiba, 2010, p. 11).
This comment highlights the internal inconsistency inherent in the practice of school suspension.
Organizational Context and Mission
The District (pseudonym used to protect research population, IRB: UP-17-00029,
Appendix A), perched below foothills near the coast of a western state, is located within a low
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

20
income, predominately Latino community. It is a high need, Title 1 urban school district that
enrolls a diverse student population. It is one of 27 school districts in the County. Although the
western coast of the U.S. is home to highly innovative and lucrative firms, there is an unequal
distribution of wealth within its boundaries. The community surrounding The District lacks the
wealth and privilege that characterizes most of the surrounding area.
The District currently serves over 10,000 students, enrolled in Transitional Kindergarten
(TK) through 8th grade at over 20 District school sites (District website, 2015). The District’s
mission, “Every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and confident individual
with the competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world”
(District website, n.d.) is supported through staff training and high student expectations, both
academically and behaviorally, and articulates the “why,” or the organizational philosophy
(Sinek, 2009). The mission statement was developed collaboratively with input from over 3,000
stakeholders as part of the District’s Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) Annual Update
(District website, 2015), and is published on District documents and on District and school site
web pages.
The District has identified a need to reduce student disciplinary suspensions. To address
this need, district administrators have developed a district-wide goal to reduce student
suspensions by 10% (District website, 2016). Supporting this goal, the district has reported the
related goal of implementing School-wide Positive Behavior Systems (SWPBS) at district school
sites, and offering continued training to staff at those schools (District website, 2015, 2016).
The demographic distribution of District schools is 78.7% Latino, followed by smaller
numbers of Asian, Filipino, Caucasian, African American, Pacific Islander, and Native American
students. The District’s socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroup represents 85.1% of total
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

21
enrollment, while the English Learner subgroup in the District is 48.2% of enrollment, with
home languages of Spanish, Vietnamese, Tagalog, Cambodian, Punjabi, and Urdu. Students
with disabilities represent 37% of enrollment in the District.
California schools and districts have previously been rated through the Academic
Performance Index (API), a numeric index applied to public schools and districts statewide. API
scores, ranging from a low score of 200 to a high of 1,000, summarized the aggregate
achievement scores of students in the school or district. The District’s API score was 785
(California Department of Education [CADOE], 2012), closely approaching the California
Department of Education’s target score of 800, and in line with the California state average API
of 815 for elementary schools, and 792 for middle schools (CADOE, 2013).
Organizational Performance Goal
For the 2016-2017 academic year, the District’s goal was to reduce student disciplinary
suspensions overall by 10% district-wide (District website, 2016). Student suspension rates were
measured by calculating an average of the total disciplinary suspensions reported at each of the
District’s more than 20 school sites. The goal to reduce suspensions was based on the District’s
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), and was developed through the District’s annual
progress report, the Local Control Accountability Plan update. Through the LCAP engagement
process, District staff conducted surveys and collaborative sessions to collect feedback from
students, teachers, staff, parents, and the community (District website, 2016) to refine District
goals collaboratively.
The goal to implement Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a type of
School-wide Positive Behavior System (SWPBS), represents an organizational need in the
District to reduce student suspensions. This goal may in turn promote more equitable school
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

22
outcomes, creating opportunities for increased instructional time (Horner et al., 2009),
strengthening school bonding (Balfanz et al., 2007), improving achievement (Arcia, 2006), and
contributing to equitable on-time graduation rates (Balfanz et al., 2007), while reducing
unsupervised time out of school, potentially reducing exposure to the justice system and negative
effects to the student, school, and community (Lamont, 2013).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Public education in California at the K-12 level includes multiple stakeholder groups.
The stakeholder groups that comprise public education include students, parents/guardians,
teachers, principals/site administrators, district leaders, local board of education trustees,
community members, state and local taxpayers, legislators, county and state board of education
trustees, superintendents at the local and state level, and the state governor. The vast number of
stakeholder groups statewide provides for a multi-level accountability structure.
Locally, some groups of stakeholders that directly contribute to and benefit from the
achievement of the District include students, parents and guardians, teachers and staff, school
site administrators, and District administrators.
Students are direct beneficiaries of the curriculum, policies, and strategies selected by the
district to support learning and student goals, and contribute to the success of the organization
through their progress in learning, attendance, behavior, and achievement results.
Parents and guardians contribute to student success by being active participants and
supporting students, teachers, and school sites. Parents also support student success by
promoting school initiatives, providing conditions that support learning and appropriate behavior
at home, and bringing students to school on time and ready to learn.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

23
Teachers contribute to the success of the district through their direct daily implementation
of district teaching and learning policies and goals, as they support and prepare students
academically, emotionally, socially, and physically (California Commission on Teacher
Credentialing, 2009).

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and confident individual with
the competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2017, the District will reduce student disciplinary suspensions district-wide by 10%
(District website, 2015, 2016).
District
Principals
Goal 1
District
Principals
Goal 2
District
Principals
Goal 3
District
Principals
Goal 4
Increasing
daily
attendance by
1%
Decreasing
student
disciplinary
suspensions
by 10%.
Implementing a positive
behavior intervention system
at individual school sites to
contribute to district goal of
PBIS implementation at 80%
of district schools.
Gathering survey
responses from staff,
parents, and students that
indicate that 85% feel safe
and welcomed within their
schools.

Principals, or site administrators, interpret and implement state and federal regulations
and district policy, and articulate district goals and initiatives to students, staff, parents, and the
community. School site administrators may include the school Principal, Assistant Principal,
Dean, or other school site-based administrator. Principals follow policies for school site
administrators and staff. With the guidance and direction of district board of education trustees,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

24
district superintendent, and district level administrators, principals implement curriculum,
programs, initiatives, training, and procedures to support learning. Stakeholder goals for District
principals appear in Table 1.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
The joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
organizational goal that every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and
confident individual with the competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and
competitive world. However, it is important to focus on the stakeholder group that guides
district efforts for achievement of student goals and implements policy for students and staff.
Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study will be school principals, or school-site
administrators, who are pivotal to implementing PBIS and achieving the goal of reducing
suspensions. The stakeholders’ goals were developed by principals with support and input from
District-level administrators, informed by students, parents, teachers, and the community through
multiple school-site and district-wide input sessions. With the guidance and direction of district
board of education trustees, and informed by the community, district principals review and
implement curriculum, programs, initiatives, training, and procedures to support student learning
and well-being, and to support District goals. The district administrative team, including
managers, directors, assistant superintendents, and the District Superintendent, direct the actions
of administrators at school sites. District management selects initiatives and programs,
provisions resources, access, training, and support, and will benefit from the success of
initiatives that are successfully implemented through increases in student achievement and well-
being. District leadership can also impose consequences for non-compliant or under-performing
school sites.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

25
Compliance with District goals will be monitored through the analysis of data on daily
school attendance and disciplinary suspensions, implementation of school-wide positive behavior
systems at district school sites, and the results of an annual school climate survey of parents,
students, and staff (District website, 2016). Failure to achieve district goals can result in students
who are non-productive and not prepared for the demands of a 21st century global society, and
families exiting the district to attend one of many local charter schools. The loss of students
reduces district resources and adversely impacts the District’s ability to provide quality
programs, supports, and interventions to attain student goals and achieve the organizational goal
of preparing creative, collaborative and confident individuals with the competencies that will
enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to examine the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
elements that facilitate or interfere with implementing school-wide positive behavior systems to
prevent student misconduct and reduce exclusionary school discipline. The analysis began with
the generation of a list of possible or assumed interfering elements, then examining these
assumed influences systematically to focus on actual or validated interfering elements. While a
complete gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) would focus on all stakeholders, the stakeholder
group to be focused on within the scope of this analysis is District principals.
The questions that guided the gap analysis addressed the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational causes and solutions for success in implementing comprehensive
Tier I PBIS at district school sites by the principal stakeholder group:
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

26
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements that support, or
limit, achieving the District’s goals of implementing SWPBS at District school sites
and reducing implementation of exclusionary school discipline?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions?
Methodological Framework
The gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) provides a systematic analytical tool
to identify the gap between current organizational performance and desired organizational
performance. The gap analysis framework was applied to this project to identify existing
performance gaps in knowledge, motivation, or organizational barriers that prevent a reduction in
student disciplinary suspensions through implementation of SWPBS, as well as an equitable
distribution of student suspensions by gender, disability, and racial subgroup. The gap analysis
reviewed current organizational performance with respect to the number of school sites
implementing PBIS and the number of student suspensions at District focal school sites, seeking
to identify the root causes of the gap between current performance and the desired reduced
number of student suspensions. Student suspension data was collected through a document
analysis of DataQuest information, which stores and disseminates state public school suspension
data. Research-based solutions were recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Exclusionary School Discipline — Exclusionary school discipline is defined as any
action taken by school officials to exclude or remove a student temporarily (suspension) or
permanently (expulsion) from their usual learning environment (National Clearinghouse on
Supportive School Discipline, n.d.).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

27
KMO — The Clark and Estes (2008) framework that supports analysis of the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that can promote or support a project or endeavor; or
deficits in these areas that can create barriers to implementation of initiatives,
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) — A three-tiered school-wide
positive behavior system that is designed to prevent student misbehavior through clarified
expectations, explicitly taught behavior lessons, reinforcement of positive behavior, data-driven
decision making, and differentiated levels of support (Cressey, Whitcomb, McGilvray-Rivet,
Morrison, & Shander-Reynolds, 2015).
Principal — The leader of a school. Alternately referred to as the administrator, building
administrator, school site leader, or instructional leader.
School site administrator — The principal, or instructional leader, of a school.
School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS) — Shared, systemic behavior program
that builds a positive school culture with explicit behavior expectations, effective recognition,
tiered support, consistent consequences, and data driven decision-making that supports all
students (Vincent & Tobin, 2011). PBIS is one type of School-wide Positive Behavior Support
(SWPBS) system.
Token economy — The practice of using representative tokens, such as school tickets or
“bucks,” to recognize positive behavior, that can be redeemed for desired positive reinforcement,
such as extra recess or special school supplies (Cressey et al., 2015).
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters were used to organize this dissertation. This chapter provides the reader
with the key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about exclusionary
school discipline. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders, as well as the initial
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

28
concepts of gap analysis, are introduced. Chapter 2 provides a review of current literature
surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of reductions in school suspensions within the
context of School Wide Positive Behavior Systems will be addressed. Chapter 3 details the
assumed interfering knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements, as well as outlining the
methodology for the study, including the criteria that will drive the selection of participants, data
collection method, and data analysis. Chapter 4 will review the findings of the research project.
Chapter 5 will connect the findings of the present study to the organizational context and
mission, and provide recommendations based on the data collected and analyzed.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

29
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter reviews the relevant literature addressing the practice of exclusionary school
discipline, and the promising practice of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a
type of School-wide Positive Behavior System (SWPBS), in reducing exclusionary school
discipline. The first section reviews current and historical data relating to exclusionary school
discipline, with a focus on school suspensions. The next section highlights literature that
examines the nature of the promising practice of implementing PBIS in school settings. Finally,
the chapter concludes with an examination of the literature that defines some potential promoters
and/or barriers to successfully implementing SWPBS in schools, through the Clark and Estes
(2008) framework of knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational factors (KMO)
needed for successful implementation. The literature review provides data to substantiate the
research questions that guided this study. To inform the exploration of the perceptions and
experiences of school site administrators with respect to Tier I implementation of PBIS, a
school-wide positive behavior system, at schools in the District, research questions were
designed to frame the inquiry.
The following research questions guided the study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors that supported, or
limited, achieving the District’s goals of implementing SWPBS at selected district
school sites, and reduced implementation of exclusionary school discipline?
2. What effective knowledge, motivation, or organizational solutions are recommended
to promote the District’s goals of implementing SWPBS and reducing student
disciplinary suspensions?
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

30
Exclusionary School Discipline
Inequities in the Application of Exclusionary School Discipline
Since the first data on school suspensions were compiled and disaggregated in the 1970s,
clear patterns of bias have characterized the practice (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975).
Disparities with respect to gender, race, and disability status have persistently characterized
student disciplinary suspensions (Losen, 2011). Boys, minorities, and disabled children are
overrepresented in exclusionary school discipline (Jordan & Anil, 2009; Losen & Skiba, 2010;
Raffaele Mendez & Knoff, 2003). Inequities in the application of exclusionary school discipline
may result from school site administrators who lack the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational assets to make positive behavior support decisions. Racial disparities in the
application of exclusionary school discipline may be the result of lack of training in culturally
responsive classroom management (Vavrus & Cole, 2002).
Racial Disparity
African American students represent only 17% of the U.S public school student
enrollment, but receive 32% of school suspensions (Raffaele Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Skiba,
Michael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002). Additionally, African American students are more likely to
be suspended for minor or subjective offenses, such as disruption or disrespect (Rausch & Skiba,
2004; Skiba et al., 2002; Skiba et al., 2011; Skiba & Sprague, 2008).
Wallace et al. (2008) analyzed data from the University of Michigan’s Monitoring the
Future study. The data represented the results of a multi-stage sampling procedure to identify
nationally representative samples of 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students from the 48 continental
United States. The data sampling included regional sampling (Stage One), mix of public and
private schools (Stage Two), and samples of students within each school (Stage Three).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

31
Students were informed via flyer about their participation in the study. Study
questionnaires were administered to the identified students during school hours, with parent
letters sent home. These participation safeguards produced an 86% response rate.
The study revealed important racial and ethnic differences in school discipline, as
reported by students across the U.S. Boys were consistently disciplined at school at a much
higher rate than girls. African American students were significantly more likely to experience
school discipline than White boys. The data revealed that, for 2001-2005 data combined, among
35,986 10th grade boys in U.S. schools who responded to the questionnaire, 56% of African
American boys were suspended or expelled, compared to 43% of American Indian boys, 39% of
Latino boys, 27% of White boys, and 19% of Asian American boys. Table 2 shows these results.

Table 2
U.S. 10th Grade Boys Suspended or Expelled by Race (2001–2005 Data Combined)
Boys by Race % Suspended or Expelled
African American 56%
American Indian 43%
Hispanic 39%
White 27%
Asian American 19%

Using large, nationally representative samples, self-reported by U.S. students from the
contiguous 48 states, Wallace et al. (2008) found that African American, Latino, and Native
American students are 2 to 3 times more likely to be suspended or expelled than White or Asian
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

32
students. Equally troubling was the finding that, for the 15-year study period, 1991–2005,
suspension rates for Latinos and Native Americans declined slightly, while suspension rates for
African American youths increased, especially for boys (Wallace et al., 2008). These data depict
a discipline gap that parallels the achievement gap (Losen & Gillespie, 2012), contributing to
continued institutional inequities in public schools.
The social and economic costs of inequities in school discipline can create a disparate
impact on students who are unfairly targeted for suspension (Rumberger & Losen, 2017). Using
data from a far-reaching study of all Texas middle school students, researchers found that the
state could “avoid billions of dollars in lost tax revenue, and in social welfare costs, as well as
costs associated with repeating a grade, by suspending fewer students” (Rumberger & Losen,
2017, p. 3). Reducing exclusionary school discipline can be expected to reduce the significant
costs to the community associated with the practice of disciplinary school suspension.
Gender and Disability Disparities
Disparities in the application of exclusionary school discipline also exist with respect to
gender and disability status. Although boys represent approximately 50% of public school
enrollments, they receive a disproportionate number of exclusionary school discipline referrals
(Jordan & Anil, 2009; U.S DOE, 2016).
Disproportional to their percentage in U. S. public school enrollment, students with
disabilities are overrepresented in exclusionary school discipline. Disparities by ability group
show that disabled students are overrepresented in exclusionary school discipline (Losen &
Martinez, 2013; Rafaele Mendez, 2003; Vincent et al., 2012). Students with multiple risk factors
(minority, male, disabled) experience the highest rates of exclusionary school discipline
(Sullivan et al., 2014).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

33
School Safety
Although the concept of removing students from their usual learning environment
through disciplinary school suspension is intended to increase school safety, school site
administrators regularly implement suspensions for issues other than preserving school safety.
Most school suspensions are implemented for relatively minor offenses (Heaviside et al., 1998).
An analysis of 2002–2003 Indiana state-wide suspension data found only 5% of suspensions
were for dangerous offenses, such as weapons or drug possession; most suspensions fell in the
categories of relatively minor and subjective misconduct, described as disruptive behavior or
other (Rausch & Skiba, 2004). In a study of disciplinary data of middle-school students in a
large, urban midwestern public school district, disciplinary data for over 11,000 students showed
that African American students were more likely than White students to be disciplined for
subjective offenses, such as disrespect or loitering (Skiba et al., 2002).
Negative School Outcomes Associated with Exclusionary School Discipline
There are multiple negative school outcomes associated with exclusionary school
discipline. These include reduced achievement (Arcia, 2006); reduced school bonding (Bryant et
al., 2000); increased school attrition and lower on-time graduation rates (Arcia, 2006; Balfanz et
al., 2007; Bernburg & Krohn, 2003; Velez, 1989), and increased risk of exposure to the juvenile
or criminal justice system (Fabelo et al., 2011), known as the school to prison pipeline.
Morris and Perry (2016), in a longitudinal study of the impact of student suspensions on
achievement, found that the racial disparities in suspension contribute to lower academic
achievement, thereby exacerbating the racial achievement gap. Using data from the Kentucky
Student Discipline Study for 16,248 students in grade 6 through grade 10, Morris and Perry
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

34
found a strong relationship between suspension and achievement, linking the racial inequities in
school discipline with disparate academic outcomes by race.
Students who are suspended from school are at an increased risk of exposure to the
justice system (Wald & Losen, 2003). In a longitudinal study of 1,354 adolescent offenders ages
14 through 17, in two U.S. metropolitan areas for the years 2000–2006, Monahan, VanDerhei,
Bechtold, and Cauffman (2014) found that juveniles were more likely to be arrested during a
month in which they are suspended from school. Sweeten (2006), using data from the National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997 cohort, found that being arrested was a significant predictor
of high school attrition. These negative effects extend to the community, in terms of increased
criminal activity when students are suspended, as well as diminished earning capacity and
increased adult unemployment experienced by students who are suspended (Bernburg & Krohn,
2003), negatively impacting neighborhood safety and community resources available through the
tax base (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). Extrapolating 10th grade suspension data from
Florida and California, a recent study by The Civil Rights Project at UCLA calculates the cost of
exclusionary school discipline in the U.S., including fiscal losses (lost tax revenues through
diminished earning capacity and increased unemployment) of $11 billion, as well as social costs
(health care, assistance, incarceration) of $35 billion (Rumberger & Losen, 2016).
School suspensions represent a large, costly, and growing problem of practice in U.S.
public education. Over 3 million students are suspended from American schools each year
(Zhang, Musu-Gillette, & Oudekerk, 2016). Persistent disparities in the implementation of
exclusionary school discipline, in which boys, children of color, and the disabled are consistently
overrepresented, along with multiple negative outcomes to the student and the community,
including lower achievement, reduced on time graduation rates, diminished lifetime earnings,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

35
and increased exposure to the justice system, outline a problem of practice for the U.S.
educational system that must be addressed to promote equity, maximize instructional time, and
enhance the educational outcomes of all students (Wallace et al., 2008).
School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems
What are School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems?
Exclusionary school discipline may be over-utilized by school site administrators who
lack training in alternative positive discipline measures (Skiba & Sprague, 2008). The emerging
practice of implementing positive school-wide behavior plans is showing promising results in
reducing exclusionary school discipline (CADOE, 2017). School-wide positive behavior
systems (SWPBS) refer to a constellation of interrelated procedures and practices that create
changes in the school environment and school culture to provide support for students that is
designed to prevent misbehavior, encourage positive behavior, and promote academic
achievement for all students (Sugai, Horner, & Lewis, 2009). School-wide positive behavior
systems present a framework to implement a continuum of evidence-based interventions that
enhance academic and behavioral outcomes for all students (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012; Sugai et
al., 2000).
Comprehensive, school-wide positive behavior supports are designed to promote
positive, self-regulated student behavior through implementing explicitly taught school-wide
behavior expectations to clarify acceptable behavior. Positive behavior support systems develop
self-discipline and prevent misconduct by recognizing and reinforcing positive behavior (Barrett,
Bradshaw, & Lewis-Palmer, 2008). SWPBS activates positive behavior interventions and
supports through school-wide positive behavior expectations that are shared and explicitly taught
(Horner, Sugai, & Anderson, 2010). This may include minimizing distractions to learning by
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

36
changing the environment to support focused learning, and strengthening desired behavior
through recognition and reinforcement (McSweeney & Murphy, 2014). Teachers frequently
focus on students who are disruptive. Shifting the school culture to focus on, and reinforce,
positive student behavior, motivates attention-seeking students to follow established, prosocial
norms to receive recognition, rather than being disruptive.
Elements of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports Systems
The most successful and impactful implementations of school-wide positive behavior
systems are those that show evidence of multiple positive behavior support elements. Positive
Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a positive behavior support system that is
showing promising results in reducing student disciplinary suspensions. PBIS-aligned elements
include developing shared, school-wide, location-specific behavior expectations that are posted
and explicitly taught to all students (Skiba, 2010). These expectations are paired with a positive,
progressive school discipline system (Skiba & Sprague, 2008; Skiba, 2010), including shared
expectations for classroom-managed behavior and referrals for office-managed behavior, and
utilizing multi-tiered systems of support. A multi-tiered support system is utilized, within a
continuum of support strategies, to structure supports that are appropriate for the individual
needs of each student. Multi-tiered systems include Tier I, or universal supports, such as posting
behavior expectations, and explicitly teaching and practicing the expectations with students
(Horner et al., 2010). Universal supports are appropriate for all students, and may be all that is
needed to guide the behavior of approximately 80% of the students. For students struggling to
comply within the universal support system (approximately 15%), Tier II, or secondary,
interventions can be introduced. These may include small group social skills training, or the
Check, Connect, Expect intervention (Cheney et al., 2010). The Check, Connect, Expect model
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

37
is a Tier II intervention that structures school-level support in the form of a supportive adult
coach with whom the at-risk student meets daily to review social goals, with structured check-ins
during the day to reinforce self-regulation and social skills progress by the student, and
communication through daily notes home to report progress (Cheney et al., 2010).
Tier III, or tertiary supports, for the small number of students (approximately 5%) who
have not responded to either universal or secondary supports and still need guidance to
successfully navigate the system of expected appropriate behavior, involve individual supports,
such as an individually crafted Behavior Improvement Plan (Cheney et al., 2010; Eagle, Dowd-
Eagle, Snyder, & Holtzman, 2015; Hawken, Vincent, & Schumann, 2008), or referral for
individual counseling. Figure 2 demonstrates the multi-tiered layers of support applied based on
student need (Sugai, 2017; Office of Special Education Programs [OSEP], 2017).
Data is collected on behavior referrals, which is analyzed by the positive behavior
support team for patterns and trends, with a focus on data-driven decision-making (Losen, 2011).
Data-driven decisions focus on the use of data collected from office referral forms to identify
patterns and trends, which are applied to inform problem-solving and craft behavior support
solutions within the school (McIntosh, 2016). For instance, the school site behavior committee
might decide to provide additional student support by increasing supervision at recess, based on
multiple behavior incidents reported during recess. Exclusionary school discipline, in the form of
suspensions or expulsions, is reserved for behaviors that significantly compromise school safety
(Skiba & Sprague, 2008), as defined in California Education Code § 48900.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

38

Figure 2. Multi-tiered systems of support

School Safety: Positive Disciplinary Alternatives
Positive behavior plans are designed to reduce student misconduct through prevention
and explicitly taught behavior expectations (Losen, 2011). Through direct instruction, repeated
practice, and positive reinforcement, positive behavior responses become routine and
automaticity is fostered (McCrudden, Schraw, & Hartley, 2006). Positive behavior is recognized
to provide reinforcement and promote compliance (McSweeney & Murphy, 2014).
Effectiveness of SWPBS
In a 5-year longitudinal study of 37 U.S. elementary schools implementing SWPBS,
Bradshaw, Mitchell, and Leaf (2010) reported reduced student disciplinary office referrals as
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

39
well as reduced student suspensions after implementing SWPBS. In addition to a reduction of
inappropriate student behaviors (Payton et al., 2008), SWPBS support also improved other
favorable school and student outcomes, including increased achievement (Lassen, Steele, &
Sailor, 2006) and an improvement in the overall school climate.
California Education Code requires school leaders to “establish programs and strategies
that promote school safety and emphasize violence prevention among children and youth in the
public schools” (California Education Code § 35294). School-wide positive behavior systems
present such a program, using effective strategies within a systemic methodology to promote
prevention, equity, and school safety by emphasizing recognition of positive behavior and
reducing suspensions (Bradshaw, Koth, Bevans, Ialongo, & Leaf, 2008). Implementation of
SWPBS is usually a multiple year endeavor, with Tier 1, consisting of universal supports,
typically offered in Year 1. This study examines the perceptions and experiences of school
principals in implementing Tier I PBIS through an analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors that promote or inhibit school site implementation of PBIS.
KMO Conceptual Framework
Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation Influences
Analyzing human performance gaps through the Clark and Estes (2008) cognitive
problem-solving framework involves an examination of the knowledge or skills needed to
perform tasks, along with sufficient motivation to achieve the goal, and organizational elements
to support success. Analyzing human performance through the knowledge, motivation, and
organization (KMO) conceptual framework, a systemic approach to improve performance to
achieve organizational goals, creates an effective tool to identify performance gaps, analyze the
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

40
elements needed for success, and apply these factors to eliminate barriers and promote success
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Performance gaps in knowledge and skills factors may be addressed through increased
training, development, and experience to support successful performance. Motivational issues
signal the need for increased goal-setting, persistence, and mental effort to support successful
task completion. Identifying organizational barriers demonstrates the need for facilities,
resources, tools, or shared procedures that support success. The KMO approach provided the
framework to effectively analyze and address the performance gaps revealed in this study (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Knowledge and Skills
A key to understanding the partial successes of the District in implementing School-Wide
Positive Behavior Supports (SWPBS) systems at selected district school sites required inquiry
into the knowledge held by stakeholders. The following pages will review literature that
explores knowledge-related influences that are pertinent to the achievement of the organizational
goal of reducing suspensions through implementation of SWPBS. An analysis of the reviewed
literature in terms of the type of the knowledge or skills that are being described will follow.
Knowledge types. Prevalent types of knowledge include declarative knowledge, which
may be factual or conceptual; procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Factual
knowledge of the elements; conceptual knowledge, or interrelationships between elements; and
procedural knowledge, involving steps, skills, or algorithms, are subsets of the knowledge
dimension. Metacognitive knowledge, a fourth and more recently recognized subset of the
knowledge dimension, includes knowledge of cognition in general, as well as an awareness of
one’s own cognitive processes (Krathwohl, 2002).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

41
Stakeholder knowledge influences. A review of the literature that is relevant to the
knowledge stakeholders need to achieve organizational goals appears below (Table 3). SWPBS
involves the systematic application of behavioral learning theory. SWPBS includes intentional
alterations to modify the school environment to enhance systems and procedures that promote
positive changes in the behavior and responses of students and staff (Bradshaw et al., 2008).
These changes may include arranging the environment to minimize distractions and support
learning, as well as strengthening desired behavior through recognition and reinforcement
(McSweeney & Murphy, 2014). Currently, a body of rigorous scholarship exists to establish
SWPBS as an evidence-based practice that can be implemented by teachers and staff in U.S.
public schools to decrease inappropriate behavior and promote prosocial behavior (Horner et al.,
2010; Cressey et al., 2015).
Declarative knowledge influences. Declarative knowledge, including factual and
conceptual (Krathwohl, 2002), is needed for school principals to understand the elements of
PBIS, and constructs that may facilitate, or present barriers to, implementation of new initiatives.
School site administrative stakeholders need to understand the barriers to effective behavior
support. Racial disparities in the application of exclusionary school discipline may be the result
of lack of training in culturally responsive classroom management (Vavrus & Cole, 2002).
Principals need knowledge of the theoretical basis for positive behavior plans and their perceived
efficacy and fit for the school site culture to determine the appropriate behavior plan to invest in
and implement to support students. Additionally, principals need the conceptual knowledge of
understanding the elements of the selected program. This declarative knowledge is essential to
making well-informed and effective curricular and programmatic selections that will support the
achievement of the global goal of implementing systemic Positive Behavior Interventions and
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

42
Supports at selected district school sites, and decreasing disciplinary student suspensions by 10%
by June, 2017 (District website, 2016).
Elements of PBIS. School-wide positive behavior systems are designed to prevent
student misconduct and emphasize the recognition of positive, prosocial student behavior. These
goals are facilitated through developing shared, school-wide, location-specific student behavior
expectations that are explicitly taught, modeled, and practiced to automaticity. These may
include expectations for appropriate student behavior in the library, playground, cafeteria, and
classroom, which are learned through practice and repetition, and reinforced to become routine,
increasing engaged learning time, and improving the school climate (McKevitt & Braaksma,
2008; Cressey et al., 2015; McCrudden et al., 2006; Kame’enui, & Carnine, 1998).
Student behavior expectations are clarified, posted in common areas, and explicitly
taught to students. Each teacher will explicitly teach student behavior expectations within the
relevant context. For instance, library behavior expectations are taught in the library, cafeteria
expectations in the cafeteria, etc. (Cressey et al., 2015).
Conversely, lack of knowledge of the theoretical constructs and implementation elements
of SWPBS is a barrier to successful implementation. Feuerborn and Tyre (2016) found that
positive staff perceptions of SWPBS increased with level of understanding of SWPBS.
Successful implementation practices increased with the amount of time that schools were
involved in planning and/or implementing SWPBS. Staff reported only basic levels of
understanding of SWPBS in schools that were in the pre-implementation phase, but high levels
of understanding of the principles of SWPBS after implementation (Feuerborn, Tyre, & King,
2015). Interestingly, most staff in all schools in the Feuerborn and Tyre (2016) study report
agreement with SWPBS theory and practice, however staff surveyed in schools with multiple
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

43
years of implementation were significantly more likely to report that they strongly agree with
SWPBS and were actively involved in the implementation (Feuerborn & Tyre, 2016). This high-
level agreement with PBIS constructs after multiple years of implementation is crucial, as
increased staff ownership — leadership teams and peer facilitation — is important for successful
implementation (Bambara, Nonnemacher, & Kern, 2009; Kincaid, Childs, Blasé, & Wallace,
2007).
Procedural knowledge influences. Procedural knowledge, as defined by Krathwohl
(2002), refers to the knowledge and skill needed to perform a task, or “how-to” knowledge.
District leaders need to know how to support the implementation of positive school-wide
behavior programs at school sites. This will require the procedural knowledge to effectively
provide training and implementation plans to support the introduction of school-site positive
school-wide behavior programs at selected District schools. SWPBS activates positive behavior
interventions and supports through school-wide positive behavior expectations that are shared
and explicitly taught (Horner et al., 2010).
Metacognitive knowledge influences. Metacognitive knowledge, or the ability to reflect
on and examine one’s own thinking (Krathwohl, 2002), is an important tool in self-reflection to
gauge effectiveness. District leaders and policy makers need to know how to reflect on their
own effectiveness in supporting and implementing School Wide Positive Behavior Supports at
District school sites. Multiple SWPBS tools are available for self- and team-reflection, including
the School Evaluation Tool (SET) and the Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) (Upreti,
Liaupsin, & Koonce, 2010). These tools will facilitate individuals and teams as they reflect on
their own effectiveness in implementing SWPBS.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

44
Table 3
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Principals Implementing PBIS to Achieve
Organizational Goals
Organizational Mission
Every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and confident individual with the
competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world.
Organizational Global Goal
The District will provide all students and families a safe, welcoming, and caring environment
conducive to learning.
Stakeholder Goal
By June, 2017, 80% of District schools will implement systemic Positive Behavior Interventions.
The District will decrease disciplinary student suspensions by 10% by June, 2017.
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Influence Assessment
Declarative
Factual: Instructional leaders need to
know which school site programs will
reduce exclusionary school discipline.
Site administrators can identify the most effective
aspects of positive school-wide behavior programs
currently used in school settings, and research
evidence of positive behavior support systems.
Conceptual: Instructional leaders need to
know the details of available positive
school-wide behavior programs.
School site administrators were asked to identify
key elements of positive behavior intervention
programs.
Procedural
Instructional leaders need to know how to
support the implementation of positive
school-wide behavior programs.
School site administrators were asked to provide
implementation plans that were used to support the
introduction of school-site positive school-wide
behavior programs.
Metacognitive
Instructional leaders need to know how to
reflect on their own effectiveness in
supporting the implementation of positive
school-wide behavior programs at school
sites.
School site administrators were asked to reflect on
the effectiveness of their support in the
implementation of school-wide positive behavior
programs at District school sites.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

45
A summary of the declarative, procedural, and metacognitive influences that are assumed
to impact the comprehensive school site implementation of Tier 1 PBIS are noted in Table 3.
The assumed influences in Table 3 were investigated through the qualitative research in this
study, with proposed recommendations outlined in Chapter 5.
Motivation
To understand the motivational issues that support or enhance the achievement of
organizational goals, a review of the literature that focuses on motivation-related influences that
are pertinent to the stakeholder of the organization is required. Motivation can be defined as the
force that, “gets us moving, keeps us going, and tells us how much effort to spend on work
tasks” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 80). Motivation is critical to success, and stimulates energy to
fuel and direct behavior (Pintrich, 2003). A motivated performance will include the elements of
active choice, or actively engaging in pursuing a goal, persistence to continue despite distractions
from less important goals, and the mental effort required to successfully complete the
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). The types of knowledge needed to successfully implement
SWPBS and reduce student disciplinary suspensions include an understanding of the
motivational aspects of utility value, attributions, and self-efficacy (Table 3).
Utility value theory focuses on the perceived usefulness, or utility value, of the proposed
solution or learning task (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Learners who perceive the utility value of
cognitive tasks in achieving their goals, or in filling other psychological needs, will be motivated
to achieve (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Principals who see the value of implementing a positive
behavior system will be motivated to achieve thorough school site implementation aligned with
PBIS.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

46
Site administrators ’ perception of utility. Site administrators need to see the
importance of implementing school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports at their
school sites to promote the reduction of student disciplinary suspensions. For District school site
administrator stakeholders, utility value, provided by research evidence on the effectiveness of
SWPBS, supplies the motivation to persist in successfully implementing positive behavior
systems at school sites (Upreti et al., 2010).
Attribution theory. For school site administrators to support the selection and
implementation of SWPBS programs at district school sites, they must believe that negative
student behavior and ineffective teacher responses are both external and controllable, and that
effort is more salient to success than ability (Anderman & Anderman, 2010; Dweck, 2007).
These attributions support the possibility of change, that students can learn to make better
behavioral choices, and that teachers and staff can learn to provide more positive behavior
guidance and support (Anderman & Anderman, 2010). Attribution theory focuses on the nature
of learning, including the importance of effort, strategies, and potential self-control of learning
(Pintrich, 2003). Johansen, Little, and Akin-Little (2011) found that most teachers do not believe
in the effectiveness of SWPBS, despite considerable research to the contrary. However,
Feuerborn and Tyre (2016) found increased agreement with the constructs of SWPBS with
increased exposure to and education in SWPBS and its implementation.
School site administrators ’ attributions. District school site administrators attribute
ineffective school behavior management to lack of knowledge on the part of both students and
teachers. Attributing poor behavior choices as internal and controllable demonstrates district
administrators’ beliefs that explicit teaching of behavior expectations will support better
behavioral choices. Attributing lack of knowledge of positive behavior interventions and
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

47
supports as both internal and controllable allows district administrators to invest in and require
SWPBS training at district school sites. Suspensions may be overutilized by school site
administrators who lack training in alternative positive discipline measures (Skiba & Sprague,
2008), while racial disparities in exclusionary school discipline may result from deficiencies in
culturally responsive classroom management training (Vavrus & Cole, 2002). Both of these
deficiencies can be effectively addressed through training, with the understanding, through
attribution theory, that the lack of knowledge is both internal and controllable (Anderman &
Anderman, 2010).
Self-efficacy theory. In self-efficacy theory, individual self-perceptions and beliefs are
critical — judgments people hold about their ability to learn or perform. High self-efficacy can
enhance motivation and learning through the expectation of success (Pajares & Urdan, 2005).
School site administrators ’ self-efficacy. School site administrators need to believe
they can positively affect teacher and staff training and expect success in supporting student
behavior through their efforts to implement PBIS at district school sites. Assessment would
include open-ended questions regarding self-confidence and the ability to successfully direct
training and implementation of PBIS at District school sites. Reflective and evaluative tools of
PBIS, such as the School Evaluation Tool (SET), could provide data for self-efficacy reflection
in the implementation of SWPBS (Upreti et al., 2010).
Table 4 summarizes key motivation factors that may influence school principals in
successfully implementing comprehensive PBIS practices at their school sites.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

48

Table 4
Assumed Motivational Influences on Principals Implementing PBIS, and Assessments
Organizational Mission
Every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and confident individual with
the competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June, 2017, selected District schools will implement systemic Positive Behavior
Interventions. The District will decrease disciplinary student suspensions by 10% by June,
2017.
Stakeholder Goal
By June, 2017, principals at District schools will implement systemic Positive Behavior
Interventions, and decrease disciplinary student suspensions by 10%.
Assumed Motivational Influences How Was It Assessed?
Utility Value – School site administrators need
to see the importance of implementing school-
wide positive behavior interventions and
supports at district school sites.
Interview questions of school site
administrators regarding the importance
of implementing school-wide positive
behavior interventions and supports at
district school sites.
Attributions – District school site administrators
understand that the attitudes, words, and actions
of adults have significant impact on the behavior
and educational outcomes of children.
Interview questions of school site
administrators regarding the significance
of adult actions on student behavior.
Self-efficacy – District school site administrators
need to understand that they can positively
impact the behavior and educational outcomes of
students by implementing systemic school-wide
positive behavior interventions and supports.
Interview questions to query the level of
confidence in supporting student
behavior through the implementation of
SWPBS.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

49
Organization
Organizational factors, from training, equipment and materials, to organizational
processes and leadership support, create the organizational structure that provisions and supports
effective organizational functioning. Identifying and working within the organizational culture is
also essential in effectively aligning organizational culture with work processes, policies and
procedures. Implementing organizational change, a key process for improvement, is promoted
when changes are aligned with the existing organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008), and
when both individual and institutional identities are engaged (Kezar, 2001).
An organizational model responding to institutionalized resistance to organizational
change (Cultural Model Influence 1; Table 5), including non-compliance or opposition, involves
leaders as change agents (Agocs, 1997). Fundamental change can be realized through strategies
such as creating allies by seeking common goals; using existing organizational policies,
practices, and resources effectively; and presenting evidence to support the change (Agocs,
1997). These strategies promote the dynamics of change in the context of individual and
collective action (Agocs, 1997).
The organizational culture and climate are key factors in the work process, as the culture
provides the context for the interaction of diverse team members (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Managing effective work interactions within diverse teams is accomplished through pluralistic
leadership, allowing for differences to be acknowledged and negotiated (Kezar, 2000). Applying
pluralistic leadership in the District, a model would emerge that would allow multiple
perspectives to be valued and differences respected, as pluralistic decisions are implemented
(Kezar, 2000). For example, pluralistic leadership could dismantle the distrust that may exist
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

50
(Cultural Model Influence 2; Table 5), through the implementation of open communication and
valuing capable leaders and leadership processes (Kezar, 2000).
Recognizing the cultural setting of the workplace can support success. In the District,
teachers and staff members are unionized, with clear division of responsibilities, and a sharp
delineation between workers and management. Organizational support to address staff needs can
provide the impetus for change. For teachers who are feeling overwhelmed with a sequence of
drastic changes (Cultural Setting Influence 1, Table 5), including implementation of Common
Core Standards, adoption of new curriculum for both math and English Language Arts, and
continual disruptive downsizing due to declining enrollment, organizational support in the form
of additional planning and collaboration time and additional professional development to prepare
teachers to navigate the changes, could be effective in calming fears and eliminating resistance to
the implementation of a new school-wide positive behavior system. This organizational support
could build knowledge and motivation in teachers, as well as organizational support (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
“Managing change is about managing people” (Moran & Brightman, 2000, p. 66).
Managing conflict resolution to promote team effectiveness supports empowered organizational
teams (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000). Filling the organizational need for training to develop
teacher leaders who will be role models to colleagues in promoting cooperative goals for
establishing positive behavior support within classroom teaching will support teachers in
accessing new learning (Cultural Setting Influence 2; Table 5).

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

51
Table 5
Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences that May Impact Principals in Implementing
PBIS
Organizational Mission
Every student in the District will be a creative, collaborative and confident individual with the
competencies that will enable them to thrive in a diverse and competitive world.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June, 2017, selected District schools will implement systemic Positive Behavior Interventions.
The District will decrease disciplinary student suspensions by 10% by June, 2017.
Stakeholder Goal
By June, 2017, principals at District schools will implement systemic Positive Behavior
Interventions, and decrease disciplinary student suspensions by 10%.
Assumed
Organizational
Influences
Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle Proposed Solution
Cultural Model
Influence 1:
There is general
resistance by
principals to
changing existing
disciplinary
practices.
Interview question
about resistance to
change or factors of
resistance to change
that school site
administrators have
observed; review of
disciplinary data to
determine if practices
have changed.
A strong organizational
culture controls
organizational behavior
and can block an
organization from
making necessary
changes for adapting to a
changing environment
(Schein, 2004).
Increase principal PBIS
training to outline the
research evidence of the
efficacy of PBIS. Site
administrators must use
education to overcome
resistance based on false
beliefs in the efficacy of
past practice.
Cultural Model
Influence 2:
There is distance
between school site
leaders and school
site staff, hindering
the institutional goal
of integrating
positive behavioral
support into
teaching.
School site
administrator
interview questions
about the level of
faculty connection to
goals of school
administration.
Adult learners resist
learning when they feel
others are imposing
information, ideas or
actions on them
(Fidishun, 2000).
Site administrators
should utilize team-
building and
collaborative strategies
to build ownership and
cooperation. Form an
action committee to
attend training together
and collaboratively
develop the school’s
shared expectations.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

52

Table 5, continued
Assumed
Organizational
Influences
Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle Proposed Solution
Cultural Setting
Influence 1:
Teachers are
overwhelmed by
Common Core teaching
and associated new
curriculum and
instructional strategies,
and this keeps them
from investing effort
into integrating positive
behavior practices into
their teaching.
Interview questions
about school site
administrators’
observation of
competing initiatives
and feelings of being
overwhelmed in
implementing
Common Core
curriculum, standards
and practices.
“Leaders should not
focus on culture change.
Focus on the business
problem: what isn’t
working. The key to
problem identification is
to become very
specific.” (Schein,
2004).
School site
implementation will
focus on addressing
student behavior
issues that impede
teaching success,
thereby serving
teacher goals and
improving teaching
and learning.
Cultural Setting
Influence 2:
There is a lack of
consistent role models
within the District who
have integrated positive
behavior supports into
their teaching.
Interview questions
about knowing
supportive colleagues
they can reach out to
about how they have
integrated positive
behavior supports at
their school sites.
Modeling to-be-learned
strategies or behaviors
improves learning and
performance (Bandura,
2001).
Provide principals
with active modeling
and mentoring
through identification
of district role models,
best practice videos,
peer visits and
observations, and
coaching.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

53
Effective organizational change can be supported through recognition of the culture or
climate, as well as the context or setting, as lenses through which to focus needed improvements.
Shaping the organizational culture is an essential function of leadership, and is unique to leaders
(Schein, 2004). Building organizational culture in a learning organization requires leaders to be
designers, teachers, and stewards (Senge, 1990). Designing a continual learning environment,
modeling learning on multiple levels, with a focus on the causes of patterns and events, and
developing the roles of stewardship, both of people and of a commitment to a greater good, will
create the conditions for accessible and sustainable change (Senge, 1990). Informed selection,
clarity of vision, transparent communication, monitoring progress, active leadership, and
providing knowledge, motivation, and organizational support are needed to successfully
implement organizational change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Table 5 expresses assumed
organizational influences that may create barriers to achieving the organization’s and
stakeholder’s goals of implementing comprehensive, Tier I PBIS practices and reducing student
disciplinary suspensions at District school sites.
Table 6 integrates current learning, motivation, and organizational theory into the KMO
problem solving framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) of knowledge, motivation, and organization
assumed influences. These influences will be examined through the present qualitative inquiry
into the perceptions and experiences of school sit implementation of PBIS in the District.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

54
Table 6
Assumed KMO Influences by Learning, Motivation and Organization Theory
Assumed Influences
Sources Knowledge Motivation Organization
Learning,
Motivation and
Organizational
Theory
Declarative
Factual:
School leaders need to
know research evidence
regarding which school
site programs will reduce
exclusionary school
discipline.
Utility Value – School
administrators need to see
the benefit of
implementing school-
wide positive behavior
interventions and supports
at district school sites.
School site
administrators
implement suspensions
for issues other than
preserving school safety
(Heaviside et al., 1998).
Conceptual:
School leaders need to
know the elements of
positive school-wide
behavior programs
Attribution – School
leaders should understand
that the attitudes, words,
and actions of adults have
significant impact on the
behavior and educational
outcomes of children.
Racial disparities in the
application of
exclusionary school
discipline may be the
result of lack of training
in culturally responsive
classroom management
(Vavrus & Cole, 2002).
Procedural:
School leaders need to
know how to support the
implementation of
positive school-wide
behavior programs
Self-Efficacy – Principals
need to understand that
they can positively impact
the behavior and
educational outcomes of
students by implementing
systemic school-wide
positive behavior
interventions and supports
at their school sites.
African American
students represent only
17% of student
population, but receive
32% of school
suspensions (Raffaele
Mendez & Knoff, 2003;
Skiba et al., 2002).
Metacognitive:
Principals need to know
supportive colleagues they
can reach out to about the
progress of integrating
positive behavior supports
at their school sites, and
with whom they can self-
reflect on challenges and
successes.
Modeling strategies or
behaviors improves
learning and performance
(Bandura, 2001).
Reflective self-evaluation
of behaviors learned
through modeling.
Provide principals with
active modeling and
mentoring through
identification of district
role models, best
practice videos, peer
visits and observations,
and coaching, allowing
reflective self-
evaluation.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

55
Conclusion
Knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements can support, or hinder, human
performance. The assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that influenced
District principals’ ability to implement PBIS and reduce exclusionary school discipline are
summarized in Table 6. This table summarizes the elements that were validated. The validation
process will be described in Chapter 3.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

56
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
Disparity in the application of exclusionary school discipline, particularly the
disproportionate representation of boys, racial minorities, and the disabled in school discipline
(Sullivan & Bal, 2013; Vincent et al., 2012), is a significant problem of practice in U.S. public
schools that is both persistent and growing, with increasingly negative consequences (Children’s
Defense Fund, 1975; Losen, 2005). Multiple negative student outcomes are associated with the
use of exclusionary school discipline as a temporary (suspension) or permanent (expulsion)
school discipline measure (National Clearinghouse on Supportive School Discipline, n.d.).
These negative outcomes inform the organizational need to reduce student suspensions, and
support the District goal of implementing SWPBS at District school sites. Implementing
SWPBS may promote more equitable school outcomes, creating opportunities for improved
achievement through increased instructional time (Horner et al., 2009), strengthening school
bonding (Balfanz et al., 2007), improving achievement (Arcia, 2006), and contributing to
equitable on-time graduation rates (Balfanz et al., 2007). SWPBS programs may also reduce
unsupervised time out of school, improving student safety (American Academy of Pediatrics
Committee on School Health, 2003), potentially reducing exposure to the justice system (Fabelo
et al., 2011) and negative effects to the student, school, and community (Lamont, 2013), while
improving school climate and individual student outcomes. This chapter will outline the project
questions that informed the study. Next, the conceptual and methodological gap analysis
framework approach used in the present study will be described. The research questions that
were developed to guide the qualitative inquiry will be elucidated, followed by the conceptual
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

57
and theoretical frameworks that bounded and structured the research study. Next, the
stakeholders and sampling criteria that were applied in the study are reviewed. A description of
data collection and instruments will ensue, followed by a discussion of the credibility,
trustworthiness, and ethical standards observed in the study. Finally, limitations and
delimitations of the research study will be discussed.
The purpose of this study was to analyze the role of School-Wide Positive Behavior
Systems, such as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) (Barrett et al., 2008) in
guiding student behavior and reducing the use of exclusionary school discipline. Initial data
collection included a review of exclusionary school discipline rates at all school sites in the
District, as well as an analysis of which school sites have implemented PBIS, and the length of
implementation. The initial data collection was followed by an interview protocol administered
to a sample of school site administrators to determine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors that supported or inhibited the successful implementation of SWPBS at
individual school sites. PBIS, while not a prescriptive practice, is designed for implementation
with fidelity to all elements. Interview questions were designed to assess the fidelity of the
implementation of SWPBS at each school site, and to determine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors driving principals in implementing PBIS. The research design utilized the
tradition of phenomenological inquiry (Creswell, 2014). Initial collection of public data on
suspensions at each school site was determined through document review (CADOE, n.d.). The
suspension data informed subsequent in-depth interviews to further elucidate the authenticity of
the PBIS implementation at each school site, and determine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors that promoted or limited school site staff (Clark & Estes, 2008) in
achieving the District’s goal of implementing PBIS and reducing student suspension rates.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

58
To inform the exploration of the perceptions and experiences of school site administrators
with respect to Tier I implementation of PBIS, a school-wide positive behavior system, at
schools in the District, project questions were designed to frame the inquiry.
The following project questions guided my study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors that supported, or
limited, achieving the District’s goals of implementing SWPBS at selected district
school sites, and reduced implementation of exclusionary school discipline?
2. What effective knowledge, motivation, or organizational solutions were
recommended to promote the District’s goals of implementing SWPBS and reducing
student disciplinary suspensions?
Conceptual and Methodological Approach
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used in this study. The gap
analysis framework is a systematic problem-solving framework that can be applied to identify
causes for performance gaps, and to highlight appropriate and effective solutions to improve
performance. The gap analysis problem solving framework consists of the following sequence
(Clark & Estes, 2008):
1. Goals: Analyze the gap between current performance and desired future performance
to set goals.
2. Causes: Understand the root causes of gaps you have observed in terms of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors.
3. Solutions: Develop integrated solutions to address all facets of the performance gap.
4. Evaluation: Design evaluation components to calibrate results for optimal solutions.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

59
5. Process: Continuously cycle through the problem-solving framework for incremental
improvement.
The gap analysis process relies on multiple approaches to collect and analyze data.
Qualitative approaches, including interviews and observations may be utilized, or quantitative
approaches, such as surveys. In this study, a qualitative methodology was applied. A
phenomenological approach was utilized (Creswell, 2014), as student disciplinary data was
collected and analyzed, both pre- and post-implementation of PBIS. This document analysis
informed a series of follow-up in-depth interviews of school site administrators, providing
additional qualitative data to enhance interpretation of the data and shape future interviews.
Analysis of initial interview data also provided insight to inform further interviews. Data from
field observations was also analyzed.
The qualitative data collection phase was informed through concurrent analysis of
responses to inform and shape future interviews. A draft codebook was prepared using analytic
coding of responses into themes and sub-themes, utilizing both a deductive approach based on
the conceptual framework, as well as in vivo coding, to capture emergent themes and patterns.
Applying coding and drafting a codebook facilitated categorization of open-ended interview
responses into concepts, experiences, and values for deeper analysis, and in discerning patterns
and trends that emerged during data collection (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2014).
Research Questions Expanded
The two project questions proposed in Chapter 1 were, through the literature review
process, expanded into four research questions, to reflect an analysis of current research findings
and to narrow the scope of each question for more focused inquiry. The inquiry addressed the
following four research questions:
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

60
1. What knowledge elements do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
2. What motivation factors do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
3. What organizational factors do principals need to implement to support
comprehensive implementation of Tier I PBIS at their school sites?
4. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational recommendations are indicated for
principals to support comprehensive school-site implementation of PBIS Tier I
elements?
Conceptual Framework
The purpose of a conceptual framework is to represent the key variables and concepts to
be studied, and the relationships among them (Maxwell, 2013). It provides a system that is
constructed to reflect the main theories and concepts that frame and inform the research depicted
in a graphic representation (Maxwell, 2013).
The conceptual framework, represented in Figure 3 below, illustrates the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that can support or limit an organization’s successful
implementation of an initiative. Implementing school-wide positive behavior systems (SWPBS)
requires knowledge of the elements of an effective SWPBS (K), belief in the efficacy of SWPBS
to effectively address student behavior (M), and organizational support (O) in training, supplies,
resources, recognition, and protected time to effectively implement a successful SWPBS.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

61

Figure 3. Conceptual framework

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

62
The conceptual framework illustrates the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors that can support or limit an organization’s successful implementation of an initiative.
The design of this study, along with beliefs, concepts, theories, and expectations, is embedded in
and symbolized by the conceptual framework (Maxwell, 2013). It is the theoretical model,
Figure 4, that structured and informed the research.

Figure 4. Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework presents another graphic and symbolic representation of the
present study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). In this graphic representation, the overarching theory
that framed the research was the need to provide a safe school environment, conducive to
learning, that minimizes negative impacts to all students (District website, 2016; California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 2009). Within this framework resides the problem of
practice: Exclusionary school discipline has significant and persistent disparities in its
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

63
application, and is associated with multiple negative school outcomes (Arcia, 2006; Children’s
Defense Fund, 1975; Losen, 2005). Nested within these, the purpose of the study was to explore
the role of SWPBS in preventing student misconduct and reducing exclusionary school discipline
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Implementing school-wide positive behavior systems (SWPBS) requires knowledge of
the elements of an effective SWPBS (K), belief in the efficacy of SWPBS and the individuals
and teams implementing it to effectively address student behavior (M), and organizational
support (O) in the form of training, resources, and protected time to effectively implement a
successful SWPBS (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population of focus for this study was principals who are school site
administrators of District schools. From this population, school site administrators were selected
from schools that have implemented School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems (SWPBS), with the
criteria that the selected administrators had been in an administrative position in a District school
with SWPBS for at least one year. Establishing this selection criteria will guide the inclusion of
professional school site administrators (Principals, Assistant Principals, Academic Deans) who
have intimate knowledge of SWPBS implementation in District schools, and its potential impact
on student disciplinary suspensions.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Individuals who were school site administrators (Principals) in District
schools were selected. This ensured a focus population with the capability of providing rich and
detailed feedback that was meaningful and informed the research questions.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

64
Criterion 2. Participants in the interview phase of the research were selected from
among school site administrators who work in schools that have implemented SWPBS. Utilizing
this selection criterion was consistent with the conceptual framework, to determine the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors (Clark & Estes, 2008) that impact
implementation of SWPBS. Participants in the interview phase of the research were selected
based on the degree of trust and credibility cultivated with district school site administrators at
schools that have implemented SWPBS, supporting an open exchange of interview responses.
Criterion 3. School site administrators were selected that had one or more years of
experience in a SWPBS school site setting. This provided participants who were knowledgeable
with SWPBS in a school site context. Participants were also selected based on analysis of the
document review, in order to delve deeper into the analysis of the data and provide further
insight and information to inform the research questions concerning the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors that may promote or inhibit implementation of SWPBS.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy that supported the research design was purposive sampling
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). This sampling strategy allowed focus on individuals with
specialized knowledge of the impact of SWPBS in District schools, providing potentially
information-rich cases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015), and focusing on individuals with whom I was
able to establish the most productive relationships (Maxwell, 2013). In-depth individual
interviews of a purposive sample of school-site administrators to determine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors associated with the implementation of a school-wide
behavior plan in school sites that have implemented positive school-wide behavior systems were
conducted. The topic of inquiry, SWPBS, was narrow, and the purposive sample focused on key
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

65
individuals who have implemented, and were likely to be information-rich about, SWPBS. The
target number, or the number of qualitative interviews to conduct to reach saturation, was five,
representing 20% of District administrators (Baker & Edwards, 2012; Guest, Bunce, & Johnson,
2006; Romney, Weller, & Batchelder, 1986). I applied a purposive sampling strategy, targeting
key individuals who were information-rich in the topic of inquiry through personal experience
and observation, to allow for data collection in the elements of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational facilitators or barriers to implementation and sustainability of PBIS Tier I
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I interviewed individual respondents through an in-depth, face to
face interview format, with open-ended questions to increase the richness of the responses
(Maxwell, 2013).
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Data collection for this study began with a document analysis of student discipline trends
at district school sites (CADOE, n.d.; Creswell, 2014). California public school student
disciplinary data is submitted annually to the State of California Department of Education.
Student suspension data is posted online via DataQuest (CADOE, n.d.). These public record
documents of school suspension data were accessed on the Internet for each school that was
observed, strengthening the research through analysis of documented student disciplinary
actions, providing another data point for triangulation, and demonstrating school discipline
patterns (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Artifacts that were observed at school sites included posters delineating student behavior
expectations; “school bucks,” student stores, and other evidence of a token economy; office
referral forms; slogans on murals or tee shirts, etc. These were encountered in separate locations
at each school, for instance, in the cafeteria or library. This type of visual artifact lent credibility
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

66
as it existed prior to the observation, and was nonreactive, i.e., was not affected by the presence
of the researcher. These artifacts tended to confirm or refute respondent’s comments. Artifacts
were collected via cell phone photographs or principal description, preserving an oral or visual
record of the artifact, while leaving it intact and undisturbed in its context (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015).
Qualitative data collection occurred through responses to face-to-face interview
questions, conducted through fieldwork in natural settings, using a qualitative interview protocol
design. Observational data was collected at school sites with field notes to record interactions
and artifacts characteristic of SWPBS, including posted behavior expectations, evidence of
SWPBS structures, etc. Using observational data along with exploration of different aspects of
administrators’ perceptions and experiences of SWPBS provided multiple data points along
which to triangulate the data, increasing reliability and validity (Maxwell, 2014). Using multiple
data points provided rich data to inform the administrator knowledge, motivation, and
organizational constructs in the conceptual framework.
Interviews
A sample of school-site administrators was selected for in-depth, face-to-face interviews.
The sampling was purposive, as the site administrators were selected from among principals at
District school sites that have at least one year of experience in implementing SWPBS, and were
expected to be information-rich in the content. One interview per respondent was conducted.
Each interview lasted approximately 40 minutes and was administered in the context of the
respondent’s workplace. An informal interview approach, with unstructured and open-ended
questions, was utilized. Follow-up questions to clarify comments and potentially extend the
responses were used, with questions and responses by email or phone. The interview questions
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

67
were designed to elicit responses to make internal feeling, thinking, intention, and decision
processes of the school site leaders transparent, allowing access into the perspective of another.
The interview methodology was employed to promote the collection of rich data, and to discover
elements that are not directly discernable through observation (Patton, 2002).
The interview instrument was comprised of twelve interview questions, designed to elicit
meaningful, open-ended responses. The responses to the knowledge questions provided data to
answer the administrator knowledge research question. The responses to the motivation
questions informed the administrator motivation research question. The responses to the
organizational questions informed the organizational research question. The data from the
remaining questions informed the research question regarding administrators’ experiences of
SWPBS and perceptions of the strengths and growth areas of SWPBS. The data generated by
administrator responses informed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors
constructs of the conceptual framework.
Validity and reliability of interview question items were ensured through fidelity to
intentional research design elements, including the conceptual framework, well-crafted interview
questions, and rigorous methods of data collection, interpretation, analysis (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). Multiple methods of data collection, including interview and document analysis, were
employed in this study. These data points allowed triangulation of the data, as well as expansion
of the range of information collected around administrators’ knowledge, motivation,
organizational factors, and perceptions of SWPBS (Maxwell, 2014). Additionally, a pilot, or
exploratory, study was conducted, a scanning interview to refine the calibration of the interview
protocol, as well as to “attempt to build the essence of experience from participants” (Maxwell,
2014, p. 67).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

68
Using an informal, conversational interview approach with an unstructured protocol
allowed a deep exploration of concepts, compared to the limits imposed by the standardized
interview technique (Patton, 2002). The informal conversational approach, while systematic,
allowed for flexibility and responsiveness, eliciting and capturing more nuanced responses that
might have been lost in a more formal approach (Patton, 2002). A responsive interviewing
approach was used, in which follow-up questions were based on the subject’s responses (Rubin
& Rubin, 2012). The questions asked probed for the administrator’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational perceptions and experiences. Each question informed one or more of the
constructs of the conceptual framework, and contributed to answering the research questions
regarding the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that administrators perceived
and experienced relating to SWPBS. For instance, “Can you tell me about your school’s positive
behavior system?” and, “Some schools see improvement in student behavior after implementing
school-wide positive behavior expectations, while others may not. What has been your
experience?” were designed to elicit rich responses to inform the research questions and the
constructs of the conceptual framework. The interview instrument developed for this study is
attached in Appendix C.
Observation
Focused observations were conducted at each school site. A systematic and focused
observation protocol was utilized to observe evidence of SWPBS at each site. Systematic
observations, along with descriptive field notes, provided insight into the context, and created
another opportunity to strengthen the research through triangulation by providing another data
point (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Artifacts of SWPBS included posted behavior expectations,
evidence of a token economy (school bucks, student store), and disciplinary referral forms.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

69
Further evidence included teacher recognition of positive behavior, and expectations that were
framed in positive terms (“please walk,” rather than “no running”). Each school site, the natural
setting, was observed at the time of the administrator interview, with special focus on artifacts.
Student/student or teacher/student interactions were limited as a result of the before- or after-
school timeframe most site administrators chose, as these are intervals characterized by less
students on-site and a decreased frequency of student interaction. Specific attention was paid to
the context or setting, individuals, activities, and interactions, as well as more subtle points, such
as nonverbal behavior, facial expressions, body language, etc. of the principals observed
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Follow up observations were conducted. The observation
instrument allowed for systematic collection of focused observation data and extensive
observer’s comments (OC) to inform the research questions and conceptual design (Bogdan &
Biklen, 2007).
Documents and Artifacts
Collecting and analyzing documents (written, visual, or electronic) and artifacts
(meaningful objects) adds dimension to the research, and enhances credibility through
triangulation, by identifying additional salient data points (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Documents and artifacts add credibility as they are frequently in place before, and not affected
by, the research study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
California public school student disciplinary data is submitted annually to the State of
California Department of Education. Student suspension data is posted online by DataQuest
(CADOE, n.d.). These public record documents of school suspension data were accessed on the
Internet for each school that was observed, which strengthened the research through analysis of
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

70
documented student disciplinary actions, provided another data point for triangulation, and
demonstrated school discipline patterns (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Artifacts that were encountered at school sites included posters delineating student
behavior expectations; school bucks, student store artifacts and other evidence of a token
economy; office referral forms; slogans on posters, murals, or tee shirts, etc. These were
encountered in separate locations at each school, for instance, in the cafeteria or library. These
visual artifacts lent credibility through their existence prior to the observation, and as nonreactive
artifacts, which were not affected by the presence of the researcher. These artifacts tended to
confirm respondent’s comments. Artifacts were collected through copious notes or via cell phone
photographs whenever possible, preserving a visual record of the artifact, while leaving each
artifact intact and undisturbed in its original context (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Data Analysis
Qualitative data, including observations at school sites and document review regarding
discipline trends at district schools, was analyzed as the data was compiled. Interview data was
collected and analyzed. Analytical memos were prepared for the purpose of documenting any
concerns or thoughts of the researcher, as well as initial conclusions for data
alignment/misalignment with research questions, and with the conceptual and theoretical
frameworks. On concluding interviews, initial transcribing and preliminary coding of interview
data to facilitate analysis was implemented. The first phase of analysis utilized open coding,
assigning empirical codes as well as applying a priori codes developed from the conceptual
framework. The purpose of coding is to derive and develop concepts that are expected (a priori
coding) or emerge (open coding) from analysis of the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The second data
analysis phase was conducted with the focus of aggregating empirical or emerging codes and a priori
codes into analytic/axial codes, or categories (Harding, 2013). The third phase of data analysis
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

71
focused on the identification of patterns and themes that emerged from the data in relation to the
conceptual framework and the study questions. Analysis of documents and artifacts for evidence
consistent with the constructs in the conceptual framework, as well as emergent, or in vivo, concepts,
was conducted. A codebook was developed to facilitate analysis of observation data (Corbin &
Strauss, 2008).
Research Questions Expanded
Through the findings revealed in the literature review process, the project questions
proposed in Chapter 1 were expanded, based on research evidence of the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors (Clark & Estes, 2008) that can promote or limit the implementation of
SWPBS. To inform exploration of the perceptions and experiences of school site administrators
with respect to school-wide positive behavior systems (SWPBS) at schools in the District, this
study was framed within the following research questions:
1. What knowledge elements do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
2. What motivation factors do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
3. What organizational factors do principals need to implement to support
comprehensive implementation of Tier I PBIS at their school sites?
4. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational recommendations are indicated for
principals to support comprehensive school-site implementation of PBIS Tier I
elements?
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Ensuring the credibility of data, descriptions, interpretations, and findings is of concern to
qualitative researchers (Maxwell, 2013). Multiple strategies were utilized to enhance the
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

72
credibility and trustworthiness of the data and the results and findings of this study. These
included building trust with respondents through investing time and engagement; being a careful
observer and taking detailed field notes to capture rich, descriptive data; member checking
responses to rule out misinterpretation; and maximum variation of respondents, along with
examining discrepant information. I intentionally crafted all protocols to eliminate leading
questions or judgmental language, and, with the participant’s informed consent (see Appendix
B), recorded and transcribed the audiotapes of each interview to safeguard accuracy. I engaged
in reflexivity, or regular critical self-reflection, to reduce or eliminate personal biases. Finally,
my research methodology involved triangulation of data through an intentional design to utilize
multiple data points, further enhancing the credibility of the research and the results (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015; Maxwell, 2013).
Ethics
The purpose of this research was to study the perceptions of school site administrators
regarding PBIS, a School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems (SWPBS). To this end, I collected
data to understand the perceptions and experiences of school site administrators implementing
PBIS at their school sites. As a qualitative researcher, I aligned my research with all ethical
standards of qualitative research, ensuring that respectful treatment of all interview participants
was maintained throughout the interview process. All participants participated voluntarily. I
explained all aspects of my research study, including details of the nature of the interview
process, and the time expected of each participant. I stated that the interview portion of the
study, for those individuals selected for face-to-face interviews, would be audio-recorded only
with prior written permission of the participant. I submitted my research plan to the Institutional
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

73
Review Board of the University of Southern California, and received approval before
implementing the study (IRB# UP-17-00029).
I explained to each participant that their participation was voluntary, and obtained signed
Informed Consent forms in advance of participation. I explained to each participant that they
could choose to decline to answer any or all questions, and may terminate their participation at
any time. I explained that all records would be stored securely. Any presentation of research
results or findings, whether written or spoken, will maintain the confidentiality of all
participants, through strategic use of coding and pseudonyms.
All participants were provided with researcher contact information, as well as the contact
information for the Faculty Advisor, and for USC’s Institutional Review Board.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of the study include constructs that are beyond the control of this
researcher. Reflecting the nature of self-reporting, these limits included the perspectives,
experiences, thoughtfulness, and honesty of the respondents. The effectiveness of the
instruments that were developed for this study, as well as the time constraints, also imposed
limits to the study. Qualitative studies have limitations on replicability. “Because qualitative
research occurs in the natural setting, it is difficult to replicate studies” (Weirsma, 2000, p. 211).
Delimitations that bounded the study included the research decision not to interview
teachers, parents, or students, other stakeholder populations in the implementation of SWPBS.
The time for the interview, the number of questions asked, and the observations and documents
collected also had implications in delimiting the study. The conceptual framework of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors both guided and limited the focus of the
research.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

74
Conclusion
Qualitative research requires safeguards to ensure credibility and trustworthiness of the
data on which findings are reported. Intentional research design, with a stated sampling
approach and specific criteria for selection, protects the data collected and increases the impact
of the findings. The present study, designed with specific protocols accepted by the professional
research community, demonstrates a commitment to accuracy in results and findings.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

75
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this research study was to inquire into the experiences and perceptions of
school site administrators regarding School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems (SWPBS),
specifically Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). A document review of student
discipline trends at selected school sites was followed by qualitative data collection that occurred
in the context of individual, in-person field interviews of school site administrators in the
District. The four research questions that guided this inquiry were:
1. What knowledge elements do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
2. What motivation factors do school principals need to implement to support
comprehensive Tier I PBIS implementation at their school sites?
3. What organizational factors do principals need to implement to support
comprehensive implementation of Tier I PBIS at their school sites?
4. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational recommendations are indicated for
principals to support successful, comprehensive school-site implementation of PBIS
Tier I elements?
Five school site administrators were interviewed using an in-depth, face-to-face interview
format. Interviews were conducted at the participant’s workplace, with follow-up queries via
email and phone. Criteria for selection of principals were: (1) current assignment as a school site
principal in the District; (2) working in a school that is implementing PBIS; and (3) have been an
administrator of a PBIS-implementing school for one or more years (IRB# UP-17-00029).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

76
The five site administrators, representing 20% of the principals in the District, were
veteran educators, each with 10 or more years as teachers and/or school site administrators. Two
of the principals were male; three were female. Secondary and elementary school experience
were fairly equally represented. Code names, or pseudonyms, based on the phonetic alphabet,
were assigned for each principal, with coded school mascots, and corresponding numbers
assigned for each school site (IRB# UP-17-00029). Gender for pronouns was assigned to protect
identities of participants and to honor confidentiality. Refer to Table 7 for these designations.

Table 7
Coding/Pseudonyms of Principals Interviewed
School Site Administrator
Random
gender/pronoun
assignment School mascot
Site 1 Principal Able F Alligators
Site 2 Principal Bravo M Bobcats
Site 3 Principal Charles F Cougars
Site 4 Principal Delta M Dolphins
Site 5 Principal Echo F Eagles

Data collection focused on a document review of school suspension statistics, followed
by an in-depth, in-person interview of selected principals to explore the perceptions and
experiences of school site administrators implementing SWPBS at their school sites. The
interview and document review data points were analyzed to answer the study’s research
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

77
questions regarding the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that support a
successful, comprehensive implementation of PBIS at their school sites.
Participating Stakeholders
The District stakeholders who participated in data collection through in-person interviews
to provide information on their experiences in the implementation of school-wide positive
behavior systems in schools were district principals at the elementary and secondary levels. The
selection criteria included principals who had been assigned to schools implementing SWPBS
for one or more years (IRB# UP-17-00029). The characteristics of the principals selected for
face-to-face interviews are outlined in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Characteristics of principals interviewed

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
have been assigned to two
or more PBIS schools
elementary and secondary
experience
2-3 years implementing
PBIS
5+ years implementing
PBIS
Characteristics of Principals Interviewed
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

78
Findings
A document analysis of student disciplinary suspensions reported to the state was
performed on the five focal schools selected for this study, via the state Department of Education
DataQuest service. Using the pseudonym assigned to each of the principals, school suspension
data appear in Table 8.

Table 8
Number of Suspensions per Academic Year in Selected District Schools
Enrollment Principal 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
431 Able 6 4 0 0 1 1
451 Bravo 19 4 3 3 7 7
389 Charles 2 6 5 7 9 4
382 Delta 5 9 16 9 2 1
431 Echo 13 10 13 6 25 32
Note: Post-PBIS suspension numbers are in italics.

Sites 1, 4, and 5 implemented PBIS in 2015-2016. Site 3 implemented PBIS in 2016-
2017. Site 2 implemented PBIS in 2011. Most of the school sites evidenced a sharp decline in
suspensions after implementing PBI. Principal Able showed a slight increase in suspensions
after implementing PBIS. Principal Echo experienced increased suspensions at her school site
while implementing PBIS; she mentioned struggling to change a strong school culture of
physical aggression between students. The suspension data showed a general trend toward
reducing student disciplinary suspensions post-PBIS implementation. The greatest decreases
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

79
occurred at the schools of Principals Delta and Bravo, which had the highest numbers of student
suspensions in the years before PBIS implementation.
In Chapter 2, we reviewed current literature on student disciplinary suspensions and the
promising practice of implementing Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
systems in elementary and middle schools to improve behavior and prevent disciplinary
suspensions. In this chapter, I will outline the findings of the present study, to highlight the
perceptions and experiences of school site leaders in training and implementing PBIS at five
district school sites. Each of the principals had more than one year of experience in
implementing PBIS at one or more district school sites. Most of the principals had experienced
implementing PBIS at multiple school sites, at both the elementary and secondary (middle
school) levels.
The findings were reported in three broad categories of the principals’ experience:
Knowledge factors, motivation factors, and organizational factors. Findings in the areas of these
three factors illuminate the potential facilitators and barriers that principals must skillfully
navigate to successfully implement a comprehensive Tier I PBIS system in public elementary or
middle schools.
Knowledge Findings
The first research question queried what knowledge school principals need to
successfully implement PBIS at their school sites. Knowledge is a key factor in the successful
implementation of school wide positive behavior systems. School principals need to have
sufficient conceptual and procedural knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002) about school-wide positive
behavior systems to facilitate a successful school site implementation.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

80
School-wide positive behavior systems, specifically Positive Behavior Interventions and
Supports (PBIS), while not a prescriptive practice, is designed to be implemented with fidelity to
the program’s constructs. Knowledge elements that were assumed influencers included the
declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge needed by the principal to successfully
implement Tier I PBIS constructs. The following paragraphs on knowledge will discuss
principal training, principal experience with PBIS, teacher training, staff training, core PBIS
constructs implemented, connections between PBIS training and alignment, and past practice.
Principal Development
Participation in PBIS training that focuses on key principles of PBIS is critical to
understanding the constructs of PBIS (Mathews, McIntosh, Frank, & May, 2013). Low-quality
or infrequent principal training is associated with insufficient implementation and less
impactful results (Domitrovich & Greenberg, 2000; Lipsey, 2009). A common theme observed
through the data collected in this study was the need for building the principal’s declarative,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of the constructs of PBIS, developed through both
frequency and quality of training, to support a robust and comprehensive school site
implementation.
Two of the principals interviewed attended between 5 and 7 PBIS training events prior to
implementation. Principal Able participated in five training events, and Principal Echo
participated in seven before implementing PBIS (although Echo did report recent additional
training). In three of the principals interviewed, the number of professional development events
in which the administrator participated was 12 or more. Interviews revealed the knowledge level
of PBIS elements in each of the principals. Principals Bravo, Charlie, Delta, and Echo displayed
deep knowledge of PBIS constructs, as outlined below.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

81
Subsequent implementations of PBIS guided by these four administrators showed the
highest fidelity to the PBIS system, evidencing fifteen or more elements of PBIS Tier I
implementation (form a behavior team, hold regular meetings, agree on school rules, create a
token economy, regular access to student store, recognition of positive student behavior,
collaboratively developed student behavior expectations, location-specific expectations posted in
multiple common areas, PBIS-aligned office behavior referral form, etc.). Figure 6 provides a
visual representation of the significant relationship between principal training and fidelity of
PBIS implementation.

Figure 6. Principal training and PBIS alignment

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Principal Able Principal Bravo Principal Charles Principal David Principal Echo
Principal Training and PBIS Alignment
# of Principal Training Events PBIS Constructs Implemented
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

82
Notably, Principal Able, who initiated implementation of the PBIS program after
attending the fewest training events, showed significantly fewer elements of PBIS in evidence at
her school site, in fact, only two (assemble a team and develop school rules). Since the data
demonstrated that the level of training of the principal was closely correlated with fidelity of
implementation, the assumed knowledge influencer of principal training was validated. This
finding is aligned with Feuerborn and Tyre’s (2016) research on the increased agreement with
the constructs of SWPBS with increased exposure to and education in SWPBS and its
implementation.
Principal Able, the administrator of the school site implementing the fewest PBIS-aligned
constructs, repeatedly stated a belief in intrinsic motivation that countered a core theoretical
foundation of PBIS, that recognizing positive behavior is a key element in preventing
misbehavior. Principal Able stated, referring to her staff, “the idea of rewarding behavior with a
ticket or a prize, nobody wanted to do it,” and revealed her personal beliefs by stating, “it’s
actually not something that I believe in either. I think it should be intrinsic,” with the implication
that rewarding positive behavior may harm intrinsic motivation.
This belief does not conform to the construct of recognizing positive behavior, one of the
major theoretical foundations of PBIS. Additionally, repeated research on this concept has
consistently demonstrated the opposite, as summed up by Cameron, Banko, and Pierce (2001,
p. 21): “In terms of the overall effects of reward, our meta-analysis indicates no evidence for
detrimental effects of reward on measures of intrinsic motivation.”
Principal Experience with PBIS
The principals interviewed represented a range of from two to seven years of experience
in implementing PBIS. Principal Echo is in her second year of PBIS implementation, at two
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

83
different schools. Principal Able is in her second year of implementing PBIS at her school.
Principal Charles worked in a PBIS-implementing school before her current assignment, but
wasn’t directly involved in PBIS activities. She is in her second year of implementation in her
current assignment, with primary responsibility for leading the implementation. Principal Bravo
has been implementing PBIS for more than five years, in two different schools. Each of the
principals (Able, Bravo, Charles, Delta, and Echo) had served in two or more PBIS-
implementing schools, and Principals Charles, Delta, and Echo reported serving in both
elementary and middle schools that implemented PBIS. Principal Delta, perhaps the longest-
serving PBIS principal interviewed, stated, “I became aware of PBIS, Positive Behavior
Interventions and Support, in 2009,” or approximately eight years prior to his interview for the
present study.
Four of the five principals interviewed shared declarative knowledge that was closely
aligned with PBIS theory and practice. Principal Echo mentioned many PBIS constructs at her
school:
Teachers went out and created posters with students and basically did all the classroom
rules. Another component of Tier I with PBIS is the behavior expectation assemblies.
With the assemblies, at the beginning of the year, I discussed with the students these are
the expectations for school-wide PBIS. Whether you’re in the classroom or on the
blacktop playing or in the cafeteria, everyone needs to be respectful, responsible and safe.
And then I talked about other things such as attendance, tardies, and things of such
nature.
Principal Charles also discussed multiple elements of PBIS:
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

84
As far as rolling it out, in May of the last school year, we rolled it out to the staff. We had
a power point, we asked for feedback, we created a behavior matrix, we rolled out the
office referral, the handbook, the lessons. We spent two staff meetings in May getting
feedback as we’re putting these things in place for the upcoming school year. Then we
also created a PBIS Kickoff Assembly. We had that the third day of school in the
cafeteria where we had music playing and we went over our expectations and showed
them items from the Eagle Store. Teachers that week, went back, and they took their
students to specific areas and taught lessons and taught expectations and modeled
appropriate behaviors. That’s how we have rolled it out.
Principal Bravo also demonstrated a clear understanding of Tier I PBIS elements:
It’s a system that creates common expectations for all students as well as rules, a reward
system for students who follow the rules, consequences for students who do not. It
creates a positive environment for students and for the staff. All staff agrees on what rules
and consequences and rewards have to be implemented at that school. The community
can be involved as well . . . It’s a positive, and it can also be used as a community
builder. It brings all the stakeholders together to build a positive behavior system for the
students.
Teacher Development
Another knowledge dimension needed for school site administrators to successfully
implement PBIS is the training required to develop the knowledge level of the teachers and staff.
As successfully implementing a school site PBIS system requires a mindset shift from the past
practice of punitive discipline to the current mindset of positive discipline, extensive training is
required to drive this shift.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

85
As the data emerged from the principal interviews, four of the five principals reported
presenting or facilitating multiple teacher trainings (more than ten), accompanied by regular
training of yard supervisors and other school staff.
Principal Able, who participated in a low number of PBIS learning events prior to
implementation, indicated facilitating only two PBIS teacher trainings, and no staff training.
Again, the reduced exposure to PBIS training was associated with reduced implementation of
PBIS constructs, only two of the fifteen or more elements of PBIS implemented by other
principals interviewed.
Staff Development
A required driver for the desired change of implementing PBIS is the amount of training
that is provided to staff. In this instance, staff would encompass all school site employees who
are not considered “credentialed” teaching employees — yard supervisors, para educators,
librarians, office assistants, health aides, custodians, extended learning leaders, and food service
workers. These non-teaching staff members often supervise students when teachers are not
present, at recess or lunch time. The critical importance of training these individuals was noted
by Principal Echo who, after reviewing the school’s PBIS data, stated, “I looked at the different
number of incidents that had occurred. A lot of these incidents started at the blacktop,” or out-of-
classroom times when teachers are not present. Principal Echo also stated, “So one of the things
that was important for me was to basically train my campus supervisors to understand what
active supervision means and where all the hot spots are.”
Four of the principals interviewed reported they regularly train or review PBIS concepts
with their (non-teaching) staff. “I meet with them once a month,” reported Principal Bravo.
Principal Delta described training his yard supervisors: “I’ve been training the classified staff,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

86
yard duties. We walk through a scenario of what happens with this kid. I try to be very thorough
with the yard duties.” Principal Charles stated:
. . . and then training our yard duty paraprofessionals on it because their classroom
management, or yard management, managing students out in the yard, is limited, their
knowledge and their experience. Training them took some time because you’re trying to
train them to be able see specific behaviors, whether it be discipline or positive behaviors.
We are training them, they need to be proactive.
Teachers are not present on the field or playground during lunch recess, so training the classified
staff who supervise children during this time is critical to school site continuity and the
successful implementation of school-wide PBIS.
Principal Able reported providing no PBIS training to staff members. When queried if
non-teaching staff “had a good understanding” of the PBIS system at the school, the principal’s
response was “No.”
Core PBIS Constructs Implemented
A matrix to enumerate the elements of PBIS that were mentioned by principals during
their interviews appears below (see Table 9). The PBIS constructs mentioned most often
included: Form a behavior team, agree on basic school rules, hold regular team meetings,
present or facilitate four or more teacher trainings, regular (non-teaching) staff training, create a
token economy for recognizing positive student behavior, create a student store to redeem
positive behavior tokens and provide students with regular access, student recognition of positive
behavior, collaboratively developed common area student behavior expectations, location-
specific expectations posted in multiple common areas, PBIS-aligned office behavior referral
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

87
form, consistent consequences, student behavior assemblies, collect and report on student
behavior data, and apply data to drive decision-making.
All sites reported forming a committee and agreeing on a small number of basic school
rules, for example, Be Safe, Be Respectful, and Be Responsible. These were the only constructs
mentioned by Principal Able at Site 1. All other constructs mentioned were implemented at each
of the four other school sites, by Principal Bravo (Site 2), Principal Charles (Site 3), Principal
Delta (Site 4), and Principal Echo (Site 5).

Table 9
Implementation of Constructs of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
PBIS Tier I construct
Site 1
Able
Site 2
Bravo
Site 3
Charles
Site 4
Delta
Site 5
Echo
Form a school site behavior committee ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Agree on school rules ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Behavior committee/team meets regularly ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Present or facilitate 4 or more teacher trainings ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Regular staff training (yard supervisors, librarian,
etc.)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collaboratively develop location-specific behavior
expectations
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Post behavior expectations in multiple common
areas (library, cafeteria, hallways, etc.)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Behavior assemblies ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Create token economy to recognize positive
student behavior (i.e., Bronco Bucks)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Students have regular access to student store to
redeem positive tokens
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

88
Recognition for positive student behavior ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Create PBIS-aligned office discipline referral
forms
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Consistent consequences ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collect and report student disciplinary data ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Student disciplinary data drives decision-making ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Qualitative interviews with school principals elicited principal knowledge of PBIS
constructs. Principals Bravo, Charles, Delta, and Echo showed deep knowledge of the elements
of PBIS, referring to multiple PBIS constructs. Principal Charles mentioned posters and
described two PBIS assemblies, stating, “Then we also created a PBIS Kickoff Assembly. We
had that the third day of school in the cafeteria where we had music playing and we went over
our expectations.” And further stating, “we added in a [second], new year, January kickoff
assembly to reenergize the students.” Principal Echo mentioned posters and assemblies:
Teachers went out and created posters with students and basically did all the classroom
rules. Another component of Tier one with PBIS is the behavior expectation assemblies.
With the assemblies, I . . . discussed with the students these are the expectations for
school wide PBIS.
Each of these principals, during the course of his or her interviews, reported implementing
fifteen or more PBIS constructs. Principal Able referred to implementing two PBIS constructs:
Forming a team, and agreeing on basic school rules. Principal Able reported posters in one
location (cafeteria), and no behavior assemblies.
PBIS Training and Alignment
The knowledge findings demonstrated an association between the number of PBIS
principal training events experienced by the site leader, and the level of PBIS implementation at
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

89
the school site. The knowledge level of principals was expressed, in addition to alignment with
PBIS constructs, in terms of principal training. Principal Able participated in five PBIS principal
training events, and Principal Echo participated in seven training events. Principals Charles,
Bravo, and Delta mentioned attending twelve or more PBIS trainings. The training level of each
principal is expressed in Figure 6 on page 81.
Principal Able, who reported a low frequency of PBIS training compared to most other
site administrators interviewed, also reported implementation of the fewest PBIS elements at the
school site. Although a team was formed and attended trainings, the only elements of PBIS that
the team implemented in the first two years were forming a committee and creating three basic
school rules: Be safe, be respectful, be responsible. By contrast, the four school site leaders —
Principals Bravo, Charles, Delta, and Echo — with the most comprehensive implementation of
PBIS constructs at their school sites reported implementing at least 15 PBIS-aligned elements
(see Table 9).
While each of the principals interviewed reported attending PBIS training events at the
County Office of Education, the quality of these trainings was inconsistent. Each of the
principals struggled with County training that was ineffective and did not accurately reflect PBIS
constructs. Principal Charlie stated the County team training events, “could have been a little
more engaging. There was kind of a lot of low moments and not enough time to really dive in
and create.” Principal Bravo agreed there were deficiencies in the County training, suggesting
that using district-level trainers would have allowed principals to interact with trainers who were
“more vested in the community.” Principal Able mentioned that her staff rejected positive
behavior recognition, a foundational element of PBIS: “When someone mentioned a ticket
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

90
system for good behavior . . . nobody wanted to do it . . . . They did not want to reward positive
behavior. They wanted it to be more of an intrinsic type way of dealing with it.”
Changing school culture by reversing the past practice of focusing on misbehavior to
intentionally focusing on appropriate behavior is a key construct of PBIS systems. Since
positive recognition is a foundational element of PBIS, high quality training may have dispelled
the rewards vs. intrinsic motivation confusion. A well-implemented, comprehensive training
event should have anticipated and fully addressed this misbelief. The staff training can be
assumed to have been deficient in training staff to successfully implement the elements of PBIS
with fidelity, by not anticipating common misconceptions and addressing them.
Past Practice
Training deficits also surfaced in teachers’ belief in punishment, rather than positive
behavior support. Principal Delta discussed teachers clinging to past practice of punitive
measures for minor offenses. “They wanted to suspend kids for chewing gum. It was very, very
difficult to get them to change their mindset.” Principal Echo also mentioned this concern,
stating, “That’s one of the biggest challenges, letting go of those past practices to initiate the best
practices for all students.” Principal Able elaborated on this theme:
But I think the hardest thing is those teachers who, maybe when a child misbehaves, they
immediately want to refer them, judge them, label them, want them out of the classroom.
We just have a negative way of looking at the kids and dealing with them. I would have
to say that’s probably the biggest [issue].
Past practice and beliefs in punishment, both by principals and school site staff, were mentioned
as a barrier to implementation of PBIS.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

91
Research Question 1
1. What knowledge elements do school principals need to support comprehensive Tier I
PBIS implementation at their school sites?
Answering the research question regarding the knowledge that school principals need to
successfully implement PBIS, there are clear indicators, across the interviews of each of the five
principals, that comprehensive, high-quality training that is aligned with PBIS constructs is
needed, both for principals, and for site-based positive behavior teams. Specific training to
prepare principals to overcome the common misconceptions outlined above is also indicated
(Feuerborn & Tyre, 2016). Principals need to have skills to facilitate teacher and staff training as
well. Knowledge of PBIS constructs and alignment is needed for principals to successfully
implement a comprehensive Tier I PBIS system at their school sites. Principals Bravo, Charles,
Delta, and Echo demonstrated deep knowledge of PBIS constructs, each mentioning 15 or more
constructs they had implemented at their schools. Each of these four principals described
numerous training events they presented or facilitated for teachers and staff.
For Principal Able (School Site 1), the small number of training opportunities, creating
deficits in the knowledge level, and low motivation (see Motivation section below), in terms of
perceived need, combined to create the school implementation of PBIS that bore the least fidelity
to the PBIS program. This result is aligned with Feuerborn and Tyre’s (2016) research finding
of increased agreement with the constructs of SWPBS associated with increased exposure to, and
education in, SWPBS elements and their successful implementation, as well as connections to
the perceived needs of the learner (Schraw & Lehman, 2001).
Specifically, Principal Able and the PBIS committee at Site 1 clung to past practice,
rejecting a significant pillar of PBIS support, the recognition of positive behavior through a
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

92
token economy system. When discussing the teachers’ rejection of the token economy construct,
through which students are recognized for appropriate behavior, the principal stated, “It’s
actually not something I believe in either. I think it should be intrinsic.”
A thorough and high-quality PBIS training event would have been expected to dispel this
belief. The PBIS system relies on recognition for positive behavior as the primary means to
reshape the school culture, from past practice of focus on misbehavior, to initiating a new
practice of focus on positive behavior. Functional Behavior Analyses reveal the purpose of a
student’s misbehavior is frequently to gain attention. By systematically recognizing positive
behavior, the school culture shifts and students observe the way to gain attention is to behave in a
prosocial manner (Loman & Borgmeier, 2010), thus reinforcing appropriate behavior in a
positive manner.
Motivation Findings
Research Question 2 was designed to elicit the motivation factors that principals need to
implement Tier I PBIS at their school sites. Motivation is a critical factor to successful
implementation of new initiatives. Clark and Estes (2008) note that active choice, persistence,
and mental effort are significant facets of motivated performance. To support motivated
performance in principals to implement PBIS will require an active choice, or commitment, to
support the implementation; accompanied by a clear focus to support persistence in achieving
desired results; and mental effort that is supported by adequate training and building confidence
to perform the required tasks. Building motivational factors in school site leaders to support
successful implementation was be a key element of successful implementation of PBIS systems.
One element of successful implementation of new initiatives is motivation. Clark and
Estes (2008) define motivated behavior in terms of efficacy and agency, or the desire to be
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

93
effective in our work. Ownership is a construct that has been identified as influencing motivated
behavior. Principals shared the motivational aspect of internalizing the importance of PBIS in
shaping the school culture and improving student behavior, thus removing significant barriers to
learning and achievement. Principal Echo described this as, “initiat[ing] the best practices for all
students.”
During training, motivation can be increased by explicitly stating the value and relevance
of the learning, making connections to the perceived needs of the learner (Schraw & Lehman,
2001). Two of the principals interviewed expressed little need for behavior support, and stated
low motivation to implement positive behavior supports. Principal Able told me, “here at [Site
1], behavior is pretty good,” and “we have pretty good kids here.” Principal Bravo mentioned a
similar observation: “Because there aren’t a lot of behavioral issues, I don’t see a lot of
motivation for it [PBIS].”
The importance of motivation was observed in a comment by Principal Able. “I know I
should be doing those things” (location-specific student behavior matrices, etc.). For Principal
Able, the declarative knowledge of the necessity of implementing all elements, and the
procedural knowledge of how to implement Tier 1 PBIS elements, were not enough to translate
into action. Motivational factors concerning the perceived school site need for behavior support,
and the value of the training in connection to school site needs, expressed through research
evidence, is needed for Principals to successfully implement Tier I PBIS.
In contrast, Principal Echo reported a strong implementation of PBIS elements, with over
15 factors operationalized. With a low level of training reported, compared to the other
principals interviewed, Principal Echo’s training deficits were superseded by his motivation to
bring order to his campus. Principal Echo stated her motivation in terms of perceived need, or
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

94
utility (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000): “last year there was 25 incidents of mutual combat fights. So
you multiply that by two and that’s fifty kids getting into a fight.”
Active Choice
A critical element of motivated performance is active choice (Clark & Estes, 2008). Each
of the principals interviewed mentioned the motivation element of choice in forming PBIS teams
at their school sites. Regarding behavior team formation, Principal Able stated: “teachers
volunteered for it.” Principal Charles told me, regarding membership on the behavior
committee, “we offered it to the whole staff.” This was similarly to Principal Echo’s statement:
“I actually put forth an invitation to all my staff.” Principal Delta stated: “Everything was
volunteer. I just asked for volunteers.” Principal Bravo discussed team formation at his school
site:
Interviewer: How were the members selected for your PBIS committee?
Principal Bravo: I just asked for grade level representatives and they volunteered.
Each of the principals interviewed used the active choice model of motivation (Clark & Estes,
2008) to form their school-site behavior team.
Ownership
Another opportunity for collaboration and shared ownership identified by each of the
principals was developing shared student behavior expectations. Research evidence supports the
motivational power of staff buy-in (Kincaid et al., 2007). Ownership was supported through
collaboratively developed student behavior expectations at District schools. Principal Delta
stated that school-wide common area behavior expectations were developed in staff meetings by
“All staff.” Principal Bravo’s discussion of developing common area expectations was similar:
“All staff agrees on what rules and consequences and rewards have to be implemented at that
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

95
school.” Principal Charles gave more details of the collaborative process: “. . . we rolled it out to
the staff. We had a power point, we asked for feedback, we created a behavior matrix . . . We
spent two staff meetings in May getting feedback as we’re putting these things in place for the
upcoming school year.” Each of the principals described inviting all staff to participate and
provide feedback in developing school-wide common area behavior expectations, building
ownership and staff buy-in to support the program.
Motivation from PBIS Results
After implementation, PBIS programs can provide motivation internally through
observed results. Principal Echo reflected: “What’s really supportive is just looking at the data
from last year . . . there’s been a significant drop in discipline [referrals], or suspensions, in
general.” Principal Echo gave an example of data that would be motivational: “last year there
was 25 incidents of mutual combat fights. So you multiply that by two and that’s fifty kids
getting into a fight. This year, it’s dropped down to nine.” Principal Charles shared the reduction
in disciplinary referrals:
Yeah, there is a change in that. I don’t have the percentage on me, but there definitely has
been less discipline coming to the front office than last year. I specifically have seen a
few changes in a couple upper grade students who last year I saw much more often. Like
I said, this year, I might have seen that student once or twice and they don’t come back to
my office for the same behaviors.
Principal Delta also mentioned a significant decline in suspensions: “. . . last year there were, I
think, 17 suspensions,” compared to only one, in-school suspension in the current year.
Meeting Staff Needs
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

96
Critical factors that increased motivation were alignment of PBIS with current beliefs,
and perceived need for student behavior support (McIntosh, Kelm, & Delabra, 2016). Principal
Echo stated her perception of a great demand for structured behavior support at her school: “for
example, last year there was 25 incidents of mutual combat fights. So you multiply that by two
and that’s fifty kids getting into a fight.” By contrast, Principals Able and Bravo repeatedly
stated observations that the students at their schools were “really good kids,” demonstrating their
limited motivation to implement PBIS, as they did not perceive a current need for behavior
support at their school sites. Principal Bravo only partially attributed student behavior success at
his site to PBIS: “I would say teachers have very strong classroom management skills as well.”
Principal Able stated: “I have to say that, I’m going to knock on wood, behavior here is
really quite excellent, and that is something that teachers all said. We have really good kids.”
Research Question 2
2. What motivation factors do school principals need to support comprehensive Tier I
PBIS implementation at their school sites?
Data from principal interviews show the motivation elements indicated for principals to
successfully implement Tier I PBIS at their school sites include active choice, ownership,
perceptions of meeting staff needs, and using PBIS student behavior data to motivate further
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Fidishun, 2000; Pintrich, 2003).
Knowledge and Motivation Intersection
Knowledge and motivation factors of principals greatly impacted each leader’s school
site implementation of Tier I PBIS. However, the data showed the most significant impact when
knowledge and motivation factors of principals intersected. To illustrate these differences
through a simple comparison, principals who participated in fewer than seven PBIS training
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

97
events were coded as low knowledge (+1), and principals who participated in 12 or more training
opportunities were coded as high knowledge (+2). Similarly, principals who expressed little
perceived need for positive behavior support at their school sites (“we have really good kids
here”) were, for the purpose of this comparison, coded low motivation (+1), while principals
who expressed a high perceived need for student behavior supports at their school sites were
coded as highly motivated (+2). Refer to Figure 7 for an illustration of these relationships.

Figure 7. Comparison of principal’s knowledge of PBIS and motivation to implement

Understanding the connection between the constructs of principal knowledge and
principal motivation provides the comparison data to illuminate the findings. Principal Echo, for
instance, experienced few training events, but stated high motivation through a perceived need
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Principal Able Principal Bravo Principal Charles Principal Delta Principal Echo
Principal Knowledge and Motivation
Knowledge Motivation
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

98
for student behavior support at his school site. Principal Bravo stated low motivation, but had
many years of training and experience in implementing PBIS. As noted in the comparison
above, Principal Able experienced the fewest knowledge-building opportunities, as well as the
lowest motivation. Principal Able’s Site 1 also demonstrated the fewest PBIS constructs
implemented, only two compared to 15 or more at each of the other school sites whose principals
were interviewed (Table 9). This implementation level did not appear to be entirely the result of
knowledge deficits, as Principal Able referred to multiple PBIS constructs of which she had
knowledge, but that she had chosen not to implement:
Principal Able: I know a lot the schools have a student store and give away tickets.
I don’t give out tickets for good behavior.
Principal Able: I do know that I could have posters, I could do posters for norms in
every area within our school. Also, documenting, really carefully,
all behavior referrals sent to me.
Principal Able: . . . having to really document all the behaviors, teachers did not
feel we needed to do that.
By contrast, Principal Echo experienced few knowledge-building events, but her high motivation
level to seek positive behavior support at her school site prompted her to seek additional
resources, adding to her knowledge base, and contributing to a comprehensive Tier I PBIS
implementation at her school site. The responses from Principal Able demonstrate that
knowledge assets alone were not sufficient to drive performance. Although Principals Able and
Echo both had low training assets, for Principal Echo, the identified needs of her school site
provided the motivation she needed to counterbalance her training deficits and guide a
comprehensive, Tier I PBIS implementation at her school site. Both Principals Able and Echo
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

99
represent instances that illustrate Clark and Estes (2008) findings on the need for both knowledge
and motivation assets to drive successful performance.
Organizational Findings
Organizational factors form the substance of Research Question 3, specifically what
organizational assets do principals need to implement to successfully achieve Tier I PBIS at their
school sites. Organizational factors include elements such as time, money, support from the
administrator, supplies, and student rewards. Organizational factors can contribute to promoting
new initiatives, or can become barriers to facilitation, particularly when there are deficits in
organizational elements. Some organizational factors that can promote a successful PBIS
implementation include forming a skilled and cohesive committee or team, protected meeting
time, budget for supplies (posters, rewards, certificates, etc.), and administrator support
(McIntosh et al., 2014). In a national study of 257 school positive behavior team members,
McIntosh et al. (2014) found that support of the school principal is a critical factor in
successfully implementing new initiatives. Support from the site administrator is a primary
element of organizational support.
A significant role of principals is appropriate and effective provisioning for identified
needs within the school site. From paper and pencils to equipment and training, principals
regularly control the site budget and direct or approve the ordering of resources and supplies.
Intangible resources must also be supplied, such as protected time for training or task
completion, support, recognition, and accountability measures. This role may also include
creating resources.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

100
Referral Forms
One organizational factor that was reported by four of the five principals was the use of
forms and other ephemera to support PBIS. Principal Charles described it: “The principal is kind
of like, in my opinion, the facilitator. Making sure that we have the items that are needed to
support this whole process.” Principal Echo mentioned creating a form for staff to use: “there’s
a referral form that has academic and personal social development concerns. It’s very easy for
teachers just to check up and say academically this is what’s happening.” Principal Bravo
described the form he created for Site 2: “We do use a form for office referrals for major
infractions. We also have another form for minor referrals.” Principal Delta also created a
referral form for his teachers use: “Every teacher has this packet . . . everybody has a copy of the
suspension [form], a copy of the referral [form], and then the minor referral [form].” Four of the
principals mentioned creating PBIS-aligned office discipline referral (ODR) forms for the use of
school staff. Principal Charles told me: “Then we created a handbook, a teacher handbook, and
we created a new office referral [form]. Those are some of the things we worked on creating.”
Only Principal Able reported that PBIS forms are not used at the school site:
Interviewer: You mentioned forms. Do you want to tell me about the forms that
you use? Or you said you don’t use those, you just know that you
could?
Principal Able: We could. We don’t use those.
The referral forms created by most of the principals functioned as job aids (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016), by reflecting school agreements defining classroom-managed versus office-
managed behavior, including the steps to be taken prior to office referral (repeat instructions,
redirect, etc.). The referral forms also listed specific behaviors, per California Education Code,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

101
that may rise to the level of student suspension (brandishing a weapon, selling controlled
substances, sexual assault, terroristic threats, etc.) (California Education Code § 48900).
Positive Behavior Recognition
PBIS theory relies heavily on recognition of positive student behavior (Koon, 2013).
“Recognition for positive behavior is an appropriate response of the social environment to elicit
desirable external behavior among youth” (Law, Siu, & Shek, 2012, p. 1). Regarding the use of
school tickets or “bucks” for student behavior recognition, Principal Delta shared: “. . . parents
come on Thursday [to help with] the Dolphin dollar store. It opens one time a week.” Principal
Bravo stated: “Sure that motivates them [students]. They want to save [Bobcat Bucks].
Absolutely, they want to follow the rules. In addition to having the Bobcat Store, we also have a
raffle that I do every Friday [using Bobcat Bucks]. It creates excitement.”
However, Principal Able stated that the PBIS-aligned element of positive recognition was
specifically rejected at School Site 1:
I know a lot of the schools have a student store and give away tickets, but that was
roundly discouraged and not wanted by any of the faculty members here. They did not
want to reward positive behavior. They wanted it to be more of an intrinsic type way of
dealing with it. That’s what we have done, which has made it just very positive. I don’t
give out tickets for good behavior.
Funding
Another organizational element discussed by principals was the existence of a budget to
support PBIS-related expenses. Principal Delta told me, “Well, it’s nice to have money. It’s nice
to have the money to buy prizes. I’m hoping that I will always have it.” Principal Echo
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

102
mentioned funding as well: “Another resource is money. Money for professional development.
Time and money resources are the two most important things.”
Although Principal Charles struggled with little budget support, she found creative ways
to supply her school site needs:
As far as a budget, teachers weren’t given a budget, we fundraised and we used ASB
money, student body funds, to purchase items for the Cougar Store and we get donations
from teachers, believe it or not. I have one teacher in mind that all the time either makes
something or gets someone to donate items, all the time. She always comes in and says,
“Hey, are we low? Are we low on items for the Cougar Store for this month or this
week?” Sometimes we’ll say, “Yeah,” and she’ll come back with like a hundred things
that she just made at home, arts and crafts type, which believe it or not, these young kids,
they like that kind of stuff.
Administrator Support
Among organizational elements, administrator support has been identified as the most
important factor facilitating PBIS implementation (Bambara et al., 2009; Coffey & Horner,
2012; Kincaid et al., 2007). Two of the site administrators interviewed showed low motivation
to implement PBIS. Principals Able and Bravo, who reported the lowest motivation among the
principals interviewed, also mentioned challenges to implementation. Principal Able stated her
school staff rejected the core PBIS theory of positive behavior recognition, and she supported the
rejection. Principal Able stated, “I was glad the teachers didn’t want a store because it’s actually
not something that I believe in either. I think it should be intrinsic.” Principal Bravo mentioned
difficulty in sustaining a high-functioning school-site positive behavior team:
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

103
Principal Bravo: I did have a specific separate committee for PBIS last year. This
year I lost a couple of the members that went to other schools at
the beginning of the school year, so then what I decided to do was
to use my leadership committee as the PBIS committee as well.
Interviewer: How’s that working?
Principal Bravo: We have work to do right now.
Interviewer: Not many come to your meetings?
Principal Bravo: Right now, no.
Collect and Report Data
Principals need to collect behavior data on all school behavior incidents, and report it to
the behavior team. Student behavior data then becomes the basis for any decisions affecting
behavior. For instance, if the behavior data reveals there are more problems at recess, the
behavior team may want to consider increasing supervision or providing alternative activities at
recess. If the data reveal that certain students appear to have continuing issues, decisions
regarding support for those students may be indicated. As Principal Echo stated:
Looking at the data, for example, for discipline I realized that all the discipline issues that
occurred the previous year came down to about twelve students. Twelve students. Those
twelve students are now receiving not only counseling support, but after-school support,
academic and social development support as well.
Principal Charles also discussed the importance of reviewing the student disciplinary data:
How many incidents have we had in this category, in that category? Which teachers are
sending them up and how often are students being sent up from that class? That is good
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

104
to know, not just accountability-wise, but that would tell us that we need to support them
more on the implementation.
Principal Bravo said, “I do share it [data] with a committee and also with staff including having
some information about referrals in a weekly bulletin so that teachers know how we’re doing.
We know how many referrals we’re getting and where.”
Staff Recognition
Sustainability of new initiatives beyond the initial interest level is an organizational factor
that principals can support through recognition of staff members. Staff recognition fuels
motivated performance and facilitates implementation of PBIS (Kincaid et al., 2007). Principal
Charles stated her understanding of this motivational factor: “adults need to get re-energized as
well.” Principal Bravo noted the importance of motivation to, “keep it exciting, like some
teachers expect something new.” Principal Echo explained it further,
To improve motivation? Actually, I think that part of PBIS is also not only recognizing
students but recognizing the hard work of those involved. Not just in the PBIS team, but
also those involved in the classroom. Recognizing teachers is important, that’s part of our
sunshine committee, that’s part of PBIS. Just recognizing teachers for all the hard work
that they do.
Protected Time
Providing dedicated time for training, committee meetings, planning, and preparation is a
critical organizational factor. As Principal Echo shared: “With PBIS, the most critical resource
is finding the time.” Time constraints were mentioned by Principal Bravo, “I would say here
[the challenge is] the fact that we don’t have time to keep bringing this up to address this in staff
meetings.” Principal Charles echoed this theme, “there’s not enough time in the day to plan for
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

105
the new initiatives that we have.” Each of the five principals interviewed mentioned time
constraints as an organizational factor. The limited time theme relates to another organizational
factor, competing initiatives that place time demands on principals and staff.
Competing Initiatives
A common theme regarding barriers to implementation of PBIS was the perception of
multiple initiatives competing for scarce time resources. Principal Charles told me,
. . . basically in our district, our teachers have been doing a lot with new curriculum and
trying to digest that, so I think sometimes the side of handing out Cougar Bucks, and to a
certain degree, positive reinforcement, I don’t want to say goes by the wayside, but it’s
not necessarily at times a priority . . . I know with all these new initiatives at times, staff
has said that they feel overwhelmed.
The competing initiatives thread was also mentioned by Principal Echo, “We’ve got tons of work
to do, as far as academics, so their [teachers] focus is mainly academic.” Competing initiatives
were also mentioned by Principal Delta. The competing initiatives theme was mentioned by
most of the selected principals as a barrier to full implementation of PBIS.
Research Question 3
3. What organizational factors do principals need to implement to support
comprehensive implementation of Tier I PBIS at their school sites?
The organizational factors that principals need to implement Tier I PBIS at their school
sites include providing PBIS-aligned forms for staff use (behavior referrals, positive recognition
(tickets, certificates), administrator support, funding, recognition for students and staff, data to
inform decision-making, and protected time to meet as a team to review data and plan next steps.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

106
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
To compare the organizational assets of each of the principals interviewed, the principals
who facilitated more than two organizational assets were coded +2, while those who facilitated
two or less organizational assets were coded +1. These results were added to the Knowledge and
Motivation data reported above (Figure 7) to demonstrate the cumulative effects of principals’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets. Refer to Figure 8 for a visual representation
of this comparison.

Figure 8. Knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors of principals

Optimal performance to drive a comprehensive implementation of Tier I PBIS by school
principals requires knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors. While each factor is
required, the most powerful and successful performance resides at the convergence of all three
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Principal Able Principal Bravo Principal Charles Principal Delta Principal Echo
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Factors of Principals Implementing Tier I PBIS
Knowledge Motivation Organization
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

107
factors — knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences — where the cumulative effects
of all three assets — or deficiencies — are compounded. Compiling data culled from the
responses of the five principals interviewed, the results, illustrated in Figure 9, demonstrate the
combined effect of the juncture of multiple high or low scores in the dimensions of knowledge,
motivation, and organization.
Each of the three performance factors — knowledge, motivation, and organization —
have an impact on performance. Combining the impact of all three factors creates the greatest
impact on performance. A comparison of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors,
combined with the resulting Tier I PBIS constructs implemented by each of the selected
principals, is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Knowledge, motivation, organizational factors impact on implementation

0 5 10 15 20 25
Principal Able
Principal Bravo
Principal Charles
Principal Delta
Principal Echo
Knowledge, Motivation, Organization Factors
and PBIS Implementation
Knowledge Motivation Organization Implementation
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

108

As illustrated in Figure 9, the strongest impact on implementation is noted through the
convergence of the cumulative effects of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets of
each of the principals implementing Tier I PBIS at their school sites. Deficits in one of the
factors can be balanced by assets in another area. Deficits in all areas, however, can exacerbate
the negative effects. Figure 9 shows that high levels of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors supported the strongest implementation of PBIS. The deficits experienced
by Principals Bravo and Echo were balanced by assets in other areas, with little impact on the
resulting Tier I PBIS implementation. However, deficits in multiple KMO factors created a
cumulative effect that had the largest negative influence on the resulting implementation of PBIS
by Principal Able at School Site 1. Conversely, assets in all areas were associated with the
strongest implementation of PBIS constructs.
Synthesis
Qualitative data was collected through document review (CADOE, n.d.) and principal
report to substantiate the number of student suspensions by year at each of the selected District
school sites. The suspension data showed a clear delineation that resulted in a trend toward
reduced student suspensions after PBIS was implemented. Reviewing combined data, the five
schools selected for this study achieved a reduction of greater than 10% in disciplinary
suspensions. For this sample, the goal of reducing student disciplinary suspensions by 10% was
met in the aggregate. However, 2 of the 5 focal schools did not meet the 10% reduction goal.
The two school sites that did not achieve the desired goal of 10% reduction in student
disciplinary suspensions after implementing PBIS, Site 1 and Site 5, were the schools whose
principals had attended the fewest PBIS trainings. The association between the suspension data
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

109
and the qualitative interviews suggests the pivotal role of principals’ knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors in implementing positive behavior systems to reduce exclusionary school
discipline.
Reviewing the gap between current performance and desired performance revealed that,
in the present study, only 4 of the 5 selected school sites (80%) implemented high-fidelity PBIS
supports. Site 1 did not implement a PBIS-aligned program. Thus, the District’s school climate
goal of implementing PBIS at selected District school sites was not met for this sample.
The highest fidelity PBIS implementations, and largest reductions in suspensions, were
achieved by principals with the greatest knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets.
Achieving and sustaining the District’s school climate goals will rely on productive leveraging of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors for sustained, high quality PBIS
implementation at school sites, resulting in the desired reduction in suspensions.
Conclusion
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets experienced by each principal
created an impact on the school site implementation of PBIS. Principals’ deficits in one of the
areas of performance — knowledge, motivation, or organization — were balanced by assets in
other areas. However, Principal Able, with deficits in all three areas of performance, reported an
insufficient number of PBIS constructs implemented. Principals Bravo and Echo, each with
deficits in one area of performance, balanced the deficit with assets in other dimensions, with
little effect on overall implementation performance. Principals Charles and Delta, with assets in
all three areas of human performance, reported the greatest number of PBIS constructs
implemented.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

110
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Introduction
The District, near the coast of a western state, has identified school climate goals to
reduce student suspensions and implement PBIS at District school sites (District website, 2015,
2016). The present study was an inquiry into the observations, experiences, and perceptions of
school principals in implementing PBIS at their school sites. Data collected in the context of in-
person qualitative interviews revealed a pattern of high principal knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors associated with a robust, comprehensive implementation of PBIS, aligned
with established core constructs of the program (Cressey et al., 2015). This chapter provides
recommendations to improve the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets of school
principals to provide the conditions that will support a comprehensive, authentic PBIS
implementation, sustaining continued achievement of the District’s school climate goals.
Discussion
Knowledge Factors
Interview data revealed a significant trend regarding the knowledge level of the school
site principals interviewed. The interview responses were coded low knowledge or high
knowledge, based on the number of PBIS trainings attended by each principal. There was a
sharp delineation between the robust school site implementation of PBIS elements reported by
the high knowledge principals, compared to the smaller number of PBIS elements implemented
by the lowest knowledge principal. Refer to Figure 6 for an illustration of this relationship.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

111
Motivation Factors
The knowledge data was revealing, but was not sufficient to explain the differentiation of
level of implementation of PBIS elements among school site principals. For instance, Principal
Echo had a low level of training, but reported implementing a high level of PBIS-aligned
constructs, 15 or more. However, motivation factors were also measured through the interview
data, providing answers to the motivation research question. Data analytics revealed a steep
differentiation between principals who had high knowledge but low motivation, or the reverse,
high motivation but low knowledge. Interestingly, high motivation was seen to reduce the
impact of low knowledge, and low motivation was mitigated by high knowledge. However, the
greatest negative impact to a successful school site implementation of PBIS was observed when
low principal knowledge intersected with low principal motivation, as illustrated in Figure 8.
Organizational Factors
The research question regarding organizational factors allowed elucidation of the final
impact. After data analytics were performed on all the qualitative data collected, the strongest
impact to support the successful school site implementation of PBIS was noted when multiple
elements coincided. The principals with high knowledge showed the highest motivation to
implement PBIS. The principals with low scores in either knowledge and motivation
experienced partial success.
However, Principal Able, who combined low knowledge, low motivation, and low
organizational support, implemented significantly fewer PBIS elements, actually only two,
forming a committee and agreeing on three basic school rules, when each of the other principals
mentioned implementing 15 or more PBIS-aligned elements at their school sites.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

112
School principals require knowledge, in the form of sufficient, high quality training
events, motivation, acquired through recognizing evidence of the benefits of PBIS, and need to
both receive and provide robust organizational elements, including protected time, budgetary
support, recognition, and structures to support staff and teachers in implementing PBIS.
Deficits in areas of knowledge, motivation, or organizational factors, can be mitigated by
assets in other areas. However, the strongest implementation of PBIS occurred in the school
sites of principals with positive scores in all three areas. Conversely, the school site
characterized by significantly fewer PBIS assets reported was associated with the principal who
demonstrated the lowest knowledge, motivational, and organizational elements. The combined
deficits in all three areas created the strongest negative effect on implementation of PBIS. This
is noted in Figure 9. The synthesis between high knowledge, high motivation, and high
organizational scores created favorable conditions that contributed to the greatest number of
PBIS-aligned elements. By contrast, the intersection of low knowledge, low motivation, and low
organizational factors created the greatest negative impact, representing significant barriers to
successful, robust, school site implementation of Tier 1 PBIS elements.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Knowledge refers to the facts and information needed to understand and
apply a concept (Krathwohl, 2002). To guide the following discussion of knowledge influences,
the Krathwohl (2002) knowledge framework will be applied. Using the framework developed by
Krathwohl (2002), knowledge influences are categorized as declarative (conceptual or factual),
procedural, or metacognitive. Declarative knowledge encompasses the facts or concepts of the
SWPBS. Procedural knowledge is the “how-to,” or understanding of the use or application of
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

113
the elements of the SWPBS. Finally, metacognitive knowledge refers to reflective self-
regulation or self-evaluation to guide the application of knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002).
Chapter 3 identified assumed knowledge influences based on scanning interviews,
informal conversations, expert knowledge, and a thorough review of relevant contemporary
literature. The assumed influences were investigated through face-to-face interviews of school
site administrators currently implementing school-wide positive behavior systems. The
interviews, part of this qualitative research study, provided data to support the assumed
knowledge influences, as noted in Table 2, where the knowledge influencers are categorized as
declarative, procedural, or metacognitive.
Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Declarative
knowledge involves understanding the facts and cognitive elements that frame concepts and
underpin constructs (Clark & Estes, 2008). School site administrators’ lack of declarative
knowledge to achieve their goals was revealed during qualitative interviews and supported in the
review of the literature (Bradshaw & Pas, 2011; McIntosh, Mercer, Nese, Strickland-Cohen, &
Hoselton, 2016).
Declarative knowledge comprises the basic elements that are needed to understand the
functioning of the system (Krathwohl, 2002). This specific knowledge of the elements of the
system is needed to implement, or operationalize, the positive behavior system in a school. In
addition to comprehensive training in the theory and practice of implementing and maintaining
school wide positive behavior systems, principals also need to learn procedures.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

114
Table 10
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Knowledge Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Declarative
(Factual):
Instructional
leaders need to
know the basic
elements of
positive behavior
support (D).
Y Y (Factual):
Provide instructional leaders
with training to build
knowledge of the elements of
positive behavior support
systems, and guided practice,
with corrective feedback, to
learn the new system (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
The elements of the positive
behavior system comprise the
basic factual knowledge
needed to understand the
operation of the system
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Provide training
opportunities for
instructional leaders to
build basic factual
knowledge of the theory
and elements of positive
behavior systems.
Provide structured
opportunities to practice
with peers, with
corrective feedback, to
increase skill and
improve performance.
(Conceptual):
Instructional
leaders need to
know the benefits
of implementing
school-wide
positive behavior
systems.
Y Y (Conceptual):
Connect learning to individual
interests to encourage
meaningfulness (McCrudden
et al., 2006).
(Conceptual):
Provide instructional
leaders with research
evidence to show the
effectiveness of
implementing PBIS.
Procedural
Instructional
leaders need
procedural
knowledge to
operationalize the
elements of
positive behavior
systems (P).
Y Y Operationalizing a school-
wide positive behavior system
requires procedural, or “how
to’’ knowledge (Krathwohl,
2002; Clark & Estes, 2008).
Continued practice promotes
automaticity (McCrudden et
al., 2006).
Disseminate “how-to”
knowledge through
monthly principal
professional
development meetings.
Create job aids for
instructional leaders, to
review the elements of
the program and outline
the specific steps needed
to implement the
elements of the positive
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

115
behavior system (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Procedural
knowledge (Table 9) is needed when principals have been trained, but a reminder is needed for
implementation. This type of “how-to” knowledge is best transmitted in a job aid, which may be
a checklist or illustrated flow chart that is distributed or posted for easy reference when
operationalizing procedures, elements, and practices of PBIS (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Implementing a school-wide positive behavior system requires procedural, or “how-to”
knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002; Clark & Estes, 2008). Providing job aids that outline and clarify
each step that is needed will be effective in providing readily accessible procedural knowledge to
build the principal’s skill in operationalizing a school-wide positive behavior system. A one-
page, laminated “cheat sheet” to post in an accessible location will provide support and also
review concepts and build confidence in the instructional leader. The recommended cheat sheet
should enumerate the PBIS constructs needed for a successful implementation of Tier I PBIS
systems (see Table 9).
Metacognitive knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. School site
administrators need metacognitive knowledge to reflect on their effectiveness in supporting
implementation of school-wide positive behavior systems at their schools.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Instructional leaders need to value the program, and require self-efficacy,
or confidence in their ability to support teachers and staff in promoting behavior change through
positive behavior systems at their schools. Pajares and Urdan (2005) posits that learning and
motivation are enhanced when learners have positive expectancies for success. Increasing the
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

116
motivation of school site leaders to implement SWPBS at their school sites will require attention
to building motivation, as outlined in Table 11.

Table 11
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Interest:
Instructional leaders
do not see that their
interests will be
served through
implementing school
wide positive
behavior systems.
Y Y Explicitly frame the
value and relevance
of the learning task
for the learner
(Schraw & Lehman,
2001).
Provide instructional leaders
at the District with research
evidence of the effectiveness
and success rate of SWPBS
in reducing classroom
disruptions and student
suspensions, thereby
maximizing learning time
and improving student
achievement, to develop
interest and build perceived
value of SWPBS.
Activating personal
interest can increase
motivation (Schraw
& Lehman, 2001).
Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the
learner values the
task (Wigfield &
Eccles, 2000).
Increase the principal’s
interest and motivation to
learn and implement SWPBS
by reviewing accountability
for the District goals and the
school site’s mission, vision,
and Theory of Action to
make explicit connections
between improved behavior
management strategies and
increased academic success
and reduced student
suspensions.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

117
Table 11, continued
Assumed
Motivation Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Utility Value:
Rationales that
include a
discussion of the
importance and
utility value of the
work or learning
can help
instructional
leaders develop
positive values
(Wigfield &
Eccles, 2000;
Pintrich, 2003).
Y Y Include rationales about
the importance and
utility value of the task
(Pintrich, 2003).
Materials and activities
should be relevant and
useful to the learners,
connected to their
interests, and based on
real world tasks
(Pintrich, 2003).
Model values,
enthusiasm and interest
in the task (Wigfield &
Eccles, 2000).
Models who are credible
and similar (e.g., gender,
culturally appropriate)
can foster positive values
(Pajares & Urdan, 2005).
Plan and provide
comprehensive professional
development training to
inform site administrators
and the SWPBS team of the
value to students, teachers,
and school climate, of
implementing positive
behavior systems as a
means of reducing
classroom behavior issues,
in support of the school’s
mission to increase student
achievement.
Site administrators will
view best practice video
training demos to support
increased skill and
confidence in applying
positive behavior practices.
Structure training of
instructional leaders to
allow them to work in
supportive peer groups with
respected peer models in
each group of program
utility value for training and
building skill
Self-Efficacy:
Site instructional
leaders need to
have high self-
efficacy to
successfully lead
the practice of
positive behavior
systems in their
schools.
Y Y High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Bandura,
1997; Pajares & Urdan,
2005).
Feedback and modeling
increase self-efficacy
(Pajares & Urdan, 2005).
Modeling to-be-learned
strategies or behaviors
improves self-efficacy,
learning, and
performance (Bandura,
2001).
Use peer modeling best-
practice videos or
observation of successful
peers to increase
instructional leaders’ self-
efficacy in applying positive
behavior systems to support
behavior at their school
sites.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

118
Interest. School site instructional leaders need to be confident that they can effectively
shape and manage student behavior through implementing school-wide positive behavior
systems. Schraw and Lehman (2001) found that increasing personal interest can increase
motivation. This suggests that training should be explicitly framed in demonstrated results
connected to the needs of the learner to raise the interest level and motivation to learn. Thus, the
recommendation is to implement SWPBS training using current, research-evidenced results to
inform instructional leaders of the demonstrated effectiveness of SWPBS. This will allow school
site leaders to explicitly frame the value and effectiveness of positive behavior systems,
increasing their interest level and building interest among stakeholders to motivate performance
(Schraw & Lehman, 2001). Connecting empirical research results to current needs of school site
leaders in shaping and managing student behavior can activate personal interest and increase
motivation to master SWPBS training through demonstrating the value to the stakeholder
(Schraw & Lehman, 2001).
Utility. Learner motivation is improved when connections are made to the usefulness of
the learning in meeting the learner’s needs (Pintrich, 2003). Improving motivation for principals
to engage in PBIS training will require presenting research evidence of the effectiveness of PBIS
in preventing student misbehavior, reducing suspensions, and improving academic achievement
through fewer disruptions, improved attendance, and increased learning time. Demonstrating the
utility value of PBIS in preventing misbehavior and promoting improved achievement to support
the school’s educational mission will increase principal motivation. Increasing engagement in
the learning through modeling enthusiasm and building interest in the tasks and skills will
heighten the effectiveness of principal training (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

119
Self-efficacy. Closely related to school site administrators’ interest in the effectiveness
of SWPBS to manage student behavior is their belief in their own self-efficacy to apply elements
of SWPBS appropriately. In self-efficacy theory, individual self-perceptions and beliefs are
critical, reflecting judgments people hold about their ability to learn or perform (Bandura, 1997).
High self-efficacy can enhance motivation and learning through the expectation of success
(Pajares & Urdan, 2005).
Clark and Estes (2008) stated that people who hold positive beliefs about their skills and
capabilities will be more motivated, and more successful, than those who are equally capable but
hold pessimistic views of, or lack confidence in, their own abilities. The importance of self-
efficacy was demonstrated by Bandura (1997) whose work showed the powerful positive effect
of self-reflection and positive personal efficacy beliefs on performance.
Reflective and evaluative tools of SWPBS, such as the School Evaluation Tool, could
provide data for self-efficacy reflection in the implementation of SWPBS to identify strengths
and areas that may need further attention or effort (Upreti et al., 2010). Building self-reflection
and self-efficacy is recommended to promote the successful implementation of SWPBS, as
school site leaders’ self-efficacy will support success in improving behavior management, school
climate, and educational outcomes for students.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Organizational elements refer to resources that school site leaders can
provide. These resources can facilitate, or limit, successful implementation of school wide
positive behavior systems. Organizational elements may include protected time dedicated to
training or implementing the program, resources to support implementation, and effective
guidance and leadership (Table 12).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

120
Table 12
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Model
Influence 1:

Principals cling
to beliefs in
existing school
culture and
disciplinary
practices.
Y Y A strong
organizational culture
controls organizational
behavior and can
block an organization
from making
necessary changes for
adapting to a changing
environment (Schein,
2004).
Ensure principal SWPBS
training includes research
evidence of the efficacy of
SWPBS. Site
administrators need to be
educated to overcome
resistance based on false
beliefs in the efficacy of
past practice.
Observe within individual
school sites to identify
cultural leaders and work
within existing assets and
patterns.
Identify leaders and
channel changes through
existing school site staff
and teacher leaders.
Organizational
performance increases
when individuals
communicate
constantly and
candidly to others
about plans and
processes (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Utilize open and robust
communications in
multiple forms — email,
meetings, newsletters,
etc., to share the goals,
successes, and importance
of school-wide positive
behavior systems.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

121

Table 12, continued
Assumed
Organization
Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Model
Influence 2:

Distance
between school
site staff and
leadership
reduces
motivation.
Y Y Adult learners resist
learning when they
feel others are
imposing
information, ideas or
actions on them
(Fidishun, 2000).
Site administrators should
utilize team-building and
collaborative strategies to
build ownership and
cooperation. Form an action
committee to attend training
together and collaboratively
develop the school’s shared
expectations.
Organizational
performance
increases when top
management is
continually involved
in the improvement
process (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Leaders attend most or all
meetings; actively
participate and support the
efforts of the team.
Behavior that is
reinforced is
strengthened (Daly,
2009).
Principals publicly
recognize teachers,
reinforcing the use of
positive behavior tools and
strategies.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

122
Table 12, continued
Assumed Organization
Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Setting Influence
1:

Site culture is currently
focused on staff being
overwhelmed by the
implementation of multiple
new initiatives, i.e.,
Common Core standards
and teaching, associated
new curriculum in English
and Math, and 21st century
instructional strategies.
This hinders staff from
investing time and mental
effort into integrating
positive behavior practices
into their teaching.
Y Y “Leaders should not
focus on culture
change. Focus on the
business problem: what
isn’t working. The key
to problem
identification is to
become very specific”
(Schein, 2004).
School site implementation
will focus on addressing
student behavior issues that
impede teaching success.
A strong organizational
culture controls
organizational behavior
and can block an
organization from
making necessary
changes for adapting to
a changing environment
(Schein, 2004).
Build on prior knowledge, and
disaggregate concepts and
strategies to sequence the
learning into manageable
chunks and accelerate effective
and efficient knowledge
acquisition.
Integrate learning of initiatives
— fold Common Core
strategies into PBIS strategies
— for example, 21st century
student-centered learning, and
increasing English Learner
language acquisition support
through increased oral
language production to
increase achievement and
support student behavior
expectations.
Create an environment
that fosters desirable
behaviors (McSweeney
& Murphy, 2014).
Create and maintain a
management learning
environment with a focus on
continual progress and
improvement in perfecting the
implementation of SWPBS.
Organizational
performance increases
when top management
is continually involved
Site leaders attend 80-100% of
trainings and meetings of
behavior committee, and
support the work.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

123
in the improvement
process (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Table 12, continued
Assumed
Organization Need
Validated
(Y,N)
Priority
(Y,N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Setting
Influence 2:

Principals lack
support from
consistent role
models within the
district who have
integrated positive
behavior supports
into their leadership.
Y Y Modeling to-be-
learned strategies
or behaviors
improves learning
and performance
(Bandura, 2001).
Provide principals with
active modeling and
mentoring through
identification of district
role models, best practice
videos, and coaching.

Pinkelman, McIntosh, Rasplica, Berg, and Strickland-Cohen (2015), in a survey of
representatives of 860 school schools implementing SWPBS, found that the most consistent
indicators of success in implementing a school-wide positive behavior system were
organizational elements. Support from the building-level administrator, or principal, staff
commitment to the program, and protected time to complete activities needed to implement the
program were key indicators of success and sustainability in the implementation of SWPBS
(Pinkelman et al., 2015).
Cultural models. Principals and veteran staff members can be resistant to changing
existing student disciplinary beliefs and actions. While acknowledging persistent flaws in the
current system of disciplinary suspensions (loss of instructional time, little or no behavior
improvement), principal resistance to change may take the form of clinging to a false belief in
the effectiveness of a punitive disciplinary system (Lohrmann, Forman, Martin, & Palmieri,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

124
2008), rather than positive behavior support. School principals can overcome this past practice
bias when provided with ample research evidence of the effectiveness of PBIS.
Distance between the roles of school site administrators and school site staff (Table 12)
may create a barrier to implementation of SWPBS. This can create a lack of ownership, or buy-
in, from staff (Kincaid et al., 2007). Creating a collaborative team approach, focused on
constructing staff ownership and buy-in of the importance of SWPBS, and the effectiveness of
the implementation process, and free of the perception of top-down management, will support a
successful implementation of the SWPBS, and sustainability of the program in the long term
(Andreou, McIntosh, Ross, & Kahn, 2015).
Cultural settings. School site administrators may face situational push-back from
educators who are overwhelmed with the recent introduction of Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) and the associated new curriculum and new instructional strategies, methods, and goals.
Schein (2004) states that, rather than framing a needed practice as a new initiative, leaders can be
effective by focusing on the problem (disruptive behavior, exclusionary school discipline), and
positioning positive behavior support (SWPBS) as a solution to the problem. Thus,
implementing SWPBS will improve teaching, learning, and achievement through reduced
classroom disruptions and lost instructional time. Another leverage point could be to integrate
CCSS teaching and learning strategies into SWPBS practices and applications, thereby
increasing support through the perception of meeting teacher needs.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

125
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Bradshaw et al.’s (2010) study of 37 schools implementing SWPBS provides evidence of
the effectiveness of positive behavior supports in reducing student exclusionary suspensions.
Providing school-site administrators and staff with effective, high-quality training in SWPBS can
provide the knowledge and skills needed to implement SWPBS, and the confidence to apply the
training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Maximizing the effectiveness of school-site or
district-level training in SWPBS and ensuring positive benefits to students will require strategic
support to encourage the transfer, or application, of training into workplace practice, and
evaluation of the subsequent expected results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The New World Kirkpatrick Model provides the framework within which to plan
implementation and monitor the effectiveness of workplace training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). Beginning with results, the Kirkpatrick Model is focused on the targeted outcomes that
are expected from the training, and can be measured through leading indicators, or measurements
that suggest that behavior can be expected to lead to desired results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The results must be supported by behavior, which encompasses critical behaviors,
defined as a few, specific actions that must be performed to reach targeted outcomes; and
required drivers, the organizational supports that promote and encourage the needed critical
behaviors, such as job aids, recognition, and coaching. The third component of the Kirkpatrick
Model is learning, or the degree to which participants gain the knowledge, skills, and confidence
to apply the training. Finally, effectiveness of training also depends the reaction of the
participants, their attendance and engagement, and their perception of the training as relevant and
noteworthy (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

126
Applying the four levels of the New World Kirkpatrick Model — results, behavior,
learning, and reaction — provides a framework for evaluating the effectiveness of SWPBS
training, and the value to the school site and District of implementing school-wide positive
behavior systems to achieve the District mission and goals to reduce student disciplinary
suspensions (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Reaction and learning can be used to measure
effective training, while behavior and results are metrics to evaluate the training’s effectiveness
in the workplace toward achieving stated objectives. Refer to Figure 10 for an illustration of the
relationships among the metrics of training evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

Figure 10. Kirkpatrick’s New World Evaluation Model

Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
Within the organization’s mission, to build every student’s creative, collaborative and
confidence assets (District website, 2016), resides the need to ensure that students are present,
and interact positively with teachers and peers, to support effective instruction. The District’s
Behavior
Learning
Results
Reaction
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

127
school site leaders’ stakeholder goal, to implement PBIS at their school sites and to reduce
student disciplinary suspensions by 10% (District website, 2016), creates urgency for school site
leaders to reduce student disciplinary suspensions.
Successfully implementing SWPBS at District school sites supports the District mission
to prepare students for future success, as well as both the stakeholder goal to implement PBIS at
District school sites, and the goal to reduce District suspensions (District website, 2016).
Providing SWPBS training District-wide can support both the District mission and the
stakeholder goal, depending on the training effectiveness, which can be evaluated through the
framework (Figure 10) of the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Successful PBIS implementation at school sites can improve school climate through reduced
suspensions, and increase achievement through fewer classroom disruptions and reduced
absenteeism.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Leading indicators are short term outcomes and measurements that demonstrate that
critical behaviors are aligned to support positive impacts and favorable results, and promote the
achievement of organizational goals. Table 13 summarizes the leading indicators that will be
monitored to indicate the focus of school site efforts to achieve the District goal of reducing
exclusionary school discipline. Leading indicators are grouped by their support of external
outcomes that occur outside of the organization, or support of internal outcomes. Each leading
indicator shows the metrics that will be monitored, and how each will be measured.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

128
Table 13
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Methods
External Outcomes
Reduced student disciplinary
suspensions
Number of student
disciplinary suspensions
Principal report
District reports
CDE data review
(CADOE, n.d.)
Parent perception of reduced
number of student suspensions
Parent feedback and
complaints
School climate survey
Internal Outcomes
School has collaboratively
developed, shared, location-
specific, behavior expectations
Behavior expectations are
posted in multiple locations
and explicitly taught
Informal interviews and
observations; lesson plans
Classroom evidence of positive
behavior support for students
Behavior expectation charts,
matrices, posters are posted
in all classrooms
Informal walk throughs
Reduced occurrence of office
disciplinary referrals
Number of office disciplinary
referrals implemented
Collect and analyze
student disciplinary data

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Achieving the stakeholders’ goal of implementing PBIS at school
sites and reducing exclusionary school discipline will require critical behaviors, promoted by
required drivers, to create leading indicators that presage measurable results to support
achievement of the District mission and individual school site goals.
Key behaviors for this study include posting shared, location-specific, student behavior
expectations in classrooms and common areas, school-wide recognition of positive behavior,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

129
behavior conversations aligned with the basic school rules (i.e., the three Bs: Be Safe, Be
Respectful, Be Responsible), recognizing positive student behavior through awards and the
development of a token economy, and universal use of office disciplinary referral forms aligned
with the school rules. These critical behaviors, along with metrics, methods, and timing of
assessment, are enumerated in Table 14.

Table 14
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metrics Methods Timing
1. Post behavior
expectations in classrooms
and common areas,
developed by the behavior
committee, framed around
school rules
1. Classroom,
common area
posters/visuals of
behavior expectations
1. Number of posted
behavior expectations
noted in classroom
walkthroughs, common
area observations
1. Immediately
upon plan
implementation
2. School-wide recognition
of positive student
behavior
2. Number of positive
behavior tickets
awarded
2. Collect positive
behavior tickets
redeemed at student
store
2. Twice monthly,
after each student
store access
opportunity
3. Student behavior
conversations framed
around the school rules
3. Observation of
positive, focused,
teacher/staff/student
interactions, aligned
with school rules
3. Informal student
interviews; observations
3. Periodically
interview students,
teachers, staff;
periodic
observations
4. Universal use of student
disciplinary referral forms,
framed around the school
rules, to align expectations
and reduce office
disciplinary referrals by
clarifying pre-referral
actions and classroom-
managed vs. office-
managed behavior
Office referral forms
aligned with school
rules and shared
behavior expectations
Track office referral
forms implemented;
data analysis of referrals
Monthly, quarterly,
as needed

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

130
Required drivers. Achieving critical behaviors to support achievement of
organizational goals will be promoted through required drivers, organizational factors that
support and drive the behaviors that lead to the achievement of stakeholder goals. These
organizational factors will promote motivation and provide organizational influences to support
achievement of stated goals. Organizational factors that promote motivation to drive the
stakeholder goal of reducing student suspensions will include reinforcing, encouraging, and
rewarding behaviors aligned with the school rules to frame and shape student behavior support
around shared core values — e. g., Be Safe, Be Respectful, and Be Responsible — are shown in
Table 15.
Monitoring. Multiple measures can be applied and tracked to monitor the successful
implementation of SWPBS at District school sites. The instructional leader can publicly
recognize school site staff who implement the elements of SWPBS at weekly staff meetings,
morning announcements, by email, or through the weekly staff newsletter. The instructional
leader should provide time for staff to share successes and barriers to full implementation, and
collaborate on team directions and solutions. Finally, the behavior committee should track and
analyze student behavior data to inform behavior decisions and plan shared behavior support.
Organizational support. The critical behaviors and required drivers that are monitored
for performance, as noted in the sections above, will require organizational-level support to be
successful. For administrators to achieve their goals, they will need to provide or facilitate high
quality training, disciplinary forms, matrices, and referrals, accountability measures through
regular reporting to the District, and access to highly trained individuals in the district to provide
guidance, training, and resources.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

131
Table 15
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Methods Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Principal will create a job aid in the form of a
PBIS-aligned student disciplinary referral form
to simplify the referral process, and remind
teachers and staff of pre-referral steps, as well as
clarifying classroom-managed vs. office-
managed behavior (Office Disciplinary Referral)
Initial distribution;
ongoing availability
1, 2, 3, 4
Site administrator facilitates posted, location-
specific student behavior expectation matrix
posters framed around the school rules
Initial distribution;
ongoing availability
1,2,3
Site administrator creates and disseminates
shared positive behavior recognition form
framed around the school rules (positive
recognition ticket)
Initial distribution;
ongoing availability
2, 3
Site administrator provides incentives for token
economy through student store; collects data on
number of positive tickets submitted to store
Bi-monthly 2, 3
Encouraging
Principals experienced and proficient in
implementing PBIS will be available at the
training to provide encouragement and support
Quarterly (at training
event)
1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding
Public recognition of Principals at District
Principals’ meetings for success in progress
toward implementing positive behavior support
at their school site (i.e., number of positive
behavior tickets awarded at their site, behavior
expectations posted, etc.)
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

132
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. To effectively implement a school-wide positive behavior system,
school site administrators need to have knowledge of the elements of SWPBS. This would
include a small set of basic school rules; developing shared, positive, location-specific, student
behavior expectations; a token economy; recognition for positive student behavior; office referral
forms aligned with positive behavior expectations; collection and analysis of behavior data for
shared decision-making; and multi-tiered systems of support, to differentiate the level of
behavior support to the individual needs of students. School site leaders also need to know how
to manage and guide a team to support behavior goals at the school.
Specifically, after completion of the recommended learning event series (SWPBS
training), principals will be able to:
1. Develop knowledge of key elements of SWPBS (Declarative knowledge — factual)
2. Understand and communicate the research evidence of the effectiveness of SWPBS
(Declarative knowledge — conceptual)
3. Recognize and implement the essential constructs of SWPBS (Procedural knowledge)
4. Classify and prioritize the elements of SWPBS for school site implementation
(Procedural knowledge)
5. Self-reflect to build and apply personal confidence in successfully implementing
SWPBS (Metacognitive)
6. Recruit staff leaders and form a behavior support team to attend training and
collaboratively develop school rules and behavior expectations (Procedural)
7. Implement or facilitate teacher/staff training in elements and effectiveness of SWPBS
(Procedural)
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

133
8. Leverage competing time demands effectively to accommodate behavior team
meetings and trainings (Procedural)
9. Dispel misconceptions about intrinsic motivation and the effectiveness of punitive
past practice (Declarative knowledge — conceptual)
10. Facilitate the production and dissemination of PBIS-aligned posters, forms,
incentives, and tools to support SWPBS implementation (Organization)
11. Recognize staff successes and challenges in implementing and sustaining positive
behavior support framed in school rules (three Bs) (Motivation)
12. Reflect on practice and self-regulate for improvement (Metacognitive)
13. Identify and seek support from a competent peer model, skilled in successfully
implementing SWPBS at the school-site level (Confidence)
14. Collect data and report back to stakeholders to monitor progress and inform decision-
making (Procedural)
15. Recognize and communicate the effectiveness of SWPBS at each school site (Value)
Program. School site administrators need the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational assets to guide a robust implementation of SWPBS at their school site. Data
collected in the present study demonstrate that leaders with the least training implemented
SWPBS with the least fidelity to the program. The most effective training for site administrators
to ensure a successful, comprehensive implementation of SWPBS at individual school sites will
require high-quality training of the school site leader. To be effective, the training will focus on
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors provided to enhance and support the
school site leader’s training and ability to successfully implement SWPBS at their school site.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

134
The learning objectives stated above will be achieved through a professional
development training event series for site administrators at a central location. The initial training
will be followed by periodic check-ins at district management meetings. The training will
address each of the learning goals in a learner-centered plan, so that each administrator can work
with peers and develop a strong working knowledge of the constructs of PBIS. The training will
move beyond the theoretical to include hands-on learning, including developing sample behavior
expectation charts, creating implementation timelines, and committing to the process.
Continuing support will be constructed through shared Google docs where principals can post
exemplars or ask questions of highly skilled peers.
Past-practice misconceptions will be explicitly dispelled, including ideas related to
punitive discipline, an ineffective practice which is replaced with positive discipline when PBIS
is implemented. Identified barriers to implementation will be collaboratively addressed,
including strategies to maximize time for implementation, identifying funding for incentives, and
work-arounds to leverage time demands for competing initiatives.
Effective training for site administrators, responsive to the learning objectives stated
above, will prepare principals for the complex task of successfully implementing a
comprehensive SWPBS at their school site. The learning event series will ensure the desired
results based on productive learning, acquisition of desired skills and behaviors, and the learner’s
reaction to the training, through perceived relevance and engagement. Training for principals
should be followed by quarterly training that the principal will attend with the designated school
behavior team.
Components of learning. Effective training must be intentional in addressing each of
the five components of learning — knowledge acquired, skills mastered, attitudes aligned,
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

135
confidence constructed, and commitment to the learning (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
However, it is critical not to provide learning in isolation, but within a comprehensive program
that encompasses results, behavior, learning and reaction to the learning.
Table 16 outlines the relationship between each of the components of learning, along
with the methods and timing of evaluative assessments. Participant knowledge (“I know it”) is
best assessed through formative assessment during training. This is most advantageously
accomplished through a variety of activities embedded in the training, each of which requires
knowledge of the training to be completed. This type of embedded formative assessment is
valuable to trainers, as instruction can be informed in the moment to address any learning deficits
observed. Evaluating skill (“I can do it right now”) requires some type of performance task, or
demonstration of the skill, in a realistic environment. Determining attitudes to training (“I
believe this is worthwhile”) will require observation or discussion to learn the thoughts of the
participants. Observation of the level of engagement of participants, along with inquiries to
identify potential questions or beliefs that may create barriers to participation. Confidence (“I
think I can do it on the job”) and commitment (“I will do it on the job”) to challenging new tasks
may be constructed through practice, and through identifying and eliminating organizational
barriers and challenges to performance (protected time, coaching, appropriate tools, access to a
highly skilled peer, etc.).

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

136

Table 16
Components of Learning for Principal Training Program
Methods and Activities Timing
Declarative Knowledge: “I know it.”
Checking for understanding through observation of small group
discussion of the elements and constructs of PBIS; share out to whole
group
Formative; during
training
Procedural Skills: “I can do it right now.”
Principals collaboratively create sample behavior expectation matrix
posters
Formative; during
training
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Jigsaw discussion of research evidence of the effectiveness of
positive behavior support to improve school climate and academic
achievement; share out to whole group
Formative; during
training
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
With an experienced peer leader in each group, principals develop
timelines and overviews of individual school site implementation
plans, collaborating on solutions to anticipated barriers
Formative; during
training
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Address final concerns and ask principals to commit to
implementation of PBIS at their school sites
Formative; during
training

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

137
Level 1: Reaction
The methods used to determine participant reaction to the training are outlined in Table
17. The reaction to the content of training participants is measured through engagement,
relevance, and customer satisfaction. The learner’s positive reaction is critical to the success of
the training. Assessing learner reaction during training allows the presenter to be informed by,
and responsive to, observed needs of the learners.

Table 17
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Methods and Tools Timing
Engagement
Instructor observation
Attendance at start of course/after lunch
Evaluation completed by principals
Evaluation emailed to principals
During training
During training
Immediately after training
Two-four weeks after training
Relevance
Brief pulse checks of participants after break/lunch
Evaluation completed by principals
Evaluation emailed to principals
During training
Immediately after training
Two-four weeks after training
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse checks of participants after break/lunch
Evaluation completed by principals
Evaluation emailed to principals
During training
Immediately after training
Two-four weeks after training

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

138
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. An evaluation tool will be
administered immediately following the principals’ learning event. The tool will integrate
measures to evaluate multiple levels of learning: Results, Behavior, Learning, and Reaction.
This integrated approach will evaluate all levels of training in one blended evaluation tool. This
will allow maximization of responses while minimizing costs and preventing survey fatigue from
implementing multiple evaluation tools. The evaluation tool includes a learner-centered question
set to elicit robust responses to inform trainers. Questions will be framed in simple language to
ensure accessibility of questions, and encourage reflection and depth of the responses.
Delayed after the program implementation. While learning (Level 2) is best measured
immediately after the training, the delayed evaluation tool, to be administered sometime after
program implementation, can also assess content area knowledge, but focuses on Reaction,
Behavior, and Results, Levels 1, 3, and 4 in the Kirkpatrick New World Training Evaluation
Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The delayed evaluation has the advantage of using
questions designed to elicit reports of actual behaviors subsequent to the training. This allows
trainers to determine if the content and theory of the training has been transferred into practice.
Appendix D contains the evaluation tool to be used immediately after training. A
delayed evaluation tool, to be implemented two–four weeks after training, is attached as
Appendix E.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The desired Level 4 goal of the recommended implementation plan is to successfully
implement SWPBS at school sites to improve school climate, most notably through the reduction
of student disciplinary suspensions. A series of training events is recommended to maximize
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

139
learning and preparation for school principals to understand the elements of SWPBS and
successfully implement a comprehensive positive behavior support plan at their school sites.
Checking for understanding, or formative assessment, will be implemented during the training to
inform the instruction and differentiate to match the training to the observed needs of the
learners.
Upon completion, the training will be evaluated using the Kirkpatrick Blended
Evaluation Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Using a learner-centered item set in a
blended evaluation tool (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) that is developed based on program
needs, can maximize the depth and usefulness of the evaluation data that can be collected to
analyze and inform training effectiveness. By integrating multiple levels of evaluation
simultaneously in one tool, the response rate can be maximized and survey fatigue avoided.
Blended evaluation of training will provide the most useful data to analyze the effectiveness of
the training, and the level of transfer of learning into practice. Blended evaluation also
maximizes resources through the integrated approach of multiple levels of evaluation in one tool.
Two evaluation tools will be implemented. The first will be implemented immediately
after the training. The second evaluation tool will be delayed, timed for implementation at two
to four weeks after training. Learning is best evaluated immediately after training, but behavior
cannot be evaluated until later. The delayed evaluation will be useful to check for behavior
change after the training, to determine if learned concepts have transferred into professional
practice. The data collected from the integrated evaluation tools, taken together, will inform the
district of the multiple levels of learning: Results, Behavior, Learning, and Reaction. The
evaluations will provide valuable information to determine the effectiveness of the training and
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

140
the impact to professional practice, and to students enrolled in district schools implementing
PBIS.
Data collected from the immediate evaluation tool as well as the delayed evaluation tool
will be reported to the District. The immediate evaluation tool will measure learning, reaction,
and results. The delayed evaluation tool will provide information on behavior, as well as
reaction and results. The data generated by the evaluations will be collected, compared, and
analyzed. The data analytics will be reported to the district, with charts to express the
relationships between data points, as per the sample chart depicted in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Results dashboard

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Engagement Relevance Customer
Satisfaction
Knowledge Commitment Attitude Confidence Results
Growth between Evaluations
Immediate Evaluation Delayed Evaluation
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

141
As implementation progresses post-training, tracking of required drivers and critical
behaviors will allow monitoring to inform effective implementation of the SWPBS in a timely
manner, that will allow for correction, if needed. Regular progress monitoring will provide the
opportunity for intervention to address any deficiencies on a timely basis to keep the
implementation plan on track for success.
The data dashboard (sample in Figure 12) will provide an accessible visual representation
to monitor progress in implementing SWPBS and in reducing student disciplinary suspensions.
The data dashboard provides an accountability representation for critical behaviors (in this
sample, tracking positive behavior recognition) to support the leading indicators of Level 4,
Results.

Figure 12. Dashboard of Level 4 goals — Critical behaviors

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Sep/Oct Nov/Dec Jan/Feb Mar/Apr
Positive Behavior Recognition Tickets Collected
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

142
Utilizing the blended approach to evaluation, as developed through the Kirkpatrick
Blended Evaluation model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), promotes accurate assessment of
the impact to the organization of participating in the training. This can provide data to assess the
organization’s return on expectation of the training, the value the training provides to the
organization in achieving its organizational mission and goals.
Summary
Training is a key factor in building the declarative and procedural knowledge to
effectively apply SWPBS, and achieve and sustain the District’s school climate goals. The
proposed series of training events is designed to meet each of the learning objectives, and will be
evaluated through the results-first process identified in the Kirkpatrick New World Evaluation
Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The recommended program addresses each of the
deficiencies demonstrated through the data collected for this study, including effective training
of the school site administrator, balancing time demands of school site faculty, and reducing
reliance on past practice. Evaluating the effectiveness of the training, through measurable
outcomes, can improve the results, the likelihood that the proposed training will prepare school
site leaders to guide a successful and comprehensive implementation of PBIS at their school sites
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Applying the New World Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model
framework to plan, implement, and evaluate recommendations will optimize likelihood of
success in applying SWPBS effectively to support the District mission and the stakeholder goals
(District website, 2016).
Using the Kirkpatrick framework allows for integration of evaluation from the outset,
planning for alignment of the training and the evaluation to enhance outcomes and maximize
results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). By planning evaluation from the outset, meaningful
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

143
metrics were identified that will be measured to improve successful outcomes and demonstrate
the value of the training to the District. The recommendations can be evaluated in terms of their
likelihood to provide value as a return on District expectations. The return on expectation will
ultimately be assessed through the successful, robust implementation of SWPBS at each school
site to guide student behavior, improve school climate, and reduce student disciplinary
suspensions.
Reflection
To study the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets that promote, or create
barriers to, successful implementation of Tier I PBIS systems by elementary school principals,
20% of the principals of a local school district were selected for in-depth, in-person interviews.
The qualitative interview questions were open-ended and unstructured to elicit rich responses to
inform the research questions developed for this study.
One area that yielded surprising findings was each principal’s motivation, and the reasons
for his or her motivation, or lack of motivation. While many of the school principals interviewed
attended some of the same county-level PBIS training events, the motivation levels after training
varied greatly. Principals with current perceived needs for student behavior support showed
higher motivation to implement a positive behavior plan. Of the two principals who stated low
motivation (“We have pretty good kids here”), one, Principal Bravo, implemented a rigorous
PBIS program, perhaps because, though his current students were generally well-behaved, he
stated his experience of students presenting major behavioral issues in prior school assignments.
The other low motivation principal, Able, presented a school site positive behavior
implementation that bore little fidelity to PBIS.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

144
While current experience can be a motivator, school administrators, particularly those
with small school enrollments, as those selected for this inquiry (Table 8), may benefit from
looking beyond their present school population to realize their potential future need. Developing
and maintaining a positive school culture can be instrumental in reducing school discipline and
creating a school culture that supports prosocial behavior choices in students, even those who
have not yet enrolled in their schools. Current perceived need for student behavior support
should be balanced with the likelihood of future need, and the importance of addressing behavior
issues proactively with a strong, positive school culture in place to prevent maladaptive behavior.
Conclusion
The persistent inequities and poor educational outcome results associated with
exclusionary school discipline, the practice of removing students from their usual learning
environment in an attempt to improve student behavior, have been documented since the 1970s
(Children’s Defense Fund, 1975). School wide positive behavior systems, such as PBIS, that
include shared school rules, location-specific student behavior expectations that are posted in
common areas and explicitly taught, systemic recognition of positive behavior, multi-tiered
systems of support, and data-driven decision making, provide results by guiding student behavior
and preventing student suspensions (Barrett et al., 2008). A successful school site
implementation of PBIS requires school site leaders to have specific knowledge, motivation, and
organizational assets that must be intentionally constructed through professional development
training events and competent peer guidance to prepare leaders to support and facilitate the
implementation of PBIS at their school sites.
A significant finding revealed in the present study was the critical contribution the site
leader’s knowledge made to the school’s overall implementation of PBIS. The training deficits
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

145
experienced by a site leader were closely associated with significantly fewer PBIS elements
operationalized in school site implementation of the behavior plan. Of great importance, the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements identified in this study either combined to
create positive effects for a robust implementation of PBIS, or, in the case of multiple deficits in
knowledge, motivation, and organizational dimensions, created increasingly negative effects on
the implementation. Recommendations for comprehensive, high-quality training to prepare
school leaders to understand and implement PBIS to improve school climate and reduce student
disciplinary suspensions, appear above. These recommendations are based on effective,
comprehensive training of the school site administrator to acquire the needed knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational factors needed to guide a robust and comprehensive
implementation of the constructs of Tier 1 PBIS to support student behavior and improve
achievement. The recommended course of professional development for site leaders, if applied,
is expected to increase the site leader’s skill and confidence in leading and directing school-wide
efforts to successfully implement PBIS to reduce exclusionary school discipline by proactively
supporting student behavior and student achievement.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

146
REFERENCES
Advancement Project. (2010). Test, punish, and push out: How ‘zero tolerance’ and high-stakes
testing funnel youth into the school-to-prison pipeline. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction, and
repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 917-931.
Alkin, M. C. (2011). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in
organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53(3), 625-642.
American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on School Health. (2003). Out-of-school
suspension and expulsion. Pediatrics, 112(5), 1206-1209.
American Psychological Association. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the
schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63(9),
852-862. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852
Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2010). Classroom motivation. Princeton, NC: Merrill.
Andreou, T. E., McIntosh, K., Ross, S. W., & Kahn, J. D. (2015). Critical incidents in sustaining
school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. The Journal of Special
Education, 49(3), 157-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466914554298
Arcia, E. (2006). Achievement and enrollment status of suspended students. Education and
Urban Society, 38(3), 359-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124506286947
Baker, S. E., & Edwards, R. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough? (Discussion
Paper). Southampton, UK: National Centre for Research Methods. Retrieved from
http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2273
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

147
Balfanz, R., Herzog, L., & Mac Iver, D. J. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and
keeping students on the graduation path in urban middle-grades schools: Early
identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 223-235.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701621079
Bambara, L., Nonnemacher, S., & Kern, L. (2009). Sustaining school-based individualized
positive behavior support: Perceived barriers and enablers. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 11, 161-176.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1-26. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Barrett, S. B., Bradshaw, C. P., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2008). Maryland statewide PBIS initiative
systems, evaluation, and next steps. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(2),
105-114.
Bernburg, J. G., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Labeling, life choices, and adult crime: The direct and
indirect effects of official intervention in adolescence on crime in early adulthood.
Criminology, 41(4), 1287-1318.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of
school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational
health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

148
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of schoolwide
positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a
randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 12(3), 133-148.
Bradshaw, C. P., & Pas, E. T. (2011). A statewide scale up of positive behavioral interventions
and supports: A description of the development of systems of support and analysis of
adoption and implementation. School Psychology Review, 40(4), 530-548.
Bryant, A. L., Schulenberg, J., Bachman, J. G., O’Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2000).
Understanding the links among school misbehavior, academic achievement, and cigarette
use: A national panel study of adolescents. Prevention Science, 1(2), 71-87.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2009). California standards for the teaching
profession. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-
prep/standards/CSTP-2009.pdf
California Department of Education. (2012). Academic performance index (API). Sacramento,
CA: Author. Retrieved from http://api.cde.ca.gov/
California Department of Education. (2013). 2012-13 academic performance index reports.
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/documents/infoguide13.pdf
California Department of Education. (2017). Expulsion and suspension data. Sacramento, CA:
Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/sd/filesesd.asp
California Department of Education. (n.d.). DataQuest. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

149
Cameron, J., Banko, K. M., & Pierce, W. D. (2001). Pervasive negative effects of rewards on
intrinsic motivation: The myth continues. The Behavior Analyst, 24(1), 1-44.
Cheney, D., Lynass, L., Flower, A., Waugh, M., Iwaszuk, W., Mielenz, C., & Hawken, L.
(2010). The Check, Connect, and Expect Program: A targeted, Tier 2 intervention in the
Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support model. Preventing School Failure, 54(3), 152-
158.
Children’s Defense Fund. (1975). School suspensions: Are they helping children? Cambridge,
MA: Author.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Coffey, J. H., & Horner, R. H. (2012). The sustainability of schoolwide positive behavior
interventions and supports. Exceptional Children, 78(4), 407-422.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291207800402
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Cressey, J. M., Whitcomb, S. A., McGilvray-Rivet, S., Morrison, R. J., & Shander-Reynolds, K.
(2015). Handling PBIS with care: Scaling up to school-wide implementation.
Professional School Counseling, 18(1), 90-99.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daly, E. J., Wells, N. J., Swanger ‐Gagné, M. S., Carr, J. E., Kunz, G. M., & Taylor, A. M.
(2009). Evaluation of the multiple ‐stimulus without replacement preference assessment
method using activities as stimuli. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42(3), 563-574.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

150
DeVoe, J. F., Peter, K., Kaufman, P., Miller, A., Noonan, M., Snyder, T. D., & Baum, K. (2004).
Indicators of school crime and safety: 2004 (NCES 2005-002/NCJ 205290). Washington,
D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics / U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005002.pdf
Domitrovich, C. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2000). The study of implementation: Current findings
from effective programs that prevent mental disorders in school-aged children. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11, 193-221.
Dweck, C. S. (2007). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Ballantine
Books.
Eagle, J. W., Dowd-Eagle, S. E., Snyder, A., & Holtzman, E. G. (2015). Implementing a Multi-
Tiered System of Support (MTSS): Collaboration between school psychologists and
administrators to promote systems-level change. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 25(2-3), 160-177.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2014.929960
Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M. P., & Booth, E. A.
(2011). Breaking schools’ rules. New York, NY: Justice Center.
Feuerborn, L. L., & Tyre, A. D. (2016). How do staff perceive schoolwide positive behavior
supports? Implications for teams in planning and implementing schools. Preventing
School Failure, 60(1), 53-59.
Feuerborn, L. L., Tyre, A. D., & King, J. (2015). The Staff Perceptions of Behavior and
Discipline (SPBD) Survey: A tool to help achieve systemic change through schoolwide
positive behavior supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17(2), 116-126.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

151
Fidishun, D. (2000). Adult learning/andragogy. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences
of learning (pp. 143-145). New York, NY: Springer.
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. (2009, November 10). Comments pursuant to notice of proposed
information collection request. New York, NY: Author.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment
with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hawken, L. S., Vincent, C. G., & Schumann, J. (2008). Response to intervention for social
behavior: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,
16(4), 213-225.
Heaviside, S., Rowand, C., Williams, C., & Farris, E. (1998). Violence and discipline problems
in U.S. public schools: 1996-97. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics.
Hoffman, K., & Llagas, C. (2003). Status and trends in the education of blacks. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-
wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1-14.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A. W., & Esperanza, J.
(2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide
positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 11(3), 133-144.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

152
Johansen, A., Little, S. G., & Akin-Little, A. (2011). An examination of New Zealand teachers’
attributions and perceptions of behavior, classroom management, and the level of formal
teacher training received in behavior management. Kairaranga, 12(2), 3-12.
Jordan, J. L., & Anil, B. (2009). Race, gender, school discipline, and human capital effects.
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 41(2), 419-429.
Kame’enui, E. J., & Carnine, D. W. (1998). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate
diverse learners. Des Moines, IA: Prentice-Hall.
Kezar, A. (2000). Pluralistic leadership: Bringing diverse voices to the table. About Campus,
5(3), 6-11.
Kezar, A. (2001). Research-based principles of change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 113-123.
Kincaid, D., Childs, K., Blasé, K. A., & Wallace, F. (2007). Identifying barriers and facilitators
in implementing schoolwide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 9(3), 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007070090030501
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Talent Development.
Koon, D. S.-V. (2013). Exclusionary school discipline: An issue brief and review of the
literature. Berkeley, CA: The Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Policy,
University of California, Berkeley.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212-218.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

153
Lamont, J. H. (2013). Out-of-school suspension and expulsion. Pediatrics, 131(3), e1000-e1007.
https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-3932
Lassen, S. R., Steele, M. M., & Sailor, W. (2006). The relationship of school-wide positive
behavior support to academic achievement in an urban middle school. Psychology in the
Schools, 43(6), 701-712. https://doi.org//10.1002/pits.20177
Law, B. M. F., Siu, A. M. H., & Shek, D. T. L. (2012). Recognition for positive behavior as a
critical youth development construct: Conceptual bases and implications on youth service
development. The Scientific World Journal, 2012(809578), 1-7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/2012/809578
Lee, S. W. (2005). Encyclopedia of school psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412952491
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile
offenders: A metaanalytic overview. Victims and Offenders, 4, 124-147.
Lohrmann, S., Forman, S., Martin, S., & Palmieri, M. (2008). Understanding school personnel’s
resistance to adopting school-wide positive behavior support at a universal level of
intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(4), 256-269.
Loman, S., & Borgmeier, C. (2010). Practical functional behavior assessment training manual
for school-based personnel (Working Paper). Portland, OR: Portland State University.
Retrieved from http://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/11250
Losen, D. J. (2005). Re-directing the school to prison pipeline. Poverty & Race, 14(4), 1.
Losen, D. J. (2011). Discipline policies, successful schools, and racial justice. Boulder, CO:
National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from
http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/discipline-policies
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

154
Losen, D. J., & Gillespie, J. (2012). Opportunities suspended: The disparate impact of
disciplinary exclusion from school. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto
Derechos Civiles, UCLA.
Losen, D. J., & Martinez, T. E. (2013). Out of school and off track: The overuse of suspensions
in American middle and high schools. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights
Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, UCLA.
Losen, D. J., & Skiba, R. J. (2010). Suspended education: Urban middle schools in crisis. Los
Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, UCLA. Retrieved
from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8fh0s5dvA
Mathews, S., McIntosh, K., Frank, J. L., & May, S. L. (2013). Critical features predicting
sustained implementation of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(3), 168-178.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
McCrudden, M., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006). The effect of general relevance instructions
on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of Experimental
Education, 74(4), 293-310.
McIntosh, K. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS. New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
McIntosh, K., Kelm, J. L., & Delabra, A. C. (2016). In search of how principals change. Journal
of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 100-110.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

155
McIntosh, K., Mercer, S. H., Nese, R. N. T, Strickland-Cohen, M. K., & Hoselton, R. (2016).
Predictors of sustained implementation of school-wide positive behavioral interventions
and supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(4), 209-218.
McIntosh, K., Predy, L. K., Upreti, G., Hume, A. E., Turri, M. G., & Mathews, S. (2014).
Perceptions of contextual features related to implementation and sustainability of school-
wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior, 16(1), 31-43.
McKevitt, B. C., & Braaksma, A. D. (2008). Best practices in developing a positive behavior
support system at the school level. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in
school psychology V (pp. 735-747). Washington, D.C.: National Association of School
Psychologists.
McSweeney, F. K., & Murphy, E. S. (2014). Basic principles of operant conditioning. In The
Wiley-Blackwell handbook of operant and classical conditioning (pp. 165-194). Oxford,
UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Monahan, K. C., VanDerhei, S., Bechtold, J., & Cauffman, E. (2014). From the school yard to
the squad car: School discipline, truancy, and arrest. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
43(7), 1110-1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0103-1
Moran, J. W., & Brightman, B. K. (2000). Leading organizational change. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 12(2), 66-74.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

156
Morris, E. W., & Perry, B. L. (2016). The punishment gap: School suspension and racial
disparities in achievement. Social Problems, 63(1), 68-86.
https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spv026
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). The condition of education 2006: In brief
(NCES 2006-072). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006072.pdf
National Clearinghouse on Supportive School Discipline. (n.d.). Exclusionary discipline.
Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from
http://supportiveschooldiscipline.org/learn/reference-guides/exclusionary-discipline
Office of Special Education Programs. (2017). Technical Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Education. Retrieved from http://pbis.org
Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (2005). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence: Implications for
teachers and parents. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents
(pp. 339-367). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K. B., &
Pachan, M. (2008). The positive impact of social and emotional learning for kindergarten
to eighth-grade students: Findings from three scientific reviews. Chicago, IL:
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

157
Pinkelman, S., McIntosh, K., Rasplica, C., Berg, T., & Strickland-Cohen, M. (2015). Perceived
enablers and barriers related to sustainability of school-wide positive behavioral
interventions and supports. Behavioral Disorders, 40(3), 171-183.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Raffaele Mendez, L. M. (2003). Predictors of suspension and negative school outcomes: A
longitudinal investigation. New Directions for Student Leadership: Deconstructing the
School-to-Prison Pipeline, 2003(99), 17-31.
Raffaele Mendez, L. M., & Knoff, H. M. (2003). Who gets suspended and why? A demographic
analysis of schools and disciplinary infractions in a large school district. Education and
Treatment of Children, 26(1), 30-51.
Rausch, M. K., & Skiba, R. J. (2004). Disproportionality in school discipline among minority
students in Indiana: Description and analysis. Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation
and Education Policy.
Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A theory of
culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and
schools. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 583-625.
Rumberger, R. W., & Losen, D. J. (2016). The high cost of harsh discipline and its disparate
impact. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, UCLA.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

158
Rumberger, R. W., & Losen, D. J. (2017). The hidden costs of California’s harsh school
discipline, and the localized economic benefits from suspending fewer high school
students. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, UCLA.
Sautner, B. (2001). Rethinking the effectiveness of suspensions. Reclaiming Children and Youth,
9(4), 210-214.
Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions
for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23-52.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009004801455
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7-22.
Sinek, S. (2009, September). How great leaders inspire action [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action
Skiba, R. J. (2010). Zero tolerance and alternative discipline strategies. National Association of
School Psychologists Communique, 39(1), 28-30.
Skiba, R. J. (2014). The failure of zero tolerance. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 22(4), 27.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C. G., Rausch, M. K., May, S. L., & Tobin, T. (2011). Race
is not neutral: A national investigation of African American and Latino disproportionality
in school discipline. School Psychology Review, 40, 85-107.
Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. (2002). The color of discipline:
Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. The Urban Review,
34(4), 317-342.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

159
Skiba, R. J., & Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe
schools? Phi Delta Kappan, 80(5), 372-376, 381-382.
Skiba, R. J., & Sprague, J. (2008). Safety without suspensions. Educational Leadership, 66(1),
38-43.
Sugai, G. (2017, May 18). Getting started with Tier 1 school-wide PBIS. Presentation at
Northeast PBIS Network Leadership Forum, Mystic, CT.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C. M., . . . Wilcox, B.
(2000). Applying positive behavioral support and functional behavioral assessment in
schools. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 131-143.
Sugai, G., Horner, R., & Lewis, T. (2009). School-wide positive behavior support implementers’
blueprint and self-assessment. Eugene, OR: OSEP TA-Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports.
Sugai, G., & Simonsen, B. (2012). Positive behavioral interventions and supports: History,
defining features, and misconceptions. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, Center for
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
Sullivan, A. L., & Bal, A. (2013). Disproportionality in special education: Effects of individual
and school variables on disability risk. Exceptional Children, 79(4), 475-494.
Sullivan, A. L., Van Norman, E. R., & Klingbeil, D. S. (2014). Exclusionary discipline of
students with disabilities: Student and school characteristics predicting suspension.
Remedial and Special Education, 35(4), 199-210.
Sweeten, G. (2006). Who will graduate? Disruption of high school education by arrest and court
involvement. Justice Quarterly, 23(4), 462-480.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

160
Tobin, T., Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1996). Patterns in middle school discipline records. Journal
of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4(2), 82-94.
Upreti, G., Liaupsin, C., & Koonce, D. (2010). Stakeholder utility: Perspectives on school-wide
data for measurement, feedback, and evaluation. Education and Treatment of Children,
33(4), 497-511.
U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1981). Prisoners at midyear 1981. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pm81.pdf
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). Unemployment rates and earnings by educational
attainment, 2015. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm
U.S. Census Bureau. (2014, September 8). Facts for features: National Hispanic Heritage Month
2014: Sept. 15–Oct. 15 (Release No. CB14-FF.22). Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2014/cb14-ff22.html
Vavrus, F., & Cole, K. (2002). “I didn’t do nothing”: The discursive construction of school
suspension. Urban Review, 34(2), 87-111.
Velez, W. (1989). High school attrition among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white youths.
Sociology of Education, 62, 119-133.
Vincent, C. G., Sprague, J. R., & Tobin, T. J. (2012). Exclusionary discipline practices across
students’ racial/ethnic backgrounds and disability status: Findings from the Pacific
Northwest. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(4), 585-601.
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

161
Vincent, C. G., & Tobin, T. J. (2011). The relationship between implementation of school-wide
positive behavior supports (SWPBS) and disciplinary exclusion of students from various
ethnic backgrounds with and without disabilities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 19(4), 217-232.
Wald, J., & Losen, D. (2003). Defining and redirecting a school-to-prison pipeline. Cambridge,
MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard.
Wallace, J. M., Goodkind, S., Wallace, C. M., & Bachman, J. G. (2008). Racial, ethnic, and
gender differences in school discipline among U.S. high school students: 1991-2005.
Negro Educational Review, 59(1/2), 47-62, 125-126.
Weirsma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
West, H. C., & Sabol, W. J. (2009). Prison inmates at midyear 2008 — statistical tables.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pim08st.pdf
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
Wilson, H. (2014). Turning off the school-to-prison pipeline. Reclaiming Children and Youth,
23, 49-53.
Zhang, A., Musu-Gillette, L., & Oudekerk, B. (2016). Indicators of school crime and safety:
2015. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational
Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016079.pdf

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

162
APPENDIX A
USC IRB APPROVAL
University of Southern California University Park Institutional Review Board
3720 South Flower Street Credit Union Building (CUB) #301
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702
Phone: 213-821-5272
Fax: 213-821-5276
upirb@usc.edu

Date: Jan 24, 2017, 02:25pm
Action Taken: Approve
Principal Investigator: Elizabeth Cord, Rossier School of Education
Faculty Advisor: Eugenia Mora-Flores, Rossier School of Education
Co-Investigator(s):
Project Title: Positive behavior systems & student suspensions
Study ID: UP-17-00029
Funding:

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

163
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT FORM FOR RESEARCH
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

The Role of School-Wide Positive Behavior Systems
in Reducing Exclusionary School Discipline

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Elizabeth Cord, MA, and Eugenia
More-Flores, Ph.D., at the University of Southern California, because you are an elementary or
middle school site administrator. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the
information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding
whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You may
also decide to discuss participation with your family or friends. If you decide to participate, you
will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study is designed to identify knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that
promote, or create barriers to, successful implementation of School-Wide Positive Behavior
Systems.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to complete a face-to-face
interview to determine your observations and experience with School-Wide Positive Behavior
Systems, such as PBIS or BEST. Questions will focus on your observations and experiences in
implementing school-wide positive behavior systems at your school. Audio recordings of
interviews will be made, to enhance accuracy of data collection. If you choose to decline audio
recording, you can still be interviewed and participate in this study.

Elementary and middle school site administrators at schools that have implemented SWPBS for
one or more years will be interviewed. The interviews will be administered in person, and may
take approximately 45 minutes to complete. All interviews will be conducted at your school site
or other location of your choice.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated discomforts or risks (psychological, social, legal or financial) of
participating in this study.

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

164
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There are no direct benefits associated with participating in this study. Potential benefits of this
study are contingent upon results. However, anticipated benefits to society as a result of this
study may include identifying factors associated with successful school-site implementation of
school-wide positive behavior systems.

CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members
of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s Human
Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

The data collected for this study, including interview protocol instruments and audio recordings,
will be stored on the researcher’s locked computer, to prevent access by unauthorized personnel.
Audio recordings will be accessed by the Principal Investigator, and possibly by professional
transcriptionists, for the purpose of creating a typed, digital copy of responses. Audio recordings
may be reviewed/edited by the respondent upon request to the Principal Investigator. Study
participant responses will be coded to maintain confidentiality and protect personal identities.
Released results and/or written analysis of this study will preserve the confidentiality of all
participants. Data collected for this study will be retained for a minimum of three years, and
may be stored indefinitely. When the results of the research are published or discussed in
conferences, no identifiable information will be used.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or
remedies because of your participation in this research study.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact: Elizabeth
Cord, Principal Investigator, Doctoral candidate, University of Southern California, Rossier
School of Education, 1150 S. Olive Street, Suite 2100-2113, Los Angeles, California 90015,
(408) 928-7700, cord@usc.edu; or Faculty Sponsor, Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores, Professor of
Clinical Education, University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education, 1150 S.
Olive Street, Suite 2100-2113, Los Angeles, California 90015, 213-821-2727,
moraflor@rossier.usc.edu

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

165
Do you have any questions?

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

AUDIO
□ I agree to be audio-recorded
□ I do not want to be audio-recorded

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe
that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to
participate.

Name of Principal Investigator

Signature of Principal Investigator Date

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

166
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
1. Please tell me, as if I were not your peer but an interested observer, about the positive
behavior system at your school.
a. What is its history?
b. What did the training look like? How much training did you receive?
c. How was the program communicated to staff?
d. What is the level of understanding of your positive behavior system among staff
members? How can you tell?
e. How motivated are staff members to implement the program? How can you tell?
f. What elements facilitated the implementation? Please tell me about them.
g. What elements presented barriers in implementing the program? Please tell me about
them.
2. How do you feel about the positive behavior system at your school?
a. Have you always felt that way?
i. If so, where do you think that feeling comes from?
b. If not, what was your initial feeling, and when did your feeling change?
c. If not, why do you think your feeling changed?
3. Are students aware of behavior expectations at your school?
a. How do you know?
b. Does their awareness lead to behavior change? How do you know?
4. Can you give me a specific example of one or more student behavior expectations at your
school?
5. Is there something that helps students follow behavior expectations at your school?
a. Are student behavior expectations posted at your school?
b. In which locations are student behavior expectations posted?
c. Are behavior expectations explicitly taught at your school?
6. Regarding the School-wide Positive Behavior System at your school:
a. Do most teachers and staff members participate in the positive behavior program at
your school?
i. If so, what do you observe (see and hear) when teachers participate in the
school-wide behavior system at your school?
ii. What factors do you think support participation?
THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

167
b. If not, why not? What do you think could increase participation among staff?
c. How would you describe your capacity in implementing and maintaining SWPBS?
7. Some schools experience changes in student behavior after implementing school-wide
positive behavior systems, while others may not. What has been your experience?
a. Have there been changes in student behavior?
b. How can you tell?
c. Can you share a specific example?
d. Has there been a change in student office discipline referrals since your school
adopted school-wide positive behavior?
e. Has there been a change in student disciplinary suspensions since your school
adopted school-wide positive behavior?
f. If so, to what extent do you credit the school-wide positive behavior system for these
changes?
g. If not, why not?
8. Can you tell me about some of the elements of your school’s positive behavior system?
a. Are there any aspects of your school’s positive behavior system that you appreciate?
What are they? Why?
b. Are there any aspects of your school’s positive behavior system you don’t appreciate?
What are they? Why not?
c. If you could change one aspect of your school’s behavior system, what would it be?
Why?
9. Thinking of the last time you noticed a teacher or staff member recognizing a student for
following a school expectation, what did you observe?
a. What did you see?
b. What did you hear?
10. Thinking about a time when a student’s behavior did not meet the school-wide behavior
expectations, describe what you observed.
11. If you had the power to change the school-wide positive behavior system implementation at
your school, what would you do?
12. Is there anything else about the school-wide positive behavior system at your school you
would like to share, or anything else that I should know?

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

168
APPENDIX D
TRAINING EVALUATION TOOL — IMMEDIATELY AFTER TRAINING

Level One: Reaction
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I was focused on the course materials and concepts during the
training. (Reaction-Engagement)

2. The concepts I learned will be useful in my work as a school-site
administrator. (Reaction-Relevance)

3. This course was a good use of my time. (Reaction-Customer
Satisfaction)

Level Two: Learning
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I am committed to leading my staff in planning and implementing a
school-wide positive behavior system at my school site. (Learning-
Commitment).

2. I believe that applying the elements of School-Wide Positive
Behavior Systems (SWPBS) at my school site will improve my school
climate. (Learning-Attitude)

3. I am confident that I will be able to implement a school-wide positive
behavior system at my school site. (Learning-Confidence).

What are the major elements of school-wide positive behavior systems? (Learning-Knowledge)

Level Four: Results
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I believe that consistently applying positive behavior system concepts
will contribute to improving the school climate at my site. (Results)

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

169
APPENDIX E
TRAINING EVALUATION TOOL — DELAYED (TWO–FOUR WEEKS AFTER
TRAINING)

Level One: Reaction
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I have applied concepts of the training in this course when interacting
with students and staff at my school site. (Reaction-Relevance)

2. The coursework prepared me to implement a school-wide positive
behavior system at my school site (Reaction-Customer Satisfaction)

3. This course was a good use of my time. (Reaction-Customer
Satisfaction)

What are the major elements of school-wide positive behavior systems? (Learning-Knowledge)

Level Three: Behavior
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I was focused on the course materials and concepts during the
training. (Reaction-Engagement)

2. The concepts I learned will be useful in my work as a school-site
administrator. (Reaction-Relevance)

3. This course was a good use of my time. (Reaction-Customer
Satisfaction)

THE ROLE OF POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

170
Please respond to the following question using the rating scale below:

1 – little or no application
2 – initial implementation
3 – moderate implementation
4 – strong implementation
5 – very strong implementation

I have applied the following course objectives at my school site (Behavior):

Level of Implementation
Objective 1 2 3 4 5
Form a behavior team of teachers & staff
Agree on a small number of school rules (usually three)
Collaborate on shared, location-specific student expectations
Create and post location-specific behavior expectation matrices

If you indicated that your level of implementation is 3 or below for any objectives above, please
indicate the reason(s):

___ I do not have the knowledge and/or skills to implement SWPBS at my school
___ I do not have time to implement course concepts
___ Competing initiatives/time demands do not allow attention to course concepts
___ I currently lack needed resources to implement SWPBS
___ I have questions about SWPBS but do not know to whom to address questions
___ I am not confident I can successfully apply coursework concepts
___ I do not think course concepts will work at my school site
___ Other:________________________________________________________

Level Four: Results
Please indicate your agreement with the following statements (5 means you strongly agree)

1. I am seeing positive results at my school site since I have applied the
elements of school-wide positive behavior systems as presented in this
training (Results)

Please give an example of a positive result you have observed at your school site since
implementing elements of the school-wide positive behavior system training. (Results)
_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Over three million U.S. school children are removed from their usual learning environments for disciplinary reasons each year. These student disciplinary suspensions show persistent inequities, with African American boys receiving three times more suspensions, and the disabled twice as many suspensions, as their white peers, while Latino and Native American boys are similarly overrepresented in school suspension statistics. Significant negative effects to the individual and to the community are associated with student disciplinary suspensions, including lower achievement, reduced school bonding, and school attrition through reduced on-time graduation rates. Excluding students from school can result in safety issues from unsupervised youths, increased exposure to the justice system, and reduced lifetime earnings, creating a negative impact to the child and to the community. While state education codes articulate specific criteria for suspension (California Education Code § 48900, for instance, lists brandishing weapons, selling controlled substances, sexual assault, and terroristic threats as student behaviors that may warrant disciplinary suspension), there is room for interpretation by school administrators. Suspensions, which some agree should be reserved for actions that significantly compromise school safety, are also implemented for minor offenses such as tardiness or dress code violations. A promising practice that has demonstrated favorable results in reducing exclusionary school discipline rates is the implementation of school-wide positive behavior systems (SWPBS). In addition to a reduction of inappropriate student behaviors, SWPBS support also improved other favorable school and student outcomes, including increased achievement and an improvement in the overall school climate. School principals, who direct and implement school policies and are responsible for implementing suspensions, are in a pivotal position in the exclusionary school discipline problem of practice. This study provided qualitative findings of in-person interviews of school principals regarding the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that support, or hinder, the implementation of school-wide positive behavior systems, such as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). The findings were analyzed through the Clark and Estes Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) framework, and recommendations based on the findings were proposed. Due to the small sample size, the findings reported are not generalizable but illuminate the experiences and perceptions of one subgroup of a population of public school principals in implementing PBIS programs at their school sites. Further study is indicated into the knowledge, motivation, and organization factors that will support a comprehensive, Tier I implementation of basic constructs of PBIS (including explicitly taught behavior expectations, positive behavior recognition, and location specific behavior support) to promote prosocial student behavior and reduce the incidence of student disciplinary suspensions.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

PBIS and equity for African American students with and without disabilities: a gap analysis

PDF

Reducing suspensions through implementation of schoolwide PBIS

PDF

The characteristics of high schools that have successfully implemented Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

PDF

Analyzing middle school teachers’ implementation and sustainability of professional development regarding non-exclusionary discipline practices

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: a promising practices study from the administrator perspective

PDF

Positive behavior intervention support plan: a gap analysis

PDF

Racial disparities in U.S. K-12 suburban schools: an evaluation study

PDF

A qualitative examination of PBIS team members' perceptions of urban high school teachers' role in implementing tier 2 schoolwide positive behavior supports

PDF

The implementation of a positive behavior intervention and support plan to reduce suspension rates in a school district

PDF

An evaluation of the effectiveness of positive behavior intervention system at the high school level

PDF

KMO factors influencing the culturally responsive implementation of PBIS: a mixed-methods study

PDF

Teachers' classroom pedagogy and perception: In schools with high rates of exclusionary discipline practices for African American students

PDF

The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support at Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of teacher needs

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support in Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of site administrator needs

PDF

Decreasing racial disproportionalities within exclusionary discipline at the middle school level

PDF

4th space teaching: incorporating teachers' funds of knowledge, students' funds of knowledge, and school knowledge in multi-centric teaching

PDF

School disciplined reimagined: centering Black students in discipline policies

PDF

School-to-prison pipeline: an all-out assault on Black males in U.S. K-12 public schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Cord, Elizabeth Burns (author)

Core Title The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 07/27/2017

Defense Date 06/22/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag achievement,Clark and Estes,disparity,exclusionary school discipline,inequity,instructional leader,KMO,knowledge, motivation, and organization,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBIS,Positive,positive behavior interventions and supports,positive behavior support,Principal,professional development,school-wide positive behavior system,student discipline,suspension,SWPBS

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee chair), Baca, Reynaldo (committee member), Datta, Monique (committee member)

Creator Email elizabethcord@gmail.com,elizabethcord@pacbell.net

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-418051

Unique identifier UC11214631

Identifier etd-CordElizab-5653.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-418051 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CordElizab-5653.pdf

Dmrecord 418051

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Cord, Elizabeth Burns

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA