University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

1

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH SCHOOLS THAT HAVE SUCCESSFULLY
IMPLEMENTED POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

by

Ramiro Rubalcaba

___________________________________________________________________________

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

May 2015

Copyright 2015 Ramiro Rubalcaba

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

2
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my family who I love with all my heart and soul and who
has sacrificed and supported me throughout this journey. I specifically appreciate the support of
my loving wife, Wendy, who made it possible to dedicate the necessary time to complete this
study. I offer this work for my sons Angel and Samuel and hope that it will inspire them to
pursue their dreams and have a love of learning throughout their lives. I am very proud of both
of you for being loving, intelligent, and fun little boys. You kept me going during my most
challenging moments and reminded me of the priorities of my life.
I also dedicate this study to my parents who worked hard to offer a better life for my
sisters and I. In addition, I dedicate this work to my sisters and the rest of our extended family
and friends whose prayers and support helped me complete my doctorate. Finally to God, who
loves us and provides everything we need everyday.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to acknowledge people whose support facilitated and guided me through this
educational journey. I want to thank my dissertation Chair Dr. Pedro Garcia for inspiring me and
for making himself available whenever I needed him. The love and respect his students have for
him is a clear reflection of him being an outstanding human being. I want to thank the members
of my committee, Dr. Rudy Castruita and Dr. Michael Escalante whose serve as role models and
mentors and whose feedback pushed me to take my work to another level. I am grateful to the
wonderful staff at the Rossier School of Education Office for their support and to Dean Karen
Symms Gallagher for leading the efforts that make the school of education a world-class school
that is second to none. I want to thank and acknowledge my editor, Paul Bailey, who was
professional, supportive, and did an amazing job in helping me produce the final product.
I wholeheartedly want to thank and acknowledge several people and organizations that
supported me financially. The amazing team of Toyota Financial Services under the direction of
Mike Groff, with the help of Maggie Bazua and Anna Araujo, who faciltated an extremely
generous scholarship. This would not have been possible without you. Other scholarship
supporters include Dr. David Beltran, the Eli and Elizabeth Emery Stoops Foundation, and the
USC Deans Superintendent Advisory Group who all granted me the financial help I needed to
make my dream of attending USC and completing my doctorate a reality. It is because of people
and organizations like all of the above mentioned that opportunities are available to make our
dreams come true. You all make this world a better place by investing in education!

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study 9
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 13
Theoretical Framework 14
Importance of the Study 15
Limitations 15
Delimitations 16
Definition of Terms 16
Organization of the Dissertation 17
Chapter 2: Literature Review 18
Historical Background 18
Theoretical Framework 23
Related Studies 36
Summary 40
Chapter 3: Methodology 42
Purpose of the Study 42
Research Questions 43
Data Needed 44
Research Design 44
Summary 51
Chapter 4: Results 52
Participants of the Study 53
Process Used to Gather Data 56
Results for Research Question 1 57
Results for Research Question 2 62
Results for Research Question 3 70
Results for Research Question 4 74
Results for Research Question 5 79
Additional Findings 86
Discussion 93
Summary 97
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

5
Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions and Implications 99
Purpose of the Study 100
Findings 101
Implications 107
Recommendations for Future Research 110
Conclusions 111
References 115
Appendices 127
Appendix A: Certified Information Sheet 127
Appendix B: Certified Recruitment Letter 129
Appendix C: Consent Form for Interviews 130
Appendix D: Interview Protocol for Principals 131
Appendix E: Interview Protocol for PBIS Experts 136
Appendix F: School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET) Version 2.1 139
Appendix G: PBIS Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) Version 3.1 147
Appendix H: Self-Assessment Survey (SAS) Version 2.0 155
Appendix I: School-Wide Benchmarks of Quality (BOQ) 172
Appendix J: School-Wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) Version 2.1 190
Appendix K: Permission To Use Information from pbis.org For Educational 210
Citations
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Participants of the Study 55
Table 2. Participants to the Study School Demographics 56
Table 3. Research Question 1: The Role of the High School Principal for PBIS 62
Implementation
Table 4. Research Question 2: The Challenges for PBIS Implementation in High School 69
Table 5. Research Question 3: Resources for PBIS Implementation in High School 74
Table 6. Research Question 4: Professional Development for PBIS Implementation 78
in High School
Table 7. Research Question 5: Evaluation System for PBIS Implementation in High 86
School
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Four key elements of SWPBIS 24
Figure 2. Six guiding principles of SWPBIS 25
Figure 3. Continuum of school-wide instructional and positive behavioral 27
interventions and supports

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

8
ABSTRACT
Educational leaders have the responsibility of creating safe and effective learning environments
so that every student can achieve and be college and career ready. Accomplishing this goal has
become increasingly challenging considering that schools face fewer resources, a variety of
competing initiatives, and greater demands in regards to serving students with vast emotional,
learning, and behavioral needs. Schools traditionally have practiced reactionary and punitive
discipline such as suspension and expulsion to deal with discipline and safety without any
evidence that it corrects student behavior. Researchers have identified Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (PBIS) as a framework for assisting school personnel in selecting and
utilizing evidence-based interventions into an integrated continuum that improves academic and
behavioral outcomes for all students. There is however, limited research and application of PBIS
at the high school level, as a majority of the current research available tends to focus on the
elementary level. The purpose of this study is to examine the characteristics of successful
School-wide PBIS implementation at the high school level through a qualitative study that
consisted of interviews of five high school principals that have successfully implemented PBIS
school-wide and five experts in the field of PBIS. The responses of all of the participants were
compared to the literature on PBIS in order to triangulate the data and find patterns that would
provide insight to key elements for successful PBIS implementation at the high school level,
from a practitioners and experts’ perspective. The study found emerging themes centered on
leadership, challenges to implementation, resources, professional development, and evaluation.
The researcher concluded that leadership and role of the high school principal are the most
critical factors for the successful and sustainable implementation of PBIS school-wide at the high
school level.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

9
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Educators are responsible for creating safe and effective learning environments that
support all students to learn and achieve and that prepare them to be college and career-ready
(Lassen, Steele, & Sailor, 2006). Schools however have struggled to meet this expectation as
educators face many challenges with competing initiatives, less resources, and students with
needs such as their behavior being a hindrance to their own learning or the learning of others
(Colvin, Kame’enui, & Sugai, 1993; Cotton, 1990; Dwyer, Osher, & Warger, 1998; Quinn,
Osher, Hoffman, & Hanley, 1998).
Dealing with discipline and safety, and creating safe and effective learning environments
consumes a significant amount of time and resources (Lassen et al., 2006; Rose & Gallup, 2006;
Simonsen, Sugai, & Negron, 2008) and has shifted to the top of educational concerns and
agendas (American Psychological Association Zero-Tolerance Task Force [APA], 2008; Storch,
Brassard, & Masia-Warner, 2003). In addition highly publicized school shootings, acts of
violence, and increased bullying incidents have moved schools to resort to get tough and zero-
tolerance approaches that are exclusionary and punitive (Bohanon, Flannery, Mallory, &
Fenning, 2009; Simonsen et al., 2008).
Educators across the nation have struggled with addressing student misconduct and this
challenge has an effect on all stakeholders (Scott, Park, Swain-Bradway, & Landers, 2007;
Simonsen et al., 2008). A national survey Public Agenda (2004) found that 76% of teachers felt
that they could be more effective teachers if it weren’t for the discipline problems and one in
three teachers considered leaving the teaching profession due to discipline problems and a lack
of administrative support (Public Agenda, 2004).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

10
Over the past few decades, out of school suspension rates are on the rise as schools are
adopting zero-tolerance and get tough approaches to attempt to discourage the likelihood of
future incidents (Bohanon et al., 2009; Losen & Skiba, 2010). As a result, more administrators
across the nation are resorting to reactive, exclusionary, and punitive measures such as
reprimands, detentions, and suspensions with minimal or no effect to correcting student
misconduct (APA, 2008; Losen & Martinez, 2013; Sprick, 2009). The U.S. Department of
Education’s Office of Civil Rights released on March 2014, the School Discipline Data Snapshot
and reported that with an approximate enrollment of 49 million students in the United States,
there were 3.5 million in-school suspensions, 1.9 million single out of school suspensions, and
130,000 expulsions (Office for Civil Rights [OCR], 2014). This data should be of grave concern
for students, parents, educational leaders, politicians and the entire nation and begs the question
as to what can be done to address the matter of student discipline and safety.
In 1997, Congress amended the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and required
that schools and districts use alternative disciplinary measures like Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports (PBIS) strategies for students who have an Individualized Education
Plan (IEP) and are experiencing poor academic and/or behavioral outcomes, or whose behavior
impedes their own learning or the learning of others (IDEA, 2004). The reason for congress
encouraging the use of PBIS is the result of two primary factors: (1) the historic exclusion of
individuals with disabilities and (2) the strong research and evidence-base of PBIS in positively
supporting students to improve academic and behavioral outcomes (PBIS, 2015a).
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a school-based prevention
model that uses a three-tiered continuum of interventions. The use of these interventions is
intended to prevent problem behaviors, reduce the number of significant problem behaviors that
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

11
occur, and decrease the impact of these problem behaviors on the school community (Sugai &
Horner, 2006). Research on PBIS demonstrates favorable outcomes in regards to student
behavior and promising strategies to lower suspension rates by utilizing proactive, learning and
preventive approaches, versus reactive punitive approaches like school suspensions (Bohanon et
al., 2006; Chin, Dowdy, Jimerson, & Rime, 2012; Bradshaw, Mitchell, & Leaf, 2010). Schools
that use PBIS strategies have shown encouraging results such as the lowering of suspensions,
less office referrals, and overall better school climate (Bohanon et al., 2006; Chin et al., 2012;
Bradshaw, Mitchell, O’Brennan, & Leaf, 2010; Curtis, Van Horne, Robertson, & Karvonen,
2010; Muscott, Mann, & LeBrun, 2008). In addition research has demonstrated that the use of
PBIS may improve successful academic and social outcomes (Bohanon et al., 2009, Curtis, Van
Horne, Robertson, & Karvonen, 2010; Lassen et al., 2006; Luiselli, Putnam, Handler, &
Feinberg, 2005; McIntosh, Chard, Boland, & Horner, 2006).
Despite the research that shows that school suspensions are not only ineffective, but also
counterproductive, school suspension continues to be amongst the most commonly used forms of
discipline (Cameron, 2006; Sugai & Horner, 2008; Dupper, 1994). Students who are suspended
are excluded from receiving instruction anywhere ranging from a class period to 10 or more
instructional school days depending on the violation and school or district policies (Christle,
Jolivette, & Nelson, 2005). These exclusionary and punitive consequences may worsen the
academic performance of students who have the greatest need of improvement and support and
exacerbate a cycle of failure (APA, 2008; Gregory, Noguera, & Skiba, 2010).
There is very compelling data in regards to the negative impact of students who are
suspended. Students who have been suspended at least one day compared to those who had not
been suspended are two times more likely to drop out (Balfanz, Byrnes, & Fox, 2013), tend to
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

12
have lower academic achievement, and are at higher risk of having contact with the juvenile
justice system (Carter, Fine, & Russell, 2014). Those same students were found to be two
reading levels behind the first year and up to almost five years behind two years later (Arcia,
2006). Carter, Fine, and Russell, (2014) stated, “The evidence is clear: excessive discipline
harms all students, teachers, and school cultures” (p. 1).
Another problem regarding suspension and expulsion is that historically, students of color
and students with special needs are disproportionately the recipients of school discipline (APA,
2008; Gregory et al., 2010; OCR, 2014). Wallace, Goodkind, Wallace, and Backman (2008)
found that approximately 50% of Black students reported that they had ever been suspended or
expelled compared with approximately 20% of White students. According to the U.S.
Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights African American students are suspended
more than three times as often as White students.
Other research has found that frequent suspensions, negatively impacts academic
achievement as being suspended significantly increases the risk of academic underperformance
(Carter et al., 2014; Christle et al., 2005; Losen & Martinez, 2013). Students who continuously
struggle with academic underperformance may become frustrated, disengaged, have lower self-
efficacy, which leads to misconduct (Miles & Stipek, 2006) and eventually withdrawal and
dropout (Balfanz et al., 2013; Gregory et al., 2010; Losen & Martinez, 2013).
Statement of the Problem
Schools have used reactive punitive measures such as suspensions and expulsions to deal
with student misconduct without any evidence that it improves student behavior (APA, 2008;
Muscott et al., 2008). The research shows that PBIS can be an effective school-wide model to
prevent student misconduct, improve student behavior and school climate (Bohanon et al., 2006;
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

13
Losen & Martinez, 2013; Muscott et al., 2008; APA, 2008; Warren et al., 2006), however there
is limited research on the application of PBIS at the high school level as a majority of the
research has focused primarily at the elementary setting (Bohanon et al., 2006). This study will
identify and examine the perceived characteristics of high schools that have successfully
implemented PBIS school-wide according to the principals and experts in the field of PBIS
perspective.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify and examine the characteristics of high school
communities that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide as determined by a
qualitative study that consists of interviews of high school principals and experts in the field of
PBIS regarding the implementation of PBIS school-wide at a high school setting. Given that the
research demonstrates that PBIS is an effective strategy to improve both academic and
behavioral outcomes for students, the researcher hopes to capture the insight from experts that
train school practitioners in PBIS implementation and from principals that have successfully
implmented PBIS school-wide. There are five areas that the study will focus on: (1) leadership
and the administrative role, (2) challenges faced when implementing PBIS, (3) the resources that
are needed for successful implementation of PBIS, (4) the professional development for PBIS
implementation, and (5) the evaluation of PBIS implementation at the high school level. The
following questions will guide this study:
1. What is the perceived role of the high school principal in regards to the
implementation of PBIS school-wide?
2. What are the challenges faced when a high school begins the implementation of PBIS
school-wide?
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

14
3. What resources if any are needed in order for a high school to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide?
4. What type of professional development is needed in order to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide at the high school level?
5. What type of evaluation system was utilized in order to determine that PBIS is
successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level?
Theoretical Framework
The origins of PBIS can be found in special education legislation, Behaviorism Theory
and Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). George Sugai, Rob Horner, and colleagues at the
University of Oregon were among the first to apply PBIS strategies school-wide in order to
address problem behaviors. The Positive Behavior Supports (PBS) model that is based on the
theory of behavior modification was intended to improve and expand interventions for people
with severe problem behaviors and developmental disabilities (Horner, Sugai, & Anderson,
2010; Sugai & Horner, 2006). Over the years, PBS has been expanded to be used in schools,
homes and in communities (Skiba & Sprague, 2008; Sugai & Horner, 2006). School-wide
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) is defined as “a systems approach to
establishing the social cultural and behavioral supports needed for all children to achieve both
social and academic success” (Horner & Sugai, 2009, p. 1). Sugai and Horner further state that
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) is not a packaged
curriculum but rather an approach or framework with four core elements that can be
accomplished through a variety of research and evidenced-based strategies. The PBIS Model in
schools offers schools a prevention-focused approach, through the explicit teaching of behavioral
expectations, research validated practices, data-driven decision making, and positive interactions.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

15
The PBIS model uses positive interventions to correct student misconduct rather than punitive
consequences such as suspensions and expulsions (Horner & Sugai, 2009; Horner et al., 2010;
Sugai, Horner, & Lewis, 2009; Bohanon et al., 2006).
Importance of the Study
The importance of this study is that it will provide school leaders with a greater
understanding of PBIS and encourage schools to implement PBIS school-wide in order to
prevent and reduce student misconduct, provide a safe and effective learning environment, and to
promote a positive school climate. The research shows that PBIS can be an effective model for
preventing student misconduct and improving student behavior (Bohanon et al., 2006; Muscott et
al., 2008; Warren et al., 2006) however, there is limited research as to the characteristics of high
schools that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide at the high school level (Bohanon
et al., 2006). Therefore, this study will provide further evidence for using PBIS as a research-
based model and provide the perspective of both principals who have successfully implemented
PBIS effectively school-wide and the perspective of experts in the field of PBIS, with the hope to
help practitioners prevent and reduce student misconduct and improve school climate at the high
school level.
Limitations
There are limitations to this study. One of the limitations is that the results of this study
are reflective of the perceptions of five school sites and may not be generalized to other schools
with similar or different demographics. A second limitation is that the levels of understanding of
PBIS and the involvement in the implementation process of the principal and experts in the field
of PBIS may vary significantly based on their role, training, and experience. A third limitation is
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

16
that the culture and climate of high schools is very different to that of elementary and middle
schools and the findings may not be applicable to those levels.
Delimitations
There is an assumption that the principals who participated in this study have been
trained and have the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational resources to lead the
implementation of PBIS school-wide. There is a second assumption that the principal and other
school leaders have provided the school faculty and staff the necessary resources, training, funds,
and time in order to implement PBIS with 100% fidelity school-wide. There is a third
assumption that faculty and staff members have implemented PBIS school-wide with at least
80% fidelity. There is a fourth assumption that a system to evaluate the implementation of PBIS
was utilized at the school site by the principals and or other school leaders.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions will be helpful for the reader and defined as they were used in
this study:
Office Disciplinary Referral (ODR): A formal documentation of an individual student’s
conduct filed by a teacher or other staff member. This referral is documented on a form
developed by the school leadership team and sent to the counselor or administrator depending on
the severity of the offense.
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support (PBIS): A research based school-wide
model of behavioral expectations and rewards designed to prevent student misconduct and to
improve social and academic success for all students (Sugai & Horner, 2002).
School Evaluation Tool (SET): A tool used to assess the fidelity of implementation of
PBIS (PBIS, 2015c).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

17
Suspension: The removal of a student from the school setting and related events for a
certain period of time; ranging from one period of class up to as much as 10 days (Christle et al.,
2005).
Zero tolerance: A policy that mandates predetermined consequences that are usually
punitive in nature that are to be applied regardless of the circumstances or consequences (APA,
2008).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is organized into five chapters and follows APA formatting guidelines.
Chapter 1 provides an overview of the study and is divided into an introduction, background of
the problem, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, importance of the study, limitations
and delimitations of the study, definition of terms and the organization of the study. Chapter 2
consists of a literature review of PBIS. This is a synthesis, evaluation, analysis, and criticisms of
the body of literature in regards to PBIS. In addition it is a presentation of the general topics
within PBIS and a presentation of theories. Chapter 3 is the methodology section that describes
this qualitative study. The sample and population used, criteria for the selection of the sample,
selection process, sampling issues, and a description of the population from which the population
was drawn are all described in this chapter. Also in this chapter there is an explanation of the
instrumentation used and the procedures for data collection. Chapter 4 is the section that focuses
on results. It is a reporting of the findings and an analysis of the results revealed from the
procedure performed in Chapter 3 and is organized by research question. Chapter 5 is the
conclusion of the dissertation. This section is primarily a summary of the study and the findings.
It also offers implications for practice and suggestions for future research.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

18
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This section consists of a review of the literature related to PBIS and includes (1) a
historical background of PBIS and its origin and development, (2) the theoretical framework of
PBIS, (3) related previous studies on PBIS and, (4) a summary.
Historical Background
The origins of PBIS are deeply grounded in strategies and interventions that were
developed in special education. Historically, students with disabilities were not treated equally
and were often denied a free and public education. In 1919, the Beattie v. Board of Education
case denied a student with special needs access to a public education ruling that the presence of a
student with a disability would be harmful to the school and unfair to other students (LaNear &
Fraturra, 2007).
There have been several court rulings that have contributed to the development of PBIS.
The 1998 Honig v. Doe Supreme Court case ruled that schools cannot suspend or expel students
with disabilities for more than 10 school days without conducting a formal hearing to determine
if the student’s behavior was a manifestation of their disability. The Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act of 2004 (IDEA, 2004) called for educators to use strategies such as PBIS and
Functional Behavior Analysis for students with special needs, who displayed poor academic or
behavioral outcomes, or whose behavior impedes the student’s own learning or the learning of
others (Warren et al., 2006). This challenge to meet the needs of all students is further
complicated in the face of more competing initiatives and fewer resources (Sugai & Horner,
2006).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

19
Creating a safe learning environment and addressing matters of school discipline, rose to
the top of educational agendas with increased school violence and concerns about student
behavior impeding learning (Storch et al., 2003). In 1994, during the Clinton administration, the
Gun-Free Schools Act was passed by Congress to confront the issue of school violence. School
suspension rates were on the rise as schools were adopting zero-tolerance and get tough
approaches to respond to school violence and misconduct in hopes of reducing future incidents
(APA, 2008; Bohanon et al., 2009). In 2001, the Bush administration passed NCLB which was
reauthorized in 2004 and called for schools to not only address student academic outcomes with
every student reaching proficiency by 2014, but the act also included educators creating safe and
effective learning environments where all students could succeed (No Child Left Behind
[NCLB], 2002).
As high profile school shootings occurred and school discipline and safety shifted to the
top of educational agendas (Storch et al., 2003; Bohanon et al., 2009) a need was also identified
for improved behavioral interventions for students with behavior disorders (BD) (Sugai &
Simonsen, 2012). In response, researchers at the University of Oregon began a series of applied
demonstrations, research studies, and evaluation projects. Their findings were that more attention
should be given toward prevention, research-based practices, data-based decision-making,
school-wide systems, explicit social skills instruction, team-based implementation and
professional development, and student outcomes (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012).
George Sugai, Rob Horner and other researchers from the University of Oregon are
considered the founders of PBIS and were the first to apply a systems approach based on
behaviorism theories to prevent and address student misconduct (Warren et al., 2006; Curtis et
al., 2010). School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) involves a
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

20
variety of strategies to improve student behavior and achievement through the use of proactive,
preventive, and positive systematic techniques that are consistently and faithfully implemented
(Warren et al., 2006; Sprick, 2009; Scheuermann & Hall, 2008).
In the 1997 reauthorization of IDEA, PBIS was introduced and a grant to establish a
national Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports was legislated to disseminate
and provide technical assistance to schools on PBIS strategies for students with Behavioral
Disorders (BD). Given the results of their work in the 1980s, researchers at the University of
Oregon successfully competed for the opportunity to develop the PBIS Center which is currently
in its 14
th
year (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012).
Over the past 17 years PBIS has emerged not only to satisfy the mandates of IDEA and
NCLB, but also as an approach to establishing a positive learning environment that meets the
needs of students with behavioral issues (Sugai & Horner, 2006).
Disproportionality
Another factor that has influenced the development of PBIS is the disproportionality of
school discipline with students with special needs and minority students (APA, 2008; Fenning &
Rose, 2007; Townsend, 2000; Gregory et al., 2010; Skiba et al., 2011). For over thirty years the
overrepresentation of minority students and students with special needs in the administration of
school discipline has been well documented (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975; Fenning & Rose,
2007; Gregory et al., 2010; Losen & Martinez, 2013; OCR, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011). Gregory et
al. (2010) stated that what is widely viewed as the achievement gap between White and African
American students could equally be termed the “discipline gap” in that education in the United
States has never been equalized for minority students, particularly African American students.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

21
The Office For Civil Rights reported that across all districts, African American students
are currently 3½ times more likely to be suspended or expelled than their White peers. In
districts that reported expulsions under the zero-tolerance polices, Hispanic and African-
American students represent 45% of the student body, but 56% of the students expelled under
such polices. It also reported that over 70% of students involved in school-related arrests or
referred to law enforcement are Hispanic and African-American (Office for Civil Rights, 2012).
According to a nationally representative study, 1 in 5 African American students (19.6%) were
suspended, compared with fewer than 1 in 10 white students (8.8%) and (6.4%) Asian Pacific
Islanders (Kewel Ramani, Gilbertson, Fox, & Provansik, 2007).
Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain why minority students are
disproportionately overrepresented in matters of school discipline. Gregory et al. (2010) suggest
that there may exist a “cultural mismatch” between the classroom or teacher culture and the
culture of the minority students, which can influence the teacher’s perception and bias toward
handling misconduct. APA (2008) found that reasons for referring African American students
were more likely to occur in response to student behaviors that were more subjective in nature in
comparison to White students’ office referrals that tended to be more objectively observable. For
example Gregory et al. (2010) suggested that the unfamiliarity of predominantly White female
teachers in our school system may interpret African American males common emotive or
impassioned interactions as confrontational or challenging the teacher’s authority.
Studies show that students who reside in low socio-economic communities are more
likely to be exposed to violence, crime, poverty, and as a result are more likely to be irritable,
anxious and hyper-vigilant. These conditions may have a negative impact on their behavior and
cause them to receive more discipline referrals (Gregory et al., 2010). However, Gregory et al.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

22
(2010) also noted that research shows that SES does not explain the racial discipline gap as
race/ethnicity remains a significant predictor even after statistically controlling student SES
(Wallace et al., 2008).
Students who are suspended are excluded from receiving instruction anywhere ranging
from a class period to 10 or more instructional school days depending on the misconduct and
school or district policies. These exclusionary and punitive consequences may worsen the
academic performance of students who have the greatest need of improvement and support
(Gregory et al., 2010). Students who have been suspended at least one day compared to those
who had not been suspended, were three reading levels behind. Those same students were almost
five years behind two years later (Arcia, 2006). Arcia also noted that large proportions of
minorities are the students that receive at least one suspension. Wallace et al. (2008) found that
approximately 50% of Black students reported that they had ever been suspended or expelled
compared with approximately 20% of White students.
Frequent suspensions negatively impacts academic achievement as they significantly
increase the risk of academic underperformance (Davis & Jordan, 1995). Students who
continuously struggle with academic underperformance may become frustrated, disengaged,
have lower self-efficacy and lead to misconduct (Miles & Stipek, 2006) and eventually
withdrawal and dropout (Gregory et al., 2010).
PBIS is described as a paradigm shift from reactive, punitive, and exclusionary practices
of the administration of school discipline toward research-based positive, proactive, preventative,
and systematic approaches (Warren et al., 2006; Sprick, 2009; Curtis et al., 2010). In the
following section I will describe the theoretical framework of PBIS, the primary purpose of
PBIS, and its guiding principles.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

23
Theoretical Framework
PBIS is based on the theory of applied behavioral analysis which focuses on the behavior
of an individual and the relationship with the environment in which they are observed (Sugai &
Horner, 2006). Horner et al. (2010) state that the primary goal of PBIS is to prevent misconduct,
reduce student misbehavior, and increase student engagement and achievement. The PBIS model
offers an approach or a framework to problem behaviors that includes: a prevention-focused
system of support, strategies to improve social skills, data informed decision making, and
positive interventions instead of punitive consequences that lead to suspension (Bohanon et al.,
2006; Warren et al., 2006). PBIS is further described as an “implementation framework that is
designed to enhance academic and social behavior outcomes for all students” (Sugai &
Simonsen, 2012, p. 1).
PBIS Key Elements
PBIS is guided by four key integrated elements (Sugai & Horner, 2002; Sugai & Horner
2006). The four major elements (see Figure 1) are the following: (a) outcomes, (b) practices, (c)
use of data, and (d) systems. A first step for schools is to establish measurable and attainable
long-term academic and behavioral or social goals. For example these behavioral targets can
consist of decreasing incidents of disruptive behaviors. These expectations are taught and
monitored by all staff members in order to accomplish the targeted goal (Sugai & Horner, 2002).
Second, research-based practices to achieve the school-based outcomes must be relevant and
appropriate for the age group and setting of each school. For example, at the high school level,
students can learn of the importance of respect as it is related to the language they use or their
dress code. A third component is the use of data. The school uses data to evaluate the outcomes
of the current practices and to determine or justify the selection of new practices. Finally, the
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

24
school looks at the system supports such as policy, funding, training, and personnel. These
systems will help ensure the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide and its
sustainability (Sugai & Horner, 2002, 2006).

Figure 1. Four key elements of SWPBIS. Source: pbis.org. Used with permission.

Guiding Principles
There are six principles that guide the four key elements in the implementation of PBIS
school-wide (See Figure 2). The first principle is the use of a continuum of research-based
academic and behavioral interventions. The second principle is the collection of and analysis of
data in order to make decisions and solve problems. The third principle of School-wide PBIS is
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

25
the arrangement of the physical environment in a manner that facilitates the prevention of student
misconduct. The fourth guiding principle is the explicit teaching and encouragement of positive
behavioral expectations. The fifth guiding principle of SWPBIS is the implementation integrity
of research and evidence-based behavioral practices and monitoring the implementation of these
practices. The sixth and final principle in the implementation of PBIS school-wide is the
continuous monitoring of student academic and behavioral performance and progress and
making changes as needed (Sugai & Horner, 2006).

Figure 2. Six guiding principles of SWPBIS. Source: pbis.org. Used with permission.

Three Tiered Continuum of Interventions
School-wide PBIS (SWPBIS) consists of a systematic prevention model based on
Response to Intervention (RTI) that emphasizes a three-tiered continuum of interventions (Sugai
& Horner, 2006) (see Figure 3). RTI is the basis to provide interventions and support in order to
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

26
promote the success of all students (McIntosh et al., 2006). Sugai and Horner (2006) state that
the intent is to apply these interventions in order to prevent the development of problem
behaviors, reduce the occurrence of problem behaviors, and decrease the impact of the
misconduct upon the school community. I will describe the three levels of prevention in the
following section.
Primary Prevention
The first tier or primary prevention focuses on preventing problems for all students and
the entire school. The idea is to explicitly teach social skills by reinforcing the expected
behaviors and clearly communicating the consequences for inappropriate behaviors in order to
maximize academic achievement and prevent student misbehavior (Sugai & Horner, 2002).
Included in this tier is the importance of school-wide systems that promote positive relationships
between staff and students. According to Sugai and Horner (2006), PBIS is a model intended to
prevent student misconduct, reduce the frequency of student misbehaviors, and improve the
school climate by reinforcing positive behaviors. Approximately 80% of students will respond to
the instruction and expectations of primary prevention and will not require further interventions
(Bender & Shores, 2007). Students that do not respond to primary prevention will be provided
more intensive secondary and tertiary interventions.
Secondary Prevention
The second tier (see Figure 3) or secondary prevention consists of specialized prevention
systems for a small portion or groups (approximately 15%) of students who display at-risk
behaviors (Sugai & Horner, 2006). This level of prevention uses group-based intervention
strategies, (i.e., tutoring or group counseling) for academic, personal, and social support. This
second level also provides individualized supports such as a Check-in Check-out program that
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

27
partners an individual student with an adult mentor who monitors or checks on the student
throughout the day to help the student improve academically and socially. Secondary prevention
may involve the assistance of teachers, school psychologist, counselors, and members of the
school community to provide assistance at this level. Approximately 15% of students will require
secondary prevention interventions (Bender & Shores, 2007). Students that do not respond to
secondary prevention interventions are provided more rigorous individualized tertiary
interventions.

Figure 3. Continuum of school-wide instructional and positive behavioral interventions and
supports. Source: pbis.org. Used with permission.

Primary Prevention:
School-/Classroom-
Wide Systems for
All Students,
Staff, & Settings
Secondary Prevention:
Specialized Group
Systems for Students
with At-Risk Behavior
Tertiary Prevention:
Specialized
Individualized
Systems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
CONTINUUM OF
SCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL &
POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

28
Tertiary Prevention
The third tier of the continuum (see Figure 3) is the tip of the triangle and targets
approximately 3-5% of the student population. This third level of prevention consists of intensive
individualized measures for students who do not respond to primary and secondary practices
(Sugai & Horner, 2006). At this level an expert team that could include a school psychologist,
counselor, teachers, administrator and others, would convene to conduct a functional behavior
assessment, collect data on the students behavior and history, set goals, and create a behavior
support plan to help the students improve their behavior (Sprick, 2009).
Traditional approaches to student misbehavior are reactive and wait for the misconduct to
occur and then impose punitive consequences that do little to change student behavior (Skiba et
al., 2008) and may lead to students dropping out of the educational system (Balfanz et al., 2013;
Sprick, 2009). The difference between PBIS and traditional disciplinary practices is that PBIS
provides schools with strategies to reinforce positive behavioral expectations and intervene early
to address student misconduct.
PBIS and the Administrative Role
One of the areas of focus for this study is to examine the role of the high school principal
for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide and to establish the importance of
administrative support in the successful and sustainable implementation of PBIS. The literature
underscores the importance of administrative support for both successful and sustainable
implementation and describes the role of administration in regards to PBIS implementation. Dr.
Rudy Castruita stated that the principal of a high school is the “captain of a ship” (Castruita,
2014, personal communication) and plays a vital role for the implementation of school-wide
initiatives such as PBIS at the high school level (Castruita, 2014, personal communication). The
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

29
principal must support and make the implementation of PBIS a top priority placing PBIS on the
agenda at staff meetings, motivating staff, allocating resources, establishing a leadership team by
selecting the right people, and participating in the planning and implementation of PBIS school-
wide (Handler et al., 2007; Kasper, 2004; Putnam & Hehl, 2004; Kincaid, Childs, Blasé, &
Wallace, 2007; Muscott et al., 2008). Kasper (2004) states that it is important for the principal to
be a strong visible presence, a “forward thinker” who can set long-term goals, an allocator of the
necessary resources, a motivator who can speak the language and model the expectations, and an
enforcer that will hold the team accountable in order to ensure faculty and staff members are
implementing PBIS with fidelity. Netzel and Eber (2003) state that the principal’s leadership in
particular is important for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide.
PBIS Implementation Challenges for High School
A review of the literature revealed that there are unique challenges to implementing PBIS
at the high school level (Bohanon-Edmonson, Flannery, Eber, & Sugai, 2005). Some of the
challenges consist of (1) the size of high schools, (2) the organization of high schools by content
area or departments and their bell schedules, (3) the age group, and (4) a recent shift in focus
toward accountability for academic outcomes.
One challenge unique to high schools that implement PBIS is their enrollment size. High
schools typically are larger than elementary and middle schools. The number of students and
teachers, number of academic areas, the organization by departments, and multiple
administrators and coordinators increases the challenge of implementing PBIS in high schools
(Bohanon et al., 2006; Bohanon et al., 2009). Other challenges of a large high school are that
students may not be familiar with other students and some of the commons areas like the
hallways, cafeteria, and restrooms are more crowded that in turn lend themselves to misconduct
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

30
(Sugai, Flannery, & Bohanon, 2004). Students in smaller schools are more visible to teachers and
other students, which allow students to develop relationships with their peers and instructors.
The large size of many high schools can make the implementing PBIS a challenge and increases
the likelihood of student discipline incidents (Bohanon et al., 2006).
Communication is another challenge facing large high schools that implement PBIS.
High schools are organized by departments and usually have department chairs, coordinators,
assistant principals and added layers that can inhibit or make communication a challenge.
Smaller schools tend to have less layers and communication can be more direct and effective
(Bohanon et al., 2009).
Another challenge to implementing PBIS in high schools is the stricture of the school day
and schedule. High school teachers have large classes and see students typically once a day for
approximately one-hour periods. This can result in being responsible for large numbers of
students and can present a challenge for personalization and accountability of students’ academic
and behavioral outcomes. At the elementary versus the secondary level, teachers have fewer
students and work with them all day versus one hour a day. This allows for more personalization
and opportunity to build deeper relationships (Sprick, 2009).
Anyone who has experience working with teenagers knows that it is a challenging time in
their lives. Teenagers are searching to discover their identities, want autonomy, and often defy or
challenge authority. During these teenage years they often learn and are influenced more by their
peers than adults (Bohanon et al., 2009). Bohanon et al. (2009) further state that high schools are
filled with teenagers and are faced with the challenge of providing the right environment that
respects these young people and the internal challenges they face while maintaining an effective
learning environment.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

31
A final challenge high schools face according to Sugai et al. (2004) is the shift to
preparing students to be college and career ready and a focus on instruction. In general the
format of high schools is much different than elementary and even middle schools. The
instructional delivery is more of a lecture format; students are required to be more independent;
credits must be earned to satisfy requirements, and exit exams must be passed in order to
graduate (Sugai et al., 2004). Teenagers are not always prepared to meet these challenges and
schools are required to provide the resources and interventions necessary in order to meet local,
state and federal mandates, and increase student achievement. These competing initiatives can
result in challenges to focusing on initiatives such as PBIS (Sugai et al., 2004).
PBIS and Resources for High School Implementation
As with any initiative, a high school principal must be willing to invest resources to make
its implementation successful. High School principals must be willing to allocate funds for PBIS
such as training fees, time for PBIS team meetings, substitute pay, stipends, printing or materials
costs, incentive items, promotional materials, and other items that the team feels necessary for
successful implementation (Kasper, 2004). Some school districts provide school funds for PBIS
implementation and include this funding as a part of their single plans while other schools with
limited resources utilize external partners such as booster clubs, PTA, community business
partners, and grants to support their PBIS implementation efforts (George & Martinez, 2007).
PBIS and Professional Development
An essential component of successful PBIS implementation is providing training for the
leadership team (McKevitt & Braaksma, 2008; Simonsen et al., 2008). There are a variety of
sources that can provide the training for districts or school sites. Some of these sources include
department of education experts, county or district experts, training from independent PBIS
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

32
experts, conferences, and The Office of Special Education Programs National Technical
Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports provides a PBIS state
expert or coach to assist teams with training, resources, and implementation of PBIS (2015b).
Once the PBIS Leadership Team is established and buy in is obtained, training typically
consists of providing the conceptual framework, guiding principles, key elements, and a
“blueprint” (PBIS, 2015b) to PBIS implementation. In addition there are a variety of instruments
such as the Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) to assist with implementation need and the
integrity of PBIS implementation. The training of the PBIS Leadership is in a sense the training
of the trainers who will then be the team that leads the school’s faculty and staff through training
and PBIS implementation (McKevitt & Braaksma, 2008; Simonsen et al., 2008).
The training of a school’s faculty and staff as mentioned above is the responsibility of the
PBIS Leadership team that includes the administration, teachers, parents, students, classified
staff, and any other representative stakeholders. McKevitt and Braaksma (2008) state that the
training could take place during staff meetings, professional development days, or whenever the
PBIS Leadership deems would be most convenient and effective. They further state that training
should be on-going and embedded within the professional development for the year in order to
sustain implementation, celebrate efforts, and provided assistance as needed (McKevitt &
Braaksma, 2008). Professional development for full implementation according McKevitt and
Braaksma may take approximately three to five years for full implementation.
PBIS and Evaluation
There are several tools that can be utilized to evaluate the fidelity of implementing PBIS
and several goals that can be established that determine successful implementation. According to
PBIS (2015c) the primary assessment tools for PBIS are (1) the School-wide Evaluation Tool
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

33
(SET) (Appendix F), (2) the Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) (Appendix G), (3) The Self -
Assessment Survey (SAS) (Appendix H), (4) the PBIS School-wide Benchmarks of Quality
(BOQ) (Appendix I), and (5) The Tiered Fidelity Implementation Tool (TFI) (Appendix J).
There are many other tools but this study will focus on the five mentioned above.
The School Evaluation Tool (SET) is a reliable, research-validated instrument that
measures if PBIS is implemented with fidelity (Muscott et al., 2008). The SET is a survey that is
completed by the faculty and staff of a school in order to produce data to be analyzed by an
evaluator. The evaluator then conducts interviews with faculty and staff members,
administrators, and students (McKevitt & Braaksma, 2008; Muscott et al., 2008). In order to be
considered a school that is successfully implementing PBIS, the SET scores in the areas of the
Average of Features and the Expectations Taught Features must be at 80% or higher (Horner,
Todd, Lewis-Palmer, Irvin, Sugai, & Boland, 2004). There are however some areas of concern
that may inhibit school’s ability to use the SET as a viable tool: (1) the SET is time and labor
intensive requiring as much as 8 hours of training for evaluators, approximately 6 hours for
conducting and scoring the SET, in addition to pulling administrators, faculty and staff, and
students from their respective responsibilities (Cohen, Kincaid, & Childs, 2007). In addition,
Cohen et al. (2007) further state that the SET may not accurately measure the fidelity of a
school’s PBIS implementation due a school’s potential to receive a score of an 80% or higher in
the areas it measure but not having in place other key components such as faculty buy-in or
behavioral expectations being taught (Cohen et al., 2007).
The Team Implementation Checklist (TIC) is another self-evaluation tool that schools
utilize to measure the fidelity of their implementation and to assess the extent that PBIS
components are in place using three criteria: (1) in place, (2) partial in place, or (3) not in place.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

34
The PBIS Leadership Team completes the TIC twice a year and schools that have 80% or more
of the PBIS components in place are considered to be faithfully implementing PBIS (Muscott et
al., 2008).
The Self-Assessment Survey (SAS) also titled Effective Behavior Support Survey (EBS)
is as its title states a self-assessment tool that is completed by the faculty and staff typically
annually. The SAS consists of 46 items around four areas: (1) school-wide, (2) non-classroom,
(3) classroom, and (4) individual students that display chronic misbehavior. Schools are to rate
these items as (a) in place, (b) partial in place, or (c) not in place. Faculty and staff also have to
prioritize each system feature as either (high, medium, or low) priority to improve. The data
gathered are to be utilized for an annual assessment that can be given either at the beginning or at
the end of the year to make decisions and develop an action plan for implementing and
sustaining PBIS school-wide (PBIS, 2015c).
The School Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ) is a self-evaluation tool that schools can utilize
to measure the fidelity of their implementation efforts. It consists of a 53 item rating scale that
the PBIS Leadership Team completes around 10 subscales: (1) The PBIS Team, (2) Faculty
Commitment. (3) Effective Discipline Procedures, (4) Data Entry, (5) Expectations and Rules,
(6) Reward System, (7) Lesson Plans, (8) Implementation Plans, (9) Crisis Plans, and (10)
Evaluation. The BoQ measures several of the same components as the SET is more detailed and
includes other important elements that are not included in the SET. Schools that score 70% or
above on the SET are considered to be implementing PBIS with fidelity and tend to show
reductions in Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) (Cohen et al., 2007).
The last Self-Assessment Tool that this study will describe is the Tiered Fidelity
Inventory that consists of 43 items across the three tiers of PBIS Implementation: Tier I
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

35
(Universal PBIS) Whole School Universal Prevention, Tier II (Targeted PBIS) Secondary, Small
Group Prevention, and Tier III (Intensive PBIS) Tertiary, Individual Support Prevention. The
purpose of the School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory is to provide an efficient and valid
index of the extent to which PBIS core features are in place within a school. According to PBIS
(2015c), the School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) is intended to fulfill the same
functions as the: Team Implementation Checklist (TIC), Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ),
Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT), PBIS Self-Assessment Inventory (SAS), and the Phases
of Implementation (POI). The TFI addresses all three tiers, and focuses on those elements of
PBIS that are most “core” to achieving student outcomes. The primary purpose of the instrument
is to help school teams improve their PBIS efforts. The TFI is to be completed by the PBIS
Leadership Team, faculty, families and administrators of the school. According to PBIS (2015c)
effective use of the instrument requires multiple administrations throughout the year for the
following purposes (1) progress monitoring such as formative assessment to determine current
PBIS practices in place and those needed prior to launching implementation, (2) self-assessment
of PBIS practices by tier to guide implementation efforts, and assess progress by tier in order to
build an action plan to focus implementation efforts, (3) annual self-assessment in order to self-
assess annually to facilitate sustained implementation of PBIS, and (4) State Recognition in order
to determine schools warranting recognition for their fidelity of PBIS implementation (PBIS,
2015c). In summary, these are some of the primary components and areas specific to PBIS at the
high school level. The following section will focus on reviewing related studies in the area of
PBIS.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

36
Related Studies
The research shows that School-wide PBIS (SWPBIS) is an effective model to prevent,
reduce, and improve student misbehavior (Bohanon et al., 2006; Muscott et al., 2008; Skiba et
al., 2008; Warren et al., 2006). This section will consist of a review of related studies that
demonstrate PBIS is an effective model for the improvement of academic and behavioral
outcomes for students. In addition, the review of the literature will show gaps in the
implementation of PBIS at the high school level, which will further justify a need for this study.
A study by Bradshaw, Koth, Bevans, Ialongo, and Leaf (2008) conducted a randomized
trial of PBIS implementation by using the School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET) to measure PBIS
fidelity of implementation at the schools. This randomized trial included 21 schools that received
PBIS training and implemented PBIS and 16 schools that implemented PBIS without receiving
training. The data gathered was analyzed to determine the impact of PBIS training fidelity.
Bradshaw et al,. (2008) found that there was not a significant difference in overall SET scores.
They also found that after controlling for school district effects, schools trained in PBIS
implemented PBIS with greater fidelity than schools that were not trained. Conclusions from the
study included a better understanding regarding the implementation of PBIS in a school setting
(Bradshaw et al., 2008).
Bradshaw, Mitchell, and Leaf (2010) used data from a 5-year longitudinal randomized
controlled effectiveness trial of SWPBIS conducted in 37 elementary schools to study the impact
of training in PBIS on implementation fidelity as well as student suspensions, office discipline
referrals, and academic achievement. Bradshaw, Mitchell, and Leaf (2010) studied the impact of
training on Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) between schools that have been trained and
schools that have not been trained in PBIS. They found that schools that were trained in PBIS
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

37
reported significant reductions in the percentage of students receiving ODRs and in the school’s
overall rate of ODRs (Bradshaw, Mitchell, & Leaf, 2010).
A study by Lassen et al. (2006) consisted of examining the implementation of school-
wide PBIS as it relates to the relationship between the reduction in out-of-class referrals and
suspensions to student academic achievement. For this study, school-wide PBIS was
implemented in an urban, inner-city middle school in the Midwest over a 3-year period. Data on
ODRs, suspensions, standardized test scores, and fidelity of implementation were gathered and
analyzed. Lassen et al. (2006) found significant reductions in ODRs and suspensions and
increases in standardized math and reading scores. Additionally, Lassen et al. (2006) suggested
that there is a significant relationship between student behavior and academic achievement
performance.
The major implications of this study are that school-wide PBIS is an effective
intervention in reducing student problem behavior, increasing the time students are in classes,
and reducing the number of minutes administrators spend dealing with each ODR in urban
middle schools that have high rates of student misconduct. In addition, this study demonstrates
that PBIS may have a significant impact on improving student academic performance (Lassen et
al., 2006).
A study by Warren et al. (2006) points out that the implementation of School-wide PBIS
strategies have proven to be successful in various settings, but that the research at that time was
conducted primarily in middle class suburban schools. As a result, Lassen et al. (2006)
conducted a case study at an inner city middle school characterized by crime, poverty, and low
social economic status. This study took place in a middle school (approximately 737 students,
grades 6–8) in a mid-western city. The student body included 41% of students from African-
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

38
American families, 35% from Hispanic families, and 18% from European-American families.
Approximately 80% of the student body received free or reduced lunch.
This three-year study included the researchers establishing rapport and a relationship at
the school site, providing training to staff to assist with implementation of PBIS school-wide,
and gathered and analyzed data. Lassen et al.’s (2006) findings suggest that the establishment of
rapport and training for teachers is vital to the successful implementation of PBIS. They found a
reduction in office discipline referrals, suspensions, and noted that teachers, parents, and
administrators shared a noticeable improvement in school climate. These findings support the
generalizability of school-wide PBIS and its application to an urban middle school setting with
high rates of students with behavioral problems. Another key finding was in regards to the
methods used to train staff on PBIS. Lassen et al. (2006) stated that it was important to the study
that they used a variety of methods to support teachers addressing student behavior and
misconduct.
There are some areas that should be taken into consideration with the Lassen et al. (2006)
study. First, the researchers stated that there was not a formal method of looking at fidelity of
implementation. This is a concern when looking at school-wide PBIS implementation, because in
order to make generalizations about its effectiveness, the level of implementation should be
evaluated and documented. Another consideration as noted by Lassen et al. (2006) was that the
outcomes of the study may not necessarily be associated with increased positive behaviors but
that other factors such as teacher’s perceptions or tolerance may have contributed to the positive
outcomes.
As evident in the studies reviewed above, one of the gaps in PBIS literature is that most
of the studies were conducted in elementary and middle school setting and there is limited
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

39
research that focuses on the application of PBIS at the high school setting (Bohanon et al., 2006).
Bohanon et al. (2006) conducted a study on how PBIS at the high school level is different from
that the elementary and middle school level. A three year mixed-method study design was
utilized to (1) evaluate the impact of PBIS implementation at an urban high school setting in the
Chicago Public Schools and (2) to consider ways in which traditional PBIS approaches would
need to be modified in order to meet the unique needs of an urban high school (Bohanon et al.,
2006).
The quantitative measures used were associated with two areas: (a) process and (b)
outcomes. The process measures were three: (1) the School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET) to
measure the fidelity of implementation, (2) the Effective Behavior Support (EBS) Survey to
determine the level of implementation and priority in four areas: school-wide, classroom, non-
classroom (i.e., hallways) and individual supports, and (3) outcome data that included office
discipline referrals (ODRs) and climate survey data. The qualitative measures included
interviews, document reviews, and comprehensive field notes (Bohanon et al., 2006).
According to Bohanon et al. (2006) the study’s outcomes must be “tempered” with the
understanding that urban high schools have unique circumstances. For example, the high school
being studied had not reached full implementation according to the SET criteria in part because
of the large numbers of staff members at the high school level. Other challenges of the study
included teachers questioning the age appropriateness of the acknowledgement system that
teachers felt was “babyish” and should be used primarily in elementary and middle schools.
Another component that presented a challenge was getting staff to explicitly teach behavioral
expectations. Bohanon et al. (2006) found that behaviors were not consistently taught throughout
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

40
the study and that a system was needed in which teaching behavioral expectations occurred on a
regular basis and was embedded as a part of the regular instructional program.
Bohanon et al. (2006) found that their research data suggested that school-wide
implementation of PBIS in high school settings may be beneficial to students and staff with
results such as reducing Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) and increasing instructional time. At
the high school studies there was a reduction of ODRs from 6,000 referrals during the 2000-2001
school year to less than 1,800 during the 2002-2003 school year. Bohanon et al. (2006) suggested
that future research is needed to identify planning and implementation practices to establish a
school-wide PBIS model and evaluation systems that focus on the sustainability of PBIS efforts
in high schools.
Summary
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a proactive school-wide approach
to reinforcing positive behavioral expectations and reducing or preventing student misconduct
(PBIS, 2015c). PBIS is deeply grounded in strategies that were developed in special education
and surfaced from a need to address students with behavioral disorders and as a result of
legislation that called for Functional Behavioral Assessments and Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports like alternatives to suspension to be used with students who display
poor behavioral and academic outcomes. Despite the research that shows PBIS to be effective to
address and improve both behavioral and academic student outcomes, and the call from IDEA to
use strategies like PBIS; traditional, reactive, exclusionary and punitive measures such as
suspension and expulsion continue to be the most commonly used forms of school discipline,
with little or no effect on student behavior or achievement (Bohanon et al., 2006; Dupper, 1994;
Muscott et al., 2008; Skiba et al., 2008; Warren et al., 2006).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

41
The theoretical framework of PBIS is based on the theory of applied behavioral analysis
which focuses on the behavior of an individual and the relationship with the environment in
which they are observed (Sugai & Horner, 2006). There are four key integrated elements that
guide PBIS (Sugai & Horner, 2002, 2006). The four major elements are: (a) outcomes, (b)
practices, (c) use of data, and (d) systems. In addition there are six guiding principles for the four
key elements in the implementation of PBIS school-wide. The six principles are the use of a
continuum of research-based academic and behavioral interventions, the collection of and
analysis of data in order to make decisions and solve problems, the arrangement of the physical
environment in a manner that facilitates the prevention of student misbehavior, the explicit
teaching and encouragement of positive behavioral expectations, and the continuous monitoring
of student academic and behavioral performance and progress and making changes as needed.
School-wide PBIS (SWPBIS) consists of a systematic prevention model based on Response to
Intervention (RTI) that emphasizes a three-tiered continuum of interventions (Sugai & Horner,
2006). The research shows that School-wide PBIS (SWPBIS) is an effective model to prevent,
reduce, and improve student misbehavior (Bohanon et al., 2006; Muscott et al., 2008; Skiba et
al., 2008; Warren et al., 2006).
The literature review also points out that most of the PBIS literature has been conducted
in elementary settings with very few conducted at the middle school setting, and the least
conducted at the high school level. The researcher hopes to add to the body of literature that
supports the use of PBIS in high school settings and expects that the findings will encourage
school practitioners to utilize PBIS at their school sites in order to positively support students. In
the following chapter the researcher will describe the methodology utilized for this study.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

42
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a research based school-wide
model of behavioral expectations and rewards designed to prevent student misconduct and to
improve social and academic success for all students (Sugai & Horner, 2006). The previous
section above has shown that there is a relationship between school climate and academic
achievement, and that punitive and exclusionary measures such as suspension and expulsion are
detrimental to students (Sugai & Horner, 2006). Unfortunately the reality is that despite the
research and evidence regarding school suspension and expulsion, approximately 3.25 million
students are suspended each year in the United States (OCR, 2014) and being suspended just
once increases the likelihood of poorer academic achievement, increased recidivism rates,
increased potential to have contact with the juvenile justice system (Chin et al., 2012) and the
likelihood of dropping out of school increases by twofold (Balfanz et al., 2013). This data should
be of grave concern to students, parents, community members, and educational leaders as they
are responsible for creating safe and effective learning environments and search for models that
will facilitate the improved behavioral and academic outcomes for students. The research has
demonstrated PBIS to be a framework that educators can utilize to create positive, safe and
effective learning environments that can help all students succeed academically and socially
(Sugai & Horner, 2006). The following chapter will describe the data needed, the research
design, the process to gain entry, capture the data, and to analyze the data.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to add to the body of literature regarding PBIS by identifying
and examining the characteristics of high school communities that have successfully
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

43
implemented PBIS school-wide as determined by a qualitative study that consists of interviews
of principals and experts in the field of PBIS. The hope of the researcher is that this study will
reveal insight along with concrete tools for other practitioners to utilize in order to create positive
and effective learning environments needed for all children to experience both academic and
social success (Horner & Sugai, 2009). This study will examine (1) the role of the high school
principal related to PBIS implementation, (2) the potential challenges high schools may face as
they begin the implementation of PBIS, (3) the resources that may be needed in order for high
schools to successfully implement PBIS, (4) the professional development utilized by high
schools that successfully implement PBIS and (5) the evaluation systems utilized by schools that
have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide.
Research Questions
The following questions will guide this study:
1. What is the perceived role of the high school principal in regards to the
implementation of PBIS school-wide?
2. What are the challenges faced when a high school begins the implementation of PBIS
school-wide?
3. What resources if any are needed in order for a high school to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide?
4. What type of professional development does the principal and other school leaders
perceive is needed in order to successfully implement PBIS school-wide at the high
school level?
5. What type of evaluation system was utilized in order to determine that PBIS is
successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level?
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

44
Data Needed
In order to answer the five research questions, the researcher needs to obtain the
following data from principals and experts in the field of PBIS through interviews:
1. The knowledge and skills, motivation, and the organizational/cultural context needed
by the principal and other school leaders in order to implement PBIS school-wide.
2. The challenges they faced and continue to face as they implement PBIS school-wide.
3. The resources utilized in order to successfully implement PBIS school-wide.
4. The professional development provided to staff and other school leaders at the school
regarding PBIS for its implementation school-wide.
5. The structures, interactions, and information provided at meetings regarding PBIS.
6. The documents utilized and distributed by principals regarding PBIS.
7. The systems of evaluation utilized by schools to measure the success of
implementation.
8. The role of data, and concrete criteria such as inputs and outcomes before and after
the implementation of PBIS school-wide and progress toward specific school-wide
goals related to student behavior such as the number of Office Discipline Referrals,
school suspension rates, and school expulsion rates.
Research Design
For this study the researcher utilized a qualitative approach, consisting of interviews of
principals that have successfully implemented PBIS at a high school setting and of experts in the
field of PBIS. There are four major characteristics of qualitative research as described by
Merriam (2009).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

45
1. The first characteristic of qualitative research is to understand the meaning attributed
to individuals’ experiences. The focus of meaning people attribute to their
experiences is on the process rather than the outcome. The purpose of qualitative
research is used to study individuals’ understanding of their experiences, not
researchers’ perceptions of individuals’ experiences or understanding of the topic.
2. The second characteristic of qualitative research is that the researcher is the primary
instrument used to collect and analyze data. Merriam (2009) states that certain biases
might occur when researchers act as the data collection instrument. Instead of
attempting to remove or eliminate such biases, the researcher must consider, account
for and monitor those biases in order to determine their impact on data collection and
analysis.
3. Another characteristic of qualitative research is that it is considered an inductive
process. Researchers often use qualitative studies to gather evidence in order to
establish theories and hypotheses that previous research has neglected.
4. The final characteristic of qualitative research considers the outcomes of the research.
Qualitative research produces highly descriptive data in the form of words and
pictures rather than the numbers provided by other types of research (Merriam, 2009).
In regards to this study, a qualitative approach will capture the “story” and provide the
rich description needed from a principal’s and PBIS experts’ perspective in order to answer the
five research questions. In addition Bogdan and Biklen (2003) and Merriam (2009) described
advantages of utilizing a qualitative approach. For example Merriam (2009) states that being able
to document behaviors as they occur in a specific setting or in their natural environment provides
first hand information. The researcher will capture as much of the information possible that will
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

46
help answer the research questions by creating detailed field notes during interviews and
compare the responses of principals and PBIS experts to the literature regarding PBIS in what is
referred to as triangulation of data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003).
Participants of the Study
For this study, the researcher used unique purposeful sampling to select participants. As
stated in Merriam (2009) unique sampling occurs when a sample is selected as they display
atypical or unusual characteristics. The researcher selected five high schools from across the
United States that have demonstrated out of the norm success of lowering suspension and
expulsion rates as a result of their implementation of PBIS based on data from the Department of
Education (DOE) from their respective states. Although there may be other factors that
contribute to the lowering of the suspension and expulsion rates at the selected schools, for the
purpose of this study the researcher selected schools that met the criteria established in order to
participate in this study: (1) The schools will have lowered suspension and expulsion rates and
(2) implemented PBIS school-wide. The PBIS experts selected for the study are (1) researchers
in the field of PBIS, (2) experts who train school leaders on PBIS implementation or (3) a
combination of researcher and trainer. A total of ten participants were selected and met the above
criteria. Five high school principals and five PBIS experts were the participants and for the
purpose of this study fictitious names were utilized for both the high school principals and PBIS
Experts. They will be referred to as High School plus an index number and PBIS Expert plus an
index number. The researcher interviewed the participants in order to gather data needed to
answer, (1) the role of the principal in regards to the implementation of PBIS school-wide, (2)
the challenges faced when a high school begins the implementation of PBIS school-wide, (3)
resources if any needed in order for the high school to successfully implement PBIS school-
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

47
wide, (4) the professional development provided if any, in order to successfully implement PBIS
school-wide at the high school level and (5) the evaluation system utilized in order to determine
that PBIS is successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level. The researcher
hopes that these essential characteristics provide practitioners and researchers insight to high
schools that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide and will be able to use the
findings from this study in their own practice.
Instrumentation
The following section describes the process used to construct the interview protocol, get
consent and gain entry, the approach used to gather the data, and the procedure employed to code
and analyze the gathered data.
Process of Constructing the Interview Protocol
For the interviews the researcher chose a semi-structured interview format. A semi-
structured interview protocol consists of questions established ahead of time, in a specific order
with the intent of gathering specific information (Merriam, 2009). Probing questions were
included and the questions were open-ended in order to allow flexibility during the interview.
The researcher chose a semi-structured format in order to gather specific data needed to answer
the five research questions of this study. Merriam (2009) warns that one of the disadvantages of
structured interviews is that researchers bring their biases to the interview and must be aware and
monitor those biases. That being said, the researcher created the interview protocol and shared
the questions with colleagues in order to reduce possible bias. Merriam (2009) suggests that
researchers conduct pilot interviews in order to test and refine both the questions and interview
skills. Colleagues provided valuable feedback and the researcher revised the questions. The
questions that were developed were written as to avoid jargon while interviewing participants as
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

48
well as avoiding leading questions, asking multiple questions at a time, and questions that can be
answered with a simple yes-no response. Merriam (2009) suggests that researchers ask open-
ended questions that elicit stories and other rich descriptive data from interviewees. The
interview questions were aligned to solicit the principals’ and PBIS Experts’ perspective on why
he or she experienced success in implementing PBIS school-wide or the PBIS Experts’
experience in either training or studying schools in the area of PBIS implementation. The final
interview protocol consists of 20 questions that were asked to each principal and 16 questions
that were asked to each PBIS Expert in an audio recorded interview either face-to-face or over
the phone. In addition to the interview protocol, the researcher asked follow-up questions either
to gain clarity about specific statements or concepts (Merriam, 2009). The interview protocol
used for the principals (Appendix D) and the protocol used for the PBIS Experts (Appendix E)
were included as a part of this study for transparency and credibility of the research and in order
to demonstrate alignment to the five research questions.
The questions for the protocol used for the high school principals were formulated to
capture as much of the insight in regards to five areas related to PBIS implementation as
highlighted as important in Chapter 2 of this study: (1) leadership and the administrative role, (2)
the challenges that high schools face when implementing PBIS, (3) the resources necessary for
PBIS implementation, (4) the professional development, and (5) the evaluation utilized in order
to determine successful implementation of PBIS school-wide. The questions were created and a
pilot study was conducted in order to refine the protocol. The research team provided feedback
and the protocol was revised. At the end of the interview, an open-ended question allowed for the
principals to contribute any final thoughts that they felt would be helpful to contribute to the
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

49
study and help provide that insight needed by practitioners seeking to implement PBIS or
improve their implementation efforts.
The protocol for the PBIS Experts consisted of the same questions that were asked of the
principals and focused on the five topics above. There were fewer probing questions, as some of
the questions were specific to the school site experience of the high school principals that PBIS
Experts could not answer. Like the principals protocol, a pilot study was conducted and the
questions were shared with the research team in order to solicit feedback. The feedback was used
and the questions were revised.
Process of Getting Consent and Gaining Entry
In order to obtain consent from the participants, the researcher contacted the principals by
making a phone call in order to explain the purpose of the study, scheduled an appointment and
formally introduced himself. Each participant was provided a Certified Information Sheet
(Appendix A), that outlined the purpose of the study, a Recruitment Letter (Appendix B), and a
Consent Form (Appendix C) to authorize the interview. Merriam (2009) highlights that one of
the factors to gaining entry is gaining the confidence of the gatekeepers of information and
forming a positive relationship. The researcher praised the principals for their success with PBIS
and emphasized that the purpose of the study is to highlight the characteristics they perceived
contributed to their success in order to help other practitioners obtain similar results. PBIS
experts were contacted in a similar fashion and were praised for their contributions to creating
positive climates at the school sites of leaders they train. The positive purpose of the study
helped to facilitate gaining entry and consent. Once verbal consent was obtained the researcher
provided a consent form (Appendix C) or obtained consent verbally at the beginning of the
audio-recorded interview.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

50
Approach to Capturing Data
To prepare for the interviews, the researcher prepared packets that included the interview
protocol (Appendix D) and a consent form to be able to record the interview (Appendix C), in
case a form was not previously collected or consent was obtained verbally. The researcher
reviewed the packet and some norms as to put the participants at ease. The researcher reminded
participants that for the study fictitious names were used and that at anytime the participant could
stop the interview if he/she felt uncomfortable. Merriam (2009) states that it is important for
researchers to review norms with participants in order to maintain ethical research practices. The
packet that was provided was for both the participant and the researchers use. The intent of both
having the same material was to create a tone of transparency, to keep the interview focused as to
capture the data needed, and to take notes of any non-verbal cues, probing questions that come to
mind, or any additional information that the participant may have shared. Data collection was
conducted through qualitative interviews with selected principals and PBIS experts during the
period of November 17
th
thru December 16
th
2014. The researcher created an audio-recorded
electronic file for each participant’s interview and the audio recordings of the interviews were
then transcribed by a professional transcription service, rev.com.
Approach to Coding Collected Data
The researcher followed a process of simultaneous data collection and analysis and
created notes or memos for each interview (Merriam, 2009). The researcher also began the
process of making meaning of the data collected by coding it and classifying it into categories
and subcategories in order to be able to see emerging themes and ultimately obtain answers for
the research questions (Merriam, 2009). The researcher created a file or area for each research
question and a parking lot for anything that did not fit anywhere specifically. Any field note,
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

51
response, document or anything that is relevant to that research question was placed in that file.
If something fell into more than one question it was placed multiple times. The researcher then
further classified the data into categories/themes and some sub-categories in order to derive
meaning from the data and draw out conclusions based upon the data.
Ethical Considerations
This proposal was submitted to and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at
the University of Southern California. All participants were asked to grant permission to use the
information obtained by the researcher and participants agreed to take part in this study. All
participants were fully informed both in writing and verbally and were asked at the beginning of
the electronically recorded interview if they agree to take part in the study. No real names were
used for this study. Titles and an index number such as “Principal 1” or “PBIS Expert 2” were
used to distinguish the participants in Chapters 4 and 5. The researcher attempted to be
transparent at all times in the process so as to minimize the appearance of impropriety (Creswell,
2003).
Summary
The previous chapter outlined the purpose of the study, the five research questions that
guided this study, the research design, sample population, data collection protocols, and the data
analysis process utilized to find meaning of the data collected. The researchers’ findings will be
discussed in the following chapter.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

52
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
The purpose of this study is to identify and examine the characteristics of high schools
that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide as determined by a qualitative study
consisting of interviews of five high school principals and five experts in the field of PBIS. This
chapter will (a) discuss the general aspects of the study such as the profiles and demographics of
the participants, (b) the process used to gather and analyze the data, (c) a report of the
researcher’s findings organized by research question, and (d) a discussion of the findings.
In response to mandates to create safe learning environments, many schools have adopted
zero-tolerance policies and have used reactive and punitive measures such as suspensions and
expulsions to deal with student misconduct without any evidence that it improves student
behavior (APA, 2008; Muscott et al., 2008). Despite the research that demonstrates that
suspension and expulsion do not correct student misconduct, they continue to be widely used
forms of school discipline and contribute to negative outcomes such as a loss of instructional
minutes and school dropout (Balfanz et al., 2013; Skiba & Rausch, 2006). In addition studies
show that for over forty years minority students have been overrepresented disproportionately in
terms of suspension and expulsions with African American students being suspended more than
3 times their White peers (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975; Fenning & Rose, 2007; Gregory et
al., 2010; OCR, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011).
The literature review in Chapter 2 revealed that PBIS can be an effective model for
preventing student misconduct and improving student behavior for all students (Bohanon et al.,
2006; Bradshaw, Mitchell, & Leaf, 2010; Curtis et al., 2010; Frazen & Kemps, 2008; Horner et
al., 2009; Kant & March, 2004; Karub, Taylor-Green, March, & Horner, 2000; Muscott et al.,
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

53
2008; Sherrod, Getch, & Ziomek-Diage, 2009; Turnbull et al., 2002; Warren et al., 2003)
however, there is limited research as to the characteristics of high schools that have successfully
implemented PBIS school-wide and the focus has been primarily at the elementary level
(Bohanon et al., 2006). Therefore, this study will provide further evidence for using PBIS as a
research-based and evidence-based model and provide the perspective of both principals who
have successfully implemented PBIS effectively along with the experience of experts in the field
of PBIS with the hope to help practitioners prevent and reduce student misconduct and improve
school climate at the high school level school-wide.
The following questions guided this study:
1. What is the perceived role of the high school principal in regards to the
implementation of PBIS school-wide?
2. What are the challenges faced when a high school begins the implementation of PBIS
school-wide?
3. What resources if any are needed in order for a high school to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide?
4. What type of professional development is needed in order to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide at the high school level?
5. What type of evaluation system was utilized in order to determine that PBIS is
successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level?
Participants of the Study
For the purpose of this study and to respect anonymity of the participants, the high
schools are referred to as, high school plus an index number, and are aligned to the respective
principal plus an index number. For example Principal 1 is at High School 1. The PBIS experts
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

54
are referred to as expert plus an index number (i.e., Expert 1). There are a total of ten participants
for this study. There are five high school principals and five PBIS Experts. There is no alignment
of the experts to any of the schools and the experts were selected based on their expertise and
recognition of being experts in the field of PBIS.
High Schools
The high schools that participated in this study range in enrollment size from a small high
school of 550 students, two medium sized schools of 1,342 and 1,903, and two large high
schools with enrollments of 2,438 and the largest at approximately 3,700 students.
Participants
All five of the principals interviewed have served in their role of principal from four
years to eight years. In addition, each of the schools has implemented PBIS efforts ranging from
four years to eight years. It appeared, that the number of years the schools have implemented
PBIS was aligned with the tenure of the principal, which leads the researcher to believe PBIS
was introduced by the principal. Three of the five schools are Title One schools with high
populations of economically disadvantaged students.
The PBIS experts that participated in this study consist of PBIS trainers and researchers.
Two of the five hold Master’s Degrees and three of the five hold doctorate degrees. Two of the
five work for k-12 large public unified school districts and in addition also provide PBIS training
services. One of the participants was previously a k-12 educator and works for a county
department of education as a PBIS expert, and two are university professors, researchers,
trainers, and work on special assignments regarding PBIS at the National level. The experience
of all five participants ranges from 12 years up to 25 years working in a PBIS related field. Four
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

55
of the five PBIS Experts have a background working in special education. See Table 1,
Participants of the Study, which includes the principals and PBIS experts.

Table 1
Participants of the Study
Classification Tenure
Years with
PBIS
Suspension
Rate 2013-14 Enrollment
Title
One
Principal 1 6 6 0.0% 2,438 Yes
Principal 2 4 4 0.2% 3713 Yes
Principal 3 8 8 0.0% 1342 Yes
Principal 4 5 5 6.2% 1903 No
Principal 5 5 8 N/A 550 No
Expert 1 15
Expert 2 25
Expert 3 16
Expert 4 25
Expert 5 12

The five schools that participated in this study are located in five different cities across
two states and range from very small suburban cities with populations of 11,000 to large urban
cities with populations of over a million. In regards to demographics there was no criteria for
participation in this study. Schools were selected based on their PBIS implementation and
outcomes in regards to reducing suspension rates and improving school climate. See Table 2
below for a breakdown based on the ethnic makeup of the schools.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

56
Table 2
Participants to the Study School Demographics
Classification Asian African American Hispanic White Other
High School 1 99% 1%
High School 2 98% 1% 1%
High School 3 20% 78% 2%
High School 4 2% 1% 78% 17% 2%
High School 5 5% 3% 1% 90% 1%

Process Used to Gather Data
The researcher utilized a qualitative approach, consisting of interviews of the five
principals that have successfully implemented PBIS at a high school setting and of the five
experts in the field of PBIS, for a total of ten participants and ten interviews. The purpose of this
design was to compare the responses of the practitioner principals who are at the school site, to
the PBIS experts that train school and district leaders, to the literature regarding PBIS, in order to
triangulate the data and capture the characteristics of successful PBIS implementation at the high
school level. The study follows a qualitative design as described by Bogdan and Biklen (2003)
and Merriam (2009). They state that qualitative research captures the “story” and provides the
rich description needed (for the purpose of this study) from a principal’s and PBIS experts’
perspective in order to answer the five research questions. Merriam (2009) wrote, “Qualitative
researchers are interested in understanding the meaning people have constructed, that is, how
people make sense of their world and the experiences they have in the world” (p. 13). In
addition, Bogdan and Biklen (2003) and Merriam (2009) further describe advantages of utilizing
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

57
a qualitative approach. For example Merriam (2009) states that being able to document behaviors
as they occur in a specific setting or in their natural environment provides first hand information.
Qualitative methods are an appropriate approach for this study as Patton states, “they tell the
program’s story by capturing and communicating the participants’ stories” (Patton, 2002, p. 10).
The researcher captured as much of the “story” as possible from the participants in order
to answer the research questions by creating detailed field notes during interviews and
comparing the responses of principals and PBIS experts to the literature regarding PBIS in what
is referred to as triangulation of data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). The interviews with the selected
principals and PBIS experts were completed during the period of November 17
th
thru December
16
th
2014. The researcher created an audio-recorded electronic file for each participant’s
interview and the audio recordings of the interviews were then transcribed by a professional
transcription service, rev.com. The researcher the began the process of making meaning of the
data collected by coding it and classifying it into categories and subcategories in order to be able
to see emerging themes and ultimately answers for the research questions (Merriam, 2009). The
researcher further classified the data into categories/themes and some sub-categories in order to
derive meaning from the data and draw out conclusions based upon the data. In the following
section, the researcher will report the findings of the research organized by research question.
Results for Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked: What is the perceived role of the principal in regards to the
implementation of PBIS school-wide? The aim of this question was to identify the role of the
administrator and the concrete areas where administrators can contribute in order to help ensure
successful and sustainable implementation. The literature review in Chapter 2 highlighted that
the role of the administrator, particularly the principal is important.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

58
The overarching theme that emerged from all ten participants regarding the role of the
principal in regards to PBIS implementation school-wide was that the leadership of the principal
is critical for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide at the high school level.
Although this similar pattern of critical leadership emerged, it was expressed in different
manners through five topics related to leadership: accountability, principal as facilitator,
supporter, provider of resources, and active participant. There were a variety of answers and
descriptors as to the role of the principal with PBIS, but all of the answers were connected to
leadership.
All 10 interviews reported that the principal plays a critical role in order to ensure the
success and sustainability of PBIS school-wide at the high school level. PBIS Expert 4
emphasizes the importance of the role of the principal by stating:
What we find is that school leaders are probably one of the most essential implementation
forces at the high school level, especially the principal. If the principal isn’t actively
engaged, doesn’t practice what is asked for a staff to do, if they are not providing
opportunities, for you know, in our case, school leadership teams to do the work, it’s
really difficult for implementation to occur.
PBIS Expert 3 echoes the critical role of the principal in regards to PBIS implementation by
stating the following:
Well the principal plays a critical role, as a supporter and their role in the PBIS Team is
critical. They’re not the head of the team, however, the coach and the administrator have
to work in tandem and be present, be actively engaged so that everyone knows it’s a
priority.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

59
The statement above emphasizes that the principal’s presence stresses to everyone else at
the school that the topic is important and therefore needs to taken care of. Principal 3
corroborates this about his role as a leader by stating the following:
As the high school principal at a very large comprehensive school, my role is essentially
one to, obviously, lead the school in promoting a healthy environment for our students, so
that they can succeed with their instructional program . . . essentially we [the principal]
lead the charge and then we have a committee that will help us engage our community,
engage our teachers, parents, and students in developing this common practice [PBIS]
that will be embedded throughout the school culture for years to come.
PBIS Expert 2 shared that the principal leads the initial exploration of the school community in
order to expose that a need exists to focus on school climate. Principal 4 shared the following
about his role as a leader of PBIS:
The principal needs to come in with a vision. They need to come in with, you know,
where do we want to be as a site? They really need to take ownership of their site and
come in with that attitude. That is the hard part, I mean, this is the most challenging part
to me as a leader, is to motivate and inspire people to help reach that goal.
What was echoed by all ten participants is that the principal plays an important and
possibly the most critical role in order for PBIS implementation to begin, succeed, and be
sustainable. The literature on PBIS supports the idea that the principal plays a critical role in
regards to PBIS implementation. Kasper (2004) states that it is important for the principal to be a
strong visible presence, a “forward thinker” who can set long-term goals, an allocator of the
necessary resources, a motivator who can speak the language and model the expectations, and
enforcer that will hold the team accountable in order to ensure faculty and staff members are
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

60
implementing PBIS with fidelity. Netzel and Eber (2003) state that the principal leadership in
particular is important for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide.
Another topic that emerged in regards to the role of the principal was accountability.
Principal 1 and 2, and PBIS Expert 1 all made statements that focused on the principal being
responsible for ensuring that implementation is taking place with fidelity. Although within the
PBIS framework there are tools that will be discussed in question four regarding evaluation and
accountability that are administered and completed by other stakeholders, the interviews
explicitly revealed that the principal is the one that is ultimately responsible as the site
administrator for ensuring implementation and accountability of PBIS. Principal 1 stated the
following:
Well as principal here at . . . my role is to ensure that all of the policies and all the plans
that we have regarding positive behavior [PBIS] are implemented correctly.
Principal 2 also shared that he oversees the team but is ultimately responsible for
implementation. He stated the following regarding his role:
My role here as principal at the school is to make sure that it [PBIS] is implemented to its
fullest and so I oversee the committee that implements this policy at the school.
Expert 1 further supports the belief that part of the principal’s role is to hold people accountable
for PBIS implementation by making the following statement:
The principal needs to . . . make sure it’s happening, to believe it, and hold people
accountable for implementing it.
Other themes that emerged from the interviews around the role of the principal consisted
of the principal being a facilitator of learning about PBIS (Principal 2), a supporter or coach that
inspires the staff to believe in PBIS and “empowers” the staff to build capacity to be able to
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

61
successfully implement the PBIS framework (Principal 4, PBIS Expert 1, Expert 2); that the
principal is a provider of resources (Principal 1, PBIS Expert 3, and PBIS Expert 5), and finally
that principal must be an active participant (PBIS Expert 1, PBIS Expert 3, and PBIS Expert 5).
PBIS Expert 1 summarizes this belief that the principal not only needs to ensure that
implementation is taking place but needs to believe and model the PBIS principles. She shared
the following statement:
The principal or administrator needs to believe it [PBIS], needs to buy into it, needs to be
a participant in what’s going on. That does not mean they need to do everything, but to be
an active member.
Principal 4 shared a very powerful quote that spoke about his role as a leader and articulates that
he needs to be an active participant, cheerleader, and strong supporter of the school-wide PBIS
effort. Principal 4 shared:
PBIS allowed me to maintain the focus on the kids and then I would say also put me in a
position where I had to be this guy who was going to lead rallies and get kids and folks
excited.
In summary the overarching theme of leadership is what emerged from the five principals
and the five PBIS experts in regards to the role of the principal related to PBIS implementation.
There were several aspects of leadership such as the principal being a provider of resources,
facilitator, supporter, a delegator, an active participant, and the person who held everyone
accountable. Table 3 below summarizes research question number one responses.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

62
Table 3
Research Question 1: The Role of the High School Principal for PBIS Implementation
Classification Principal’s Role for PBIS Implementation
Principal 1 accountability, facilitator
Principal 2 accountability, facilitator
Principal 3 coach, facilitator, visionary
Principal 4 facilitator, supporter, visionary
Principal 5 model, supporter, provider
Expert 1 accountability, participant, supporter
Expert 2 delegator, provider, visionary
Expert 3 delegator, provider, supporter
Expert 4 team builder, provider
Expert 5 believer, provider, supporter, participant

Results for Research Question 2
Research question 2 asked: What are the challenges faced when a school begins the
implementation of PBIS school-wide? The intention of this question is to identify the challenges
high school principals experienced in their implementation efforts and the insight on how they
minimized or prevented them from occurring. The responses for research question 2 revealed
three themes as challenges to implementing PBIS at the high school level: (1) staff buy in or
push back, (2) a lack of resources, and (3) a culture of traditional, punitive and reactionary
discipline practices. The study demonstrated that there was a very pronounced agreement from
both principal practitioners and PBIS Experts in regards to the challenges faced when
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

63
implementing PBIS at the high school level. One PBIS Expert (Expert 4) stated two factors that
none of the others mentioned: the size of high schools and the option for high school students to
dropout, while another expert (PBIS Expert 2) suggested a challenge is that schools, particularly
in California do not fully implement all of the features of PBIS which inhibits the likelihood of
success. The study demonstrated that the rest of the participants emphasized a lack of buy in, a
lack of resources, and the school’s culture of traditional discipline being the greatest challenges
for PBIS implementation at the high school level.
Lack of Buy In
The first theme that emerged was the challenge of getting stakeholders to believe that the
PBIS framework is something valuable to them instead of another top-down initiative. Principal
4 stated:
I would say the first challenge was just getting staff to buy in, getting them committed to
what we were trying to do . . . at first I think teachers felt like it was just a way to keep us
from suspending kids . . . at first they thought we were just being soft and you know
putting it back on them, so that was a challenge . . . you’re still going to have a handful of
teachers that are not going to see the value of it [PBIS]. They’re pretty well set in their
ways and their beliefs, but you know, we just continue to support them.
Principal 5 shared the same challenge as she described that her staff was seasoned and not as
willing initially to change:
When we first started we had a fair amount of significantly seasoned staff who were very
comfortable with the way in which business occurred. And we were asking them to really
change how they approached students, how they approached classes, you know agreeing
to common expectations. That was a little challenging for us.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

64
What is described by principals 4 and 5 is that people become accustomed to doing things
a certain way and when a new or different way of approaching discipline is presented, it takes
time and convincing for people to believe it works or is beneficial. This finding implies that
PBIS implementation can be a challenge to educators’ beliefs and experience. Some more
“seasoned” educators were raised in an environment where corporal punishment in schools is the
norm and PBIS is now calling to “positively support students” versus punishing them. PBIS
Expert 5 from an objective outside of the school environment opinion stated the following:
Staff see it as one more initiative, one more program, one more thing to do. So there’s the
deep challenge of the resistance of not understanding the “why.”
The understanding of the “why” appeared in several of the responses from both principal
practitioners and PBIS Experts. The responses from the participants conveyed a message that
educators generally speaking have good intentions and enjoy working with their students, but
their own “schema” may impede initially the acceptance of a framework like PBIS that calls to
support students when misconduct occurs versus punishing them. PBIS Expert 4 summarizes the
need to help faculty and staff understand the connection of students’ behavior and their academic
success with the following statement:
Getting people onboard with the idea that the academic success of kids is directly related
to the extent to which we build a social poster that is welcoming, that is equitable, that is
encouraging, is a giant barrier that must be overcome.
Lack of Resources
Another theme that emerged from responses to question 2 was a lack of resources. Seven
out of the out of the ten participants with only Principal 2 and PBIS Experts 3 and 4 not
mentioning resources being a challenge. The remaining participants all mentioned a lack of
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

65
resources or a need to invest more resources for the implementation of PBIS as a challenge.
Principal 3 stated:
With shrinking budgets and then also limitations on the type of budgets that we get, how
do we provide those incentives for students to just recognize them? And then you’re told
to not buy trophies and to not buy medals because you can’t use that categorical program
. . . we want to truly acknowledge our kids. Even for a simple pizza party, we pitch in
money from our pocket.
Responses from the participants also surfaced that educators often complain that not only
are salaries inequitable in comparison to other professionals outside of education, but as
Principal 3 shared above, in order for students to be recognized and celebrated, which is
important, leaders often have to pay from their own “pocket” in order for it to happen. Principal
5 states that in addition to poor salaries, and having to pay out of pocket, educators are asked or
forced to give of the resource of their “time” by putting in extra hours above contracted hours.
Principal 5 stated:
Our teachers are not paid super well. We aren’t paid for the extra time beyond the
contract . . . a lot of people have devoted time way above and beyond to develop the
system.
PBIS Expert 1 also emphasized the resource of time being a challenge initially in order to
implement PBIS because there is a learning curve due to the new framework, but also states that
in the long run it actually saves educators time by not losing instructional minutes as a result of
student misconduct. PBIS Expert 1 stated:
People think it’s harder at the beginning because they’re doing something different,
where actually in the long term it ends up giving them back more time. It does cost a little
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

66
extra time at the beginning . . . people having the time to sit down and figure out you
know what it is we need to do.
Culture of Punitive and Reactive Discipline
This study revealed as was stated in the literature that seven out of the ten participants
emphasized that a challenge to PBIS implementation is the culture of the staff at their school of
punitive and reactionary discipline practices. The literature review of this study found that these
reactive, exclusionary, and punitive measures such as reprimands, detentions, and suspensions
have minimal or no effect to correcting student misconduct (APA, 2008; Losen & Martinez,
2013; Losen & Skiba, 2010; Sprick, 2009).
Despite the research schools continue to face this challenge as one of the most widely
used forms of discipline continues to be out of school suspension (Skiba & Rausch, 2006). In
fact 19 states in the United States continue to use corporal punishment as a form of school
discipline (Crotty, 2014). Principal 2 stated that at his school teachers still wanted students
immediately removed instead of working with the student:
The challenges that I met were that most teachers that had issues [with students] wanted a
quick solution. They wanted that kid suspended, out of the school, out of the classroom
no matter what. The kid could not be in the classroom, because the kid violated whatever
rules. So it was challenging for me to then convince the faculty that this was not the right
way to go about it and the challenge was changing the culture of what the school had
been doing for the last “x” number of years.
Expert 1 also emphasizes the challenge of “culture” because it (PBIS) asked people to change the
way they think. PBIS Expert 1 stated:
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

67
It’s changing culture for a lot of people. It’s changing thinking as a change in the way
we’ve done things . . . so that’s one of the challenges . . . people don’t like change
because change is hard.
Expert 2 emphasized that culture is a challenge to PBIS implementation by shifting
students, staff, and families to an understanding that developing a positive school culture is
necessary to creating an effective learning environment. Algozzine, Wang, and Violette (2011)
stated that “Teaching behavior as relentlessly as we teach reading or other academic content is
the ultimate act of prevention, promise, and power underlying PBIS and other preventive
interventions in America’s schools” (p. 16). Expert 2 summarized that the challenge of changing
the thinking that punitive discipline “corrects behavior” and getting people to understand that
PBIS is actually an investment in supporting students:
The challenges initially are getting students, staff, and the families to a place where they
say investing in a school-wide social-culture is a critical feature for making this an
effective learning environment.
Other Challenges
Two experts shared ideas of challenges to the implementation of PBIS that none of the
other participants mentioned. These factors consisted of (1) the size of high schools, (2) the
departmental organization (3) the option for students to be able to dropout, and (4) the lack of
fully implementing all of the core features of PBIS.
According to Bohanon et al. (2006) the large size of many high schools can make
implementing PBIS a challenge (Bohanon et al., 2006). PBIS Expert 4 emphasized this and
shared that the larger size is a challenge in order to serve all of the students and to reach
consensus with so many stakeholders especially when they are divided by content and have
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

68
department heads, coordinators, or other levels that can impede communication (Sugai et al.,
2004). PBIS Expert 4 stated:
The biggest challenges that are unique to high schools are often the size, meaning the
number of students, and the second one is departmental organization.
PBIS Expert 4 also shared that the fact that high school students are able to opt out of traditional
high school programs into a variety of alternatives makes it challenging to implement PBIS with
a transient population. PBIS Expert 4 shared:
A third challenge is that high schools have an option that middle schools don’t have
which is called dropping out. A kid can leave in a variety of ways, and it’s okay for the
school to okay it or approve it. So a kid will say, “I want to do an alternative program.” A
kid will say, “I want to do online.” All of those become legitimate ways for kids to move
out or within the school, which makes implementation of PBIS content a little bit more
challenging, because it is easier to provide those options to kids than to try to help them
stay in school.
The final challenge that was mentioned by only PBIS Expert 2 is that schools partially
implement PBIS, do not receive the outcomes they want, and then give up on it. Expert 2 stated:
So a . . . big issue is, especially in California, there are so many people who have done
PBIS “light.” They’ve done a short version of PBIS without really implementing the core
features and as a result they’ve come away with a sense of “Oh, we tried that, it didn’t
work. So we really don’t want to do that again.”
Although this concept did not emerge as a pattern, the researcher felt it was important to note this
identified challenge.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

69
In summary the responses for research question 2 revealed three primary themes as
challenges to implementing PBIS at the high school level: (1) staff buy in or push back, (2) a
lack of resources, and (3) a culture of traditional, punitive and reactionary discipline practices.
The other factors that were mentioned were the size of high schools and the option for high
schools students to dropout, and that schools do not fully implement all of the features of PBIS
that inhibits the likelihood of success. See Table 4, a summary of research question 2.

Table 4
Research Question 2: The Challenges for PBIS Implementation in High School
Classification Challenges for PBIS Implementation in High School
Principal 1 resources, culture of traditional discipline
Principal 2 culture of traditional discipline, buy in
Principal 3 resources, culture of traditional discipline, buy in
Principal 4 resources, culture of traditional discipline, buy in
Principal 5 resources, culture of traditional discipline, buy in
Expert 1 resources, culture of traditional discipline, buy in
Expert 2 resources, culture of traditional discipline, buy in, partial implementation
Expert 3 buy in
Expert 4 size of high school campuses, option to dropout
Expert 5 resources, buy in

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

70
Results for Research Question 3
Research question 3 asked: What resources if any are needed in order for a school to
successfully implement PBIS school-wide? As with any initiative, you have to invest in it in
order to obtain the desired outcomes. When it came to resources for the implementation of PBIS
school-wide, five themes emerged; (1) funding was unanimously mentioned as necessary in a
variety of ways and for various reasons, (2) human capital or human resources such as staffing,
(3) partnerships, (4) professional development or training, and (5) an investment in systems.
Funding
All five principals and five PBIS Experts shared that funding in some form was needed
for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide at the high school level. The funding was
either provided by the district office with additional PBIS funds for implementation for the first
three years, as was the case for Principal 4 and 5 that received district funding and grants.
Principal 1, 2, and 3 received district provided training along with funding for substitute teachers
and training fees. Both the principals and the PBIS Experts interviewed revealed that funding
was needed for expenses for such as training fees, time for the collaboration of team members
that required subs, and funding for systems such as data systems or reward systems that consisted
of incentives that acknowledged students positive behavior. Principal 3 stated his need to seek
funding for donations:
What we try to do is seek out donations to help support our end of the year incentives for
kids. So essentially it’s the deans and counselors really asking some of the big
companies within the cities to provide some donations.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

71
PBIS Expert 5 also supports this by sharing that funding is necessary to secure time for
collaboration, extra duty pay, and getting the work and team off the ground. PBIS Expert 5
stated:
. . . time . . . you know for deep conversations, collaborations, staff development . . . the
financial just comes usually those first things in carving out time because sometimes you
need subs, extra duty pay to carve out the time to get the work initially started.
Another resource needed that was shared by six of the participants (Principal 1, Principal
2, PBIS Experts 1, 3, 4 and 5) was that of human resources or human capital. They emphasized
that it is staffing such as a coach, facilitator, a psychologist, counselor, or staffing in general to
carry out the work. PBIS Expert 3 shared this concept by stating:
I believe you need an external coach or facilitator . . . someone who has no connection or
vested interest in the school or district, to have someone who has an unbiased approach
and that understands the training components and working with all of the assessments
and evaluation tools, as well as working with the school-wide information systems.
PBIS Expert 1 shared that more than money resources it consists of reshuffling priorities and
using the resources available in a different manner. PBIS Expert 1 stated:
I think it’s a reshuffling of priorities and it’s a rethinking of how we do something. So as
far as resources, I think it’s more human resources than it is money resources.
Four of the participants stated that partnerships in some form were needed to help
implement PBIS successfully implying that the school alone could not or should not implement
PBIS on its own accord. Principal 5 stated that her school received a partnership with a
university that provided coaches and professional development for a three to four year cycle that
guided the school based leaders toward full implementation. Principal 4 shared:
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

72
You really need the support from your district office . . . the reason I say that is because
those are the people that are going to help you establish that community connection.
They’re going to help you with you know the Police Department, the civic groups, and so
you need to make sure the district office is going to support you.
Training
Another type of resource mentioned by both principals and PBIS Experts was the need
for training. In the following question (Research Question 3) the type of training will be
described but PBIS Expert 2 shares that training of the team is what will facilitate the “training
of the trainers” so that they can lead the rest of the school toward PBIS implementation. PBIS
Expert 2 stated:
All that you really need is the training of your team so that the team can walk the faculty,
the families, and the students through a process of selecting expectations of building a
formal process of acknowledging expectations.
The final resource shared by PBIS Expert 2 consists of systems that requires funding for
time for people to develop these systems such as the development of lesson plans, the analysis
and sharing of data, or the creation and use of reward systems for students and staff. PBIS Expert
2 stated the following:
They [schools] often times have very strong and useful consequence systems but they
have not invested in the prevention system. They haven’t invested in teaching the
expectations. They haven’t invested in data systems and they haven’t invested in
structures that will get sustainability . . . [for example] you have to build in the electronic
systems so that if somebody is not there you get notified very quickly and you respond so
that not being in school is not something that gets rewarded. It actually is something that
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

73
you get a prompt. You connect with their family to the extent that they are advocates for
being there and you actually get the kid back in school.
As with any initiative a high school principal must be willing to invest resources to make
its implementation successful. The literature supports the responses mentioned above by the
principals and PBIS Experts. Kasper (2004) states that for the successful implementation of
PBIS, resources such as training fees, time for PBIS team meetings, substitute pay, stipends,
printing or materials costs, incentive items, promotion materials, and other items that the team
feels are necessary for successful implementation.
George and Martinez (2007) found that some school districts provide schools funds for
PBIS implementation and include this funding as a part of their single plans while other schools
with limited resources depend more on external partners such as booster clubs, PTA, community
business partners, and grants to support their PBIS implementation efforts. This is in alignment
with the responses by the 10 participating principals and PBIS Experts. See Table 5, which
consists of a summary of the responses for research question 3.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

74
Table 5
Research Question 3: Resources for PBIS Implementation in High School
Classification Resources for PBIS Implementation in High School
Principal 1 funding, human capital, partnerships
Principal 2 funding, human capital, professional development
Principal 3 funding, partnerships
Principal 4 funding, time, partnerships
Principal 5 funding, professional development
Expert 1 funding, human capital, professional development
Expert 2 funding, professional development, systems
Expert 3 funding, human capital, partnerships
Expert 4 funding, human capital, time, systems
Expert 5 funding, human capital, time

Results for Research Question 4
Research question 4 asked: What type of professional development is needed in order to
successfully implement PBIS school-wide? Research question four resulted in a variety of
responses that consisted of two major themes: (1) the source or provider of the professional
development for PBIS at the high school level, and (2) the type of professional development or
focus of the professional development. All five principals focused on who provided the
professional development and the five PBIS Experts emphasized the type of professional
development versus the source. The principals responded by emphasizing who was providing or
leading the professional development and the PBIS Experts emphasized what the professional
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

75
development should focus on or accomplish. Collectively they gave a rich description of what
PBIS professional development looks like at high schools that have successfully implemented
PBIS and who should be leading the professional development.
The principals focused primarily on professional development being led by the local
PBIS Leadership Team. Principal 1 stated:
We have a PowerPoint presentation led by one of my assistant principals in charge of
discipline and they go over the PowerPoint with the teachers at a faculty meeting or a PD
on Monday. We cover it [PBIS] and we talk about the strategies and we arm the teachers
with tools, strategic tools that they would need to be successful at Implementing PBIS.
Principal 2 also shared that they have “buyback days” in the beginning of the year where they go
over strategies on how to diffuse “situations in the classroom.” Principal 2 shared that the
professional development was all “in-house” and that support was not provided by the district
office or outside. Principal 2 also shared that they have teachers share best practices in regards to
a strategy in the classroom and that the best PD they offer is teacher-led.
Principal 3 shared that he brought elements of PBIS that he had utilized in his previous
school because he and his team had determined that there was a significant need for PBIS based
on data and determined by the team to meet the needs of their school. Principal 3 stated:
I believe it’s the staff development that as . . . a leader you facilitate. You bring all the
PDs, elements, and practices that have been done at other schools and let your committee
decide what is best for your school. They’re the ones that took bits and pieces of the last
two schools that I brought and decided collectively, this is what’s going to work. So they
were empowered to conduct their own PD based on all the elements.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

76
Principal 4 stated that like principals 1, 2, and 3, that they did a yearly PD in the summer
professional development session and that outside experts from the County Office of Education
came in and provided support to identify gaps. Principal 5 also focused on the source of the PD
was from outside experts from a university and provided the initial “PowerPoint” for her team
and that they learned from them and then did the professional development on their own. The
focus once again from all five principals was on who provided the professional development
versus less of a focus on what was provided.
The focus from all five PBIS Experts was more on the content versus the source of
professional development. PBIS Expert 1 supports this finding by stating:
So the professional development may be around developing people’s skills and
knowledge about school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports, but I think
you kind of need to do a base needs assessment to see where people are . . . it’s that
professional development ongoing and supportive.
PBIS Expert 2 described many elements that described the purpose of professional
development such as (1) building the knowledge and understanding of the role of social culture
in making a school an effective learning environment, (2) helping teachers, students, and families
understand the impact of good teaching and effective consequences and dispelling the myth that
when kids behave badly or irresponsibly it is due to willful behavior on their part, (3)
understanding that we create environments that promote the behaviors that we dislike and that by
creating effective learning environments we get different results, (4) understanding how to truly
differentiate instruction based on students’ needs rather than a road map curriculum, and (5)
learning how to use data for decision making.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

77
PBIS Expert 3 further corroborates the focus on the type of PD by sharing the importance
of training of a three-tiered system and the importance of the assessment tools that are essential
for PBIS implementation.
PBIS Expert 4 shared what the PD should focus on and described almost exactly what the
five principals were doing, and that is professional development driven by the faculty and local
leadership based on the needs and culture of the school. PBIS Expert 4 stated:
Professional development that’s only awareness driven or staff focused tends to not
translate well into practice . . . it [professional development] really is added within the
operations and routines of the school. It’s driven by teams that own the content and own
the implementation. It needs to be driven by the local faculty because they represent the
cultural features of that community. So it really has to be embedded, ongoing,
contextually and culturally relevant, and it has to be built into the daily routine of the
school, not something that’s done separately.
Expert 5 also validates the points made by both principals and the other experts by explaining
that professional development needs to focus on the paradigm of PBIS and other topics such as,
universal expectations, distinguishing between consequence and intervention, de-escalation
strategies, and active supervision among other topics. Expert 5 also emphasized that professional
development on PBIS has to be embedded within the PD calendar, ongoing, and
indistinguishable from other PD of the school. Finally Expert 5 stated that it had to be relevant
and paired with feedback.
In summary, the two sources of professional development were first the school’s PBIS
Leadership Team-driven professional development and second the outside experts such as
trainers from the district, county office of education, or university experts. The type of
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

78
professional development described consisted of learning about the PBIS conceptual framework,
the three-tiered approach, PBIS assessment tools, knowing how to use data to make decisions,
and the overall importance of investing in a positive social culture in order to create an effective
learning environment. It was also emphasized that professional development must be a part of
the school culture, embedded, ongoing, and inclusive of all stakeholders. See Table 6 below for a
summary of the responses for research question 4.

Table 6
Research Question 4: Professional Development for PBIS Implementation in High School
Classification Professional Development for PBIS Implementation in High School
Principal 1 district specialist and teacher led at school
Principal 2 yearly teacher led at school
Principal 3 3 tiered, data-driven based on need, and teachers are compensated by team
Principal 4 outside experts initially through a grant and school-led subsequent years
Principal 5 outside experts initially through a grant and school-led subsequent years
Expert 1 p.d. that assesses where headed and smaller size period by period
Expert 2 pd that is full package and consist of all PBIS features for sustainability
Expert 3 3 tiered system, with assessment open to all students not just ASB
Expert 4 p.d. that is embedded in school culture and equal to other p.d.
Expert 5 p.d. on conceptual framework, embedded and not just a tack on

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

79
Results for Research Question 5
Research question 5 asked: What type of evaluation system was utilized in order to
determine that PBIS is successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level? When
looking at how high schools that have successfully implemented PBIS evaluate their
implementation efforts, two patterns emerged: (1) high schools utilize both quantitative and
qualitative data, and (2) the assessments and evaluations are conducted both internally by school
leaders and externally by outside evaluators. All ten participants, both principals and PBIS
Experts, shared that qualitative and quantitative measures are needed to successfully evaluate
PBIS implementation. In regards to internal or external evaluation four of the five principals
mentioned only internal evaluation while all five PBIS Experts mentioned the need for objective
external evaluation being essential to evaluating successful PBIS implementation at the high
school level.
Quantitative Data
Within the context of quantitative data, the indicators shared by both principals and
experts consisted of Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs), Out of School Suspensions, (OSS),
expulsions, academic achievement, attendance rates, and survey or assessment data. Principal 3
shared:
So imagine a kid gets sent out second, fourth period and sixth period. That’s three hours
of instruction . . . you’ve got to take a look that number of periods we’re sending out and
when you blow up the numbers that way, it really sends a strong message that we’re not
doing right for kids.
PBIS Expert 4 emphasized the importance of using quantitative data but shared beyond
the referrals and suspensions that there are other indicators:
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

80
For us it means keeping track of discipline referrals, of suspensions in schools, you know
consequences and so forth for rule violations. It also means referrals to special education.
It means referrals for mental health. It means juvenile justice you know. What are the
things that kids do that are indicating how they’re moving through this [school].
Qualitative Data
The qualitative measures mentioned were mainly observational data. Specifically
mentioned was walking onto a campus and feeling the “vibe.” Some of the questions posed
were: Is the campus welcoming? Are students doing what they are supposed to be doing?
Principal 1 stated:
The way I define it [PBIS], as an experienced administrator is when you walk on a
campus, you can get a sense. When the kids are having lunch . . . if the kids are behaving,
the kids are happy, the kids are just being regular teenagers, having a great time, picking
up after themselves, it’s amazing because they take ownership of their school. When you
don’t see graffiti on the wall . . . when you see the mutual respect when you walk into the
classroom with teachers and students and you see the positive connection, the good
instruction that’s taking place . . . when you see that on a campus, you get a good feel.
PBIS Expert 3 echoed this qualitative measure by stating:
How do you define successful implementation at the high school level? First of all when
you walk through the door, no matter who you are, it feels good to be there. You actually
change the culture. When kids are happy to be there. In general, kids are happy, staff are
happy. Kids use positive language with each other more frequently than they use negative
language with each other . . . this is a place about learning. This is a place where we come
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

81
everyday and we know it makes a difference to be here. I [student] want to be here
everyday.
Another qualitative measure shared was the use of survey data to get a pulse from various
stakeholders in regard to their perceptions of PBIS implementation. It was noted by more than
one participant that at the high school level it is important to include the students and their
opinion. Principal 4 stated:
To measure the effectiveness of the program [PBIS] . . . we survey kids. We just take a
look at what does our site look like. You know when you look at a school site, you can
tell what people value . . . when kids understand when they know there was an alternative
way they could’ve done things, you know, when they can tell you, “if I would have been
respectful instead, you know I could’ve done this over.” To me that’s how I know that
we’re being successful.
PBIS Expert 4 further supports the notion of surveying stakeholders by stating:
The fidelity question is also important there because success to me is whether the staff is
doing it [PBIS].
Expert 4 then mentioned the importance of gauging what the kids, parents, and faculty
members think about PBIS implementation. PBIS Expert 4 stated that the surveys come into play
to determine if people feel safer, or the confidence to be able to go to someone for help. That
according to PBIS Expert 4 is another evaluation indicator. PBIS Expert 5 shared that as an
expert coming in from the outside a sort of “gut feeling” that can be measured when walking
onto a campus or into classrooms:
It’s going to be observation data from the classroom. It’ll have to be generated on site. As
an outsider I look and I see and feel. What’s it feel like? Are most of the kids and staff
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

82
doing what we expect most of the time? And how does that feel? What’s the positive to
negative ratio? That’s almost a gut-feeling sort of thing. Does this place feel positive or
not? Because you can see the posters and you can know they have the forms, but if you
can’t walk on and feel welcomed and feel like people are performing at high levels, then I
would say PBIS is not in place.
Most of the participants shared that you really need a combination of both quantitative
and qualitative data to evaluate whether PBIS is implemented successfully at the high school
level. PBIS Expert 1 stated:
You know people look at your suspension rates, your higher academic achievements,
your higher attendance rates but we can’t stop there . . . I would also like to do some
student, family, staff satisfaction surveys . . . using the SET, School Evaluation Tool,
which is an excellent tool that can help you to look at, do you have all the pieces in place.
PBIS Expert 2 further supports this notion by sharing two questions that summarize PBIS
evaluation:
So the evaluation always needs to be in two forms, You should, if you’re doing PBIS, be
able to say, one, are we implementing what we said we would do? and two, is it
benefiting students? You need those two pieces of information.
PBIS Expert 2 went on to describe the most recent measure developed that is called the
Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) that measures implementation of all three tiers of PBIS. PBIS
Expert 2 went on to share that the TFI takes about 15 minutes per tier and initially teams should
do all three tiers but then a few months later focus on the area or tier that the evaluation
demonstrated they need to work on. This should be done three times a year and the data provided
is used to improve implementation. PBIS Expert 2 then went on and described the second area of
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

83
evaluation focus to determine is it benefiting kids both academically and socially. Expert 2
mentioned academics, attendance data, and a variety of benchmark data that high schools
generally have access to. The other component is the social piece where systems such as the
School-Wide Information System (SWIS) that provides behavioral data reports. His suggestion
was that teams meet at least once a month preferably every two weeks and talk about how kids
are doing both socially and academically.
PBIS Expert 2 emphasized the importance of yearly evaluation with the help of external
partners such as a district or county coach that can help to make sure they are on target. PBIS
Expert 4 echoed the sentiments of PBIS Expert 2 by making a similar statement with a two-
prong approach:
The first evaluation question is are students doing better and the second question, are we
implementing with fidelity? You can’t answer either one of those alone. You have to
know whether the kids are responding, and if they’re responding that means we’re
probably doing the right thing.
Internal Assessments
Another theme that emerged from the interviews was the use of internal assessments. The
internal assessments primarily consisted of teams looking at quantitative data such as ODRs,
suspensions, and the data from rubrics, or other evaluative tools. Principal 2 stated:
If I am able to get 95% of them [teachers] to reduce their referrals and deal with tier one
intervention, I have met my goal.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

84
Principal 5 stated that at staff meetings data is shared with faculty on percentages of referrals:
We focus on the ODRs [Office Discipline Referrals]. We look at the percent of kids in
the green . . . percent of kids in the yellow . . . and you do that at a monthly meeting for
example.
Expert 1 supports the idea of schools conducting internal assessment by stating:
So I think we need to have an ongoing self-evaluation so the school is doing self-
evaluation of where they are.
External Evaluation
The external evaluation mentioned by two principals (Principals 1 and 2) and the five
PBIS Experts involved outside people such as district office personnel, county office of
education experts, or PBIS Experts from a university. Principal 1 Stated:
I know that the district looks at our data. They look and see how many suspensions. They
match that up to the graduation rates to academic or state exams.
Principal 3 described that personnel from the district office visit the school annually and conduct
an evaluation utilizing a four-point rubric that covers a variety of elements of PBIS
implementation. PBIS Expert 5 stated:
You’re always going to look at referral and suspension data, but to be honest once we’re
deep into implementation, we’re looking for very specific walkthrough data. I’m looking
at you know, how many positive contacts are going on? How many instructional
conversations as opposed to reactive conversations? How active is the supervision? How
many people are actually standing at the door? How many were moving and scanning?
That’s the kind of thing the leadership team needs to come up with and provide feedback
on to meet their action plan goals.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

85
PBIS Tools
Another important topic around the area of PBIS evaluation consisted of the use of tools
for assessment. Four out of the five principals and five of the five PBIS Experts mentioned the
use of PBIS Tools to help them evaluate and improve implementation. PBIS Expert 3 warned of
the importance to not use student data such as ODRs or suspensions as a measure of fidelity of
implementation. PBIS Expert 3 shared that the variety of PBIS Tools available should be used
for that. She mentioned a variety of tools such as the Team Implementation Check List (TIC),
Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ), and the School Assessment Survey (SAS). PBIS Expert 3
emphasized the need for a variety of assessments as used in academics by stating:
So just like we use interim assessments to determine how things are going academically
and how well our academic program is operating, the same is true for Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports. You need to find out how is the system changing and the
only way to do that is through a variety of assessments that correspond to the different
tiers.
PBIS Expert 4 shared that not all of the tools have to be used by a team. The tool will be selected
according to the type of data you are seeking. PBIS Expert 4 stated:
You have to make sure you know why you’re administering those tools. So for example
the Team Implementation Checklist and the EBS Survey all they’re done for is to monitor
how staff perceive their environment and also how well you’re walking through the
implementation steps. The BoQ, the SET . . . those are evaluation tools for monitoring
implementation fidelity.
PBIS Expert 4 went on to describe the various tools and their purpose and emphasized that based
on the type of data you want you will select and use a different tool. See Table 7 for a summary
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

86
of the responses to research question 5 the evaluation system for PBIS implementation at the
high school level.

Table 7
Research Question 5: Evaluation System for PBIS Implementation in High School
Classification Resources for PBIS Implementation in High School
Principal 1 ODRs, suspensions, observation, student achievement data, internal, external
Principal 2 ODRs, suspensions, qualitative, tools, achievement data, external evaluation
Principal 3 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, internal evaluation
Principal 4 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, internal evaluation
Principal 5 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, internal evaluation
Expert 1 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, external evaluation
Expert 2 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, external evaluation
Expert 3 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, external evaluation
Expert 4 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, external evaluation
Expert 5 ODRs, suspensions, observation, tools, achievement data, external evaluation

Additional Findings
There were three additional findings that surfaced from this study, (1) the importance of
involving students as a part of the PBIS implementation process at the high school level, (2)
establishing a connection between a focus on school climate and academic achievement, and (3)
the need for utilizing data for decision making.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

87
Student Involvement
Another theme that emerged from the interviews was the importance of involving
students at the high school with the school’s PBIS implementation. Principal 5 and Experts 1, 2,
3, and 4 all underscored student involvement. Expert 1 stated:
Bring the kids [students]. Let the kids do it [PBIS] . . . the more the kids do, the more
they are going to buy into it . . . a lot of times people I think make the mistake at the high
school level of going only to their leadership class. Go to all the kids. You’ve got your art
kids . . . you know you’ve got kids who will do things differently. Bring them all in.
Expert 2 reiterated the idea of student involvement and extended the notion to students
mentoring other students and reaching them in ways that adults cannot. Expert 2 stated:
You know in high school, one of the things that we would really recommend is you
should always do PBIS with the active involvement of the students. So they would be
involved in selecting the expectations. They should be involved in selecting how the
acknowledgement systems are set up. They should be involved in determining how you
embed a Bully prevention component in PBIS. So the thing we want to do is we want to
not just have the teachers modeling and providing message about what the expectations
are and how to build a predictable consistent environment. We want every freshman to be
in a group that is led by juniors and seniors.
PBIS Expert 2 also noted that PBIS implementation in general, but particularly with high school
students, should be implemented collaboratively versus militarily. PBIS Expert 2 advised that if
schools do not use a collaborative approach with high school students, they are not likely to buy
in and may even rebel. Expert 2 stated:
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

88
The developmental level of the kids and the expectation of the staff, really require that
PBIS be implemented collaboratively rather than militarily. So it is not just, you know,
I’m going to tell you stupid kids what to do. In high school the social culture of high
schools are driven by the kids . . . and the thing that I keep being so fascinated by is when
we do PBIS in schools, we often times survey the students and we say, “Is this a good
idea and is this something that is helpful to you? Is this something we should do again
next year?” And the overwhelming message is, “Yes, we want a predictable, consistent,
positive, and safe environment. We do not want a zero-tolerance . . . we’re going to tell
you what to do and you better do it environment. If you do that we will rebel against it.”
Expert 3 further supports the idea of involving high school students and emphasize that they
have a different maturity level than elementary and middle school students, are able to
comprehend the concepts of PBIS, and makeup the fabric of the school culture. Expert 3 stated:
Especially because high school students are so much the very fabric of how their school
operates and they also have reached the point where they have the ability, the life
experience and we like to think the maturity to understand the concept. The more you
involve students at the high school level, the better chance you have of having it actually
become real, actually change the system. Because the real strong hold on the system at
high school involves students.
Like Expert 2, Expert 3 highlighted that students can mentor each other and serve as
PBIS Leaders for the school’s efforts. Expert 3 stated:
I want people to see that high school students have the ability to teach other. If you can
get the high school students to understand the concept, realize how this is going to make
their lives better, they will have a vested interest in seeing this through. So you will look
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

89
for a core group of students who are sort of like the PBIS ambassadors and that may be a
peevish word for high school students, but the PBIS leaders.
Data-Driven Decision Making
All ten participants mentioned in some form the importance of using data for the
implementation of PBIS at the high school level. There were three uses for data: (1) to assess the
starting point for PBIS and to justify the implementation of PBIS, (2) to use it as a tool to
persuade staff to “buy in” on the implementation of PBIS, and (3) to help evaluate the school’s
implementation efforts. Expert 2 summarizes that using data is extremely important in guiding
decisions, but shares that educational leaders are often not equipped to use the data aside from
reporting to the district, county, or state. Expert 2 stated:
We need the professional development on how to use data for decision-making. Teachers,
administrators, and teams too often perceive themselves as collecting data to be given to
the district, county or the state. One of the giant changes in education is that we now have
access to data that would make a teacher more effective with his or her students, but we
don’t do a good job of teaching them how to use those data. How does a team use it?
How do the 9
th
grade teachers use their data about literacy to change the way in which
they’re delivering the curriculum, the sequencing of things they’re doing? So using data
for decision-making is an underestimated and undervalued skill.
Expert 4 highlights the use of data as a staring point for PBIS implementation by raising
awareness of the current reality of the school based on data and as a recruitment tool to build a
team. Expert 4 stated:
Some of the best models have been ones in which the principal goes in front of the
faculty and says, “here’s what the data indicate about what climate, discipline, or
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

90
behavior is like in our school.” The second thing that person [principal] does is say,
“Here is a way of thinking about how we might address it. Not just at the intervention but
organizational level.” They also say “You know what. This is something that I can’t do
by myself, but I need a team, a leadership team that will help me, move to you know
practice this to the classroom level.”
The second use for data shared by both principals and experts was to use the data as a
tool to persuade faculty and staff to buy into PBIS implementation. Both principals and experts
shared that the data actually helped faculty and staff not only change how they feel about PBIS,
but some were moved to become active participants and leaders. Principal 3 stated:
You can’t change human behavior unless you have data to substantiate why change needs
to be made. So based on the data, we spoke to teachers at activities, spoke to parents at
different parent meetings, ELAC, School-Site Council, meetings, Title One Meetings,
Coffee with the principal, and talked about that data and the number of incidents that
students were missing instruction . . . we are now sending students to the counselor to
help support them and provide the wrap-around services necessary . . . overall I would
advocate taking a look at the data.
Principal 4 echoes the opinion by stating that some of his team members actually embraced PBIS
as a result of him sharing the results of implementation:
The people that don’t believe in it, you know, they’re those folks, “I need to see it to
believe it,” and that’s what data does for you. I say, “Here’s where we were; here’s where
we are.” And they are like wow, okay. So the data has helped get some folks to embrace
the idea [PBIS].
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

91
Principal 5 also experienced similar results of not only “buy-in” but active participation and
leadership. Principal 5 stated:
It was interesting because we learned that with some of them [teachers] once we started
collecting the data and showing that what we were doing was making a change, you
know, they became leaders on our universal team, because they saw it making a
difference.
Expert 4 also supports the use of data to helps schools not only convince reluctant staff but to
also evaluate what is working and what is not. PBIS Expert 4 shared:
Without information, you can’t buy-in, without information you can’t work with reluctant
staff. Without data, you can’t judge what’s working and not working.
Expert 2 further supports the need for teams to have access to data to determine fidelity of
implementation and its effectiveness with students. Expert 2 stated:
They get the team access to the data systems and the coaching that will allow them to
determine (1) if they’re actually implementing PBIS and (2) if it’s benefitting students.
Focus on School Climate and Academic Achievement
Another theme that emerged from this study and from the interviews was the importance
of establishing a connection between PBIS or a focus on school climate and student academic
achievement. Principal 1 and 4, and PBIS Expert 2 all stressed that a key feature of PBIS
consists of good instruction, focusing on improving teaching and learning and developing a
social culture that creates the most effective learning environment possible. Principal 1 stated:
So what we did is we focused on our instructional plan and little by little we started
noticing that by focusing on our instructional plan, our kids were behaving a little better.
Their needs were met academically. They felt successful in the classroom. They were
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

92
able to read at a better level. They were able to do their mathematics at a better level
when we focused on instruction . . . we realized that hey you know, there’s a link here.
The kids are doing better. They feel successful in the classroom therefore they’re not
misbehaving as much.
Principal 4 further explains that in order to succeed academically, you have to succeed socially
as well and school leaders are responsible for creating the effective learning environment for this
to take place. Principal 4 stated:
I think what you need to know and understand is that if you want to be successful
academically, you need to really know and understand that you need to be successful
behaviorally and socially as well too. You have to have a healthy climate with regards to
student behavior. You know their social behavior. That’s what PBIS is really all about.
It’s just that other side of the academics and so the principal really needs to understand
that that is a big part of the overall achievement.
Expert 2 shares the view of a connection between the social culture, the environment, and the
manifestation of student behaviors. PBIS Expert 2 stated:
In fact everything that we have learned says that we create environments that actually
promote the behaviors that we dislike. If we create environments, and we create really
effective learning environments, we get different kinds of behaviors than what we see.
In summary the interviews with the five principals and the five PBIS Experts revealed
three additional findings beyond the focus of the five primary research questions. These themes
were (1) the importance of involving students with the implementation of PBIS at the high
school level, (2) the need to be data driven for decision making with PBIS, and (3) the necessity
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

93
to establish a connection between a focus on school climate and academic achievement within
the PBIS implementation effort.
Discussion
This study examined the characteristics of high schools that have successfully
implemented PBIS school-wide through a qualitative study that consisted of semi-structured
interviews with five high school principals and five PBIS Experts. After analyzing the responses
of the five high school principals and the five PBIS Experts, the researcher has concluded that
the primary theme of leadership around the role of the principal (research question 1) emerged as
central and critical to the successful implementation of PBIS at the high school level. Four sub-
themes around leadership and the role of the high school principal also surfaced. These themes
are (a) challenges of PBIS implementation at the high school level (research question 2), (b) the
resources needed for PBIS implementation at the high school level (research question 3), (c) the
professional development needed for PBIS implementation at the high school level (research
question 4), and (d) the evaluation system utilized to determine that PBIS is successfully
implemented (research question 5). The researcher has concluded that the role of the principal as
the site leader is the most important factor to the successful implementation of PBIS at the high
school level and that the other four themes of challenges, resources, professional development,
and evaluation are all connected to leadership and the role of the principal, are ultimately the
principal’s responsibility to ensure that they occur.
The principal is the most important factor for the implementation of PBIS at the high
school level as all ten participants, five principals, and five PBIS experts, along with the
literature-review emphasized the critical role of the principal for successful PBIS
implementation. Netzel and Eber (2003) state that the principal’s leadership in particular is
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

94
important for the successful implementation of PBIS school-wide. The type of leader described
that is needed for successful PBIS implementation has several characteristics as revealed from
the responses to the five research questions.
The first characteristic is that the principal must be knowledgeable and a believer of the
PBIS framework in order to lead an exploration using data, and to guide the faculty and staff
toward an understanding that investing in PBIS is more than developing a social culture that is
more welcoming or positive, it is creating a more effective learning environment so that all
students can learn. The principal has to be able to create a vision and a clear direction for the
school in order for PBIS implementation to be a priority and implemented with fidelity.
The second trait is that the principal selects the leadership team and builds the leadership
capacity of the team members. The effective leader knows that the work must be done
collaboratively. The responses from the research questions emphasized that there are no heroes
in the implementation of PBIS. Peter Senge stated, “The bad leader is he who the people despise;
the good leader is he who the people praise; the great leader is he who the people say, ‘We did it
ourselves’” (Senge, 1994, p. 341). The leadership team as revealed through this study must be
representative of all stakeholders and in particular of students at the high school level. It is
important that the team be large enough to be representative but small enough to be an action
team that can make decisions. The principal is an active member but does not act as the head, but
guides the team as Nelson Mandela stated, “It is better to lead from behind and to put others in
front, especially when you celebrate victory when nice things occur. You take the front line
when there is danger. Then people will appreciate your leadership” (Goodreads, 2015a). The
team is built and carries out the work, but as Jim Collins (2001) stated, “Get the right people on
the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and the right people in the right seats” (p. 13). The
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

95
principal has the important task of ensuring the team is capable of carrying out the work, gives
them the authority to do and sustain the work because there will more than likely be “push-back”
or a lack of “buy-in” from the staff initially and the principal cannot and should do not the work
alone.
Another characteristic of the principal and school leadership team is the ability to
understand organizational change and anticipate challenges. All of the participants of this study
shared various forms of challenges such as a culture of punitive traditional discipline, a lack of
resources, or a lack of buy-in. Effective leadership is not only knowing what to do, but is also
knowing when, how, and why to do it (Waters et al., 2003). The principal and or the PBIS
Leadership must have the ability to convince people that implementing PBIS will benefit them,
benefit students, and will more than likely if they get vested in it generate improved academic
and behavioral outcomes. The use of data was highlighted as a powerful and necessary tool to
raise awareness and to persuade people that an investment in school-wide PBIS is needed.
The responses of the study also revealed that another role of the principal is to provide
the necessary resources so that the PBIS Team and implementation is likely to succeed school-
wide and is sustainable. Those resources can come from a variety of sources and in various
forms. For example, the principal should collaborate with the district office, county office of
education, the state federal government and other private and public agencies in order to secure
resources such as funding for training and professional development, grants, donations, time for
the team to collaborate and do the work, stipends or monetary compensation for teachers and
other staff, access to tools, data systems and other important resources that the PBIS Team needs
in order to accomplish the work. This idea that the principal actively advocate for and provide
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

96
the necessary resources necessary for successful and sustainable PBIS implementation is
supported by the principals, the PBIS Experts, and the literature reviewed.
There was an interesting difference in the responses regarding the professional
development (PD) needed for the successful implementation of PBIS at the high school level. A
majority of the principals focused their responses on who is providing the PD and the PBIS
Experts emphasized the type of PD. What surfaced was a rich description from both perspectives
as to both the source and type of PD needed for successful PBIS implementation at the high
school level. The two primary sources of PD are external PD or training provided by district
personnel, county or state offices of education and PBIS Experts from universities or other
organizations. The internal sources consisted of teacher, coordinators, coaches, counselors, or
administrator-led PD. In regards to the types of PD, both principals and PBIS Experts mentioned
the need to focus on the conceptual framework of PBIS, guiding schools through the three tiers
of PBIS, the systems needed, the various assessment tools, training on how to use data for
decision-making, and the full continuum of PBIS. It was also highlighted that the professional
development on PBIS must be embedded within the school culture and not just a “drive-by” PD,
but consistent and ongoing, no different than the rest of the PD of the school. An interesting note
by both principals and experts was that professional development for the adults is much like the
instruction that is provided for students. The tree tiers of intervention where approximately 80%
of the staff will get it and buy-in, 15% will be on the fence and will require group support, and
about 3-5% will need more intense intervention and possibly require “hard” individual
conversations and supports.
The final characteristic of high schools that have successfully implemented PBIS school-
wide is that they evaluate the implementation of PBIS with both quantitative and qualitative data.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

97
The qualitative measures described by both principals and PBIS Experts consists of referral,
suspension, expulsion, attendance, academic, arrests, and survey data. The mention of the use
SWIS (School-wide Information System) was also noted as an important tool to capture student
discipline data by time, location, incident, student and teacher.
The qualitative data described by both principals and experts was comprised of
observational data, walk-throughs, “gut-feeling” type of impressions of walking on campus,
through hallways and in classrooms. The focus was on the interactions between students and
between adults and students. There were several tools that were mentioned and described by
principals, the PBIS Experts, and that were also found in the literature. Some of the tools
mentioned were the School Assessment Survey (SAS), the School Evaluation Tool (SET), the
Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI), the Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ), and the Team
Implementation Checklist (TIC). All of these tools serve different purposes and can measure
effectiveness of implementation, fidelity of implementation, and measure where in the process a
school might be as far as components in place. Overall the general feeling around effective
evaluation of PBIS at the high school level consists of answering two critical questions: (1) are
we doing what we said we would do with fidelity, and (2) is it benefitting students, parents,
families, faculty, staff and the school?
In summary, the researcher has concluded that high schools that have successfully
implemented PBIS school-wide use a variety of tools based on data from both qualitative and
quantitative approaches that facilitate formative and summative assessment.
Summary
In conclusion, the study examined the characteristics of high schools that have
successfully implemented PBIS school-wide through a qualitative study that consisted of ten
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

98
semi-structured interviews with five high school principals and five experts in the field of PBIS.
The researcher has concluded that the perceived characteristics from principals, experts, and the
literature on PBIS consistently point to leadership and the role of the principal as critical and
central to the successful implementation of PBIS at the high school level. High schools that have
successfully implemented PBIS school-wide have leaders (usually the principal) that creates a
vision, raises awareness of the importance and need to invest in PBIS through the use of data,
selects and builds a leadership team that can carry out and sustain the work, anticipates and
minimizes challenges, provides and secures resources such as funding, training or professional
development, time for collaboration, access to data, systems, and tools, and ensures evaluation
for fidelity of implementation and positive behavioral and academic outcomes for students and
all stakeholders. In addition the researcher found that the leadership style identified of the
participant principals and the characteristics described by the PBIS Experts and the literature
were in alignment with principals guiding PBIS implementation but empowering the team and
staff, and giving them the credit as success and positive outcomes occur. Once again, the
researcher has concluded that leadership, particularly the role of the principal, is the most critical
factor for the successful and sustainable implementation of PBIS school-wide. The subsequent
themes that emerged around challenges of PBIS implementation, the resources needed for PBIS
implementation, the professional development and the evaluation systems used by schools that
have successfully implemented PBIS were all connected to the primary theme of leadership and
the role of the high school principal overseeing and empowering a team of people to carry out
the work.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

99
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a research and evidenced-based
school-wide model of behavioral expectations and rewards designed to prevent student
misconduct and to improve social and academic success for all students (Sugai & Horner, 2006).
The literature on the topic has shown that there is a relationship between school climate and
academic achievement, and that punitive and exclusionary measures such as suspension and
expulsion are detrimental to students (Sugai & Horner, 2006). A current report released by the
U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights in March of 2014, exposed that despite
the research and evidence regarding school suspension and expulsion being detrimental for
students, approximately 3.25 million students are suspended each year in the United States
(OCR, 2014) and according to (Chin et al., 2012) being suspended just once increases the
likelihood of poorer academic achievement, increased recidivism rates, increased potential to
have contact with the juvenile justice system and the likelihood of dropping out of school
increases by twofold (Balfanz et al., 2013). This data should be of grave concern to students,
parents, community members, and educational leaders as they are responsible for creating safe
and effective learning environments that will facilitate positive behavioral and academic
outcomes for all students.
The research has demonstrated PBIS to be a framework that educators can utilize to
create positive, safe and effective learning environments that can help all students succeed
academically and socially (Sugai & Horner, 2006). Not only does the research support the use of
PBIS, but legislation calls for it as well. Congress amended the Individuals with Disabilities Act
(IDEA) in 1997 and required that schools and districts use alternative disciplinary measures like
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

100
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) strategies for students who have an
Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and are experiencing poor academic and/or behavioral
outcomes, or whose behavior is impeding their own learning or the learning of others (IDEA,
2004). The reasons for congress “encouraging” the use of PBIS is the result of two primary
factors: (1) the historic exclusion of individuals with disabilities and (2) the strong research and
evidence-base of PBIS (PBIS, 2015a). PBIS is a school-based prevention model that uses a
three-tiered continuum of interventions. The use of these interventions is intended to prevent
problem behaviors, reduce the number of significant problem behaviors that occur, and decrease
the impact of these problem behaviors on the school community (Sugai & Horner, 2006).
Schools that use PBIS strategies have shown encouraging results such as the lowering of
suspensions, less office referrals, and overall better school climate (Bohanon et al., 2006; Chin et
al., 2012; Bradshaw, Mitchell, O’Brennan, & Leaf, 2010; Curtis et al., 2010; Muscott et al.,
2008). In addition research has demonstrated that the use of PBIS may improve successful
academic and social outcomes (Bohanon et al., 2009; Curtis et al., 2010; Lassen et al., 2006;
Luiselli et al., 2005; McIntosh et al., 2006); however, there is limited research as to the
implementation of PBIS at the high school level and the focus of the research on PBIS has been
primarily at the elementary level (Bohanon et al., 2006). Thus the justification for this study that
focuses not only on PBIS at the high school level, but more specifically examines the
characteristics of high schools that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide.
Purpose of the Study
The primary purpose of this study is to identify and examine the characteristics of high
school communities that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide as determined by a
qualitative study that consisted of a comparative analysis of interviews of high school principals
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

101
and experts in the field of PBIS regarding the implementation of PBIS school-wide at a high
school setting. There were two additional goals that consisted of (1) the researcher wanting to
contribute the body of research that supports the implementation of PBIS at the high school
level, and (2) the researcher aimed to offer practitioners and researchers insight to the leadership
strategies, challenges, resources, professional development, and evaluation systems
recommended by PBIS experts, the literature on PBIS, and used by high school principals that
have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide.
The following research questions guided this study:
1. What is the perceived role of the high school principal in regards to the
implementation of PBIS school-wide?
2. What are the challenges faced when a high school begins the implementation of PBIS
school-wide?
3. What resources if any are needed in order for a high school to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide?
4. What type of professional development is needed in order to successfully implement
PBIS school-wide at the high school level?
5. What type of evaluation system was utilized in order to determine that PBIS is
successfully implemented school-wide at the high school level?
Findings
Research Question 1: What is the Perceived Role of the Principal in Regards to the
Implementation of PBIS School-Wide at the High School Level?
The responses to research question 1 in regards to the role of the high school principal
and the school-wide implementation of PBIS, revealed the theme of leadership with five
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

102
subthemes related to leadership: (1) accountability, (2) principal as facilitator, (3) supporter, (4)
provider of resources, and (5) active participant. There were a variety of answers and descriptors
as to the role of the principal with PBIS, but all of the answers were connected to aspects of
leadership. All 10 interviews responded in a fashion that clearly conveyed that the principal
plays a critical role in order to ensure the success and sustainability of PBIS school-wide at the
high school level. The characteristics shared described that principal needs to hold all
stakeholders including him or herself accountable for the faithful implementation. Participants of
the study shared that the principal serves as the facilitator of resources such as funding,
collaboration time, training or professional development, give access to data and data systems,
and should be not only a supporter but also an active participant.
Research Question 2: What are the Challenges Faced When a School Begins the
Implementation of PBIS School-Wide?
The responses for research question 2 revealed three consistent themes as challenges to
implementing PBIS at the high school level from both principals and PBIS Experts. The themes
that surfaced were (1) a lack of staff buy in or actual push back as a result of PBIS
implementation at the high school, (2) a lack of resources necessary for the implementation of
PBIS at the high school, and (3) a culture of traditional, punitive and reactionary discipline
practices by the staff at school sites. What the principals and PBIS Experts referred to as a
culture of traditional or punitive discipline practices consisted of teachers wanting to
immediately remove, suspend, or expel students for minor misconduct instead of positively
supporting students and focusing on correcting their behavior.
Both principal practitioners and PBIS Experts agreed in regards to the challenges faced
when implementing PBIS at the high school level. There were, however, some additional
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

103
responses that did not demonstrate patterns but were highlighted by individual participants.
PBIS Expert 4 stated two factors that none of the others mentioned: the size of high schools and
the option for high schools students to dropout, while another expert (PBIS Expert 2) suggested a
challenge is that schools, particularly in California do not fully implement all of the features of
PBIS which inhibits the likelihood of success. The study demonstrated that the rest of the
participants emphasized a lack of buy in, a lack of resources, and the school’s culture of
traditional discipline being the greatest challenges for PBIS implementation at the high school
level.
Research Question 3: What Resources if any are Needed in Order for a School to
Successfully Implement PBIS School-Wide?
When it came to resources for the implementation of PBIS school-wide, five themes
emerged: (1) funding was unanimously mentioned as necessary in a variety of ways and for
various reasons, (2) human capital or human resources such as staffing, (3) partnerships, (4)
professional development or training, and (5) an investment in systems.
The funding reasons varied and included reasons such as paying for training or
professional development, time for collaboration, stipends or compensation for working above
contractual hours, signage for PBIS awareness, rewards and incentives for PBIS, and an
investment in systems such as data systems. A second resource that was highlighted was the need
for human resources or staffing such as a PBIS coach, trainers, additional counselors, and
additional staff in general to help do the added duties and work that is required for successful and
sustainable PBIS implementation. Another response that surfaced was partnerships. The
partnerships mentioned included the district office, universities, county offices of education,
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

104
state, federal, community-based organizations, law enforcement agencies, and all of the
stakeholders involved in the educational process.
The literature supports the need for these resources as mentioned by the principals and
PBIS Experts. Kasper (2004) states that for the successful implementation of PBIS, resources
such as training fees, time for PBIS team meetings, substitute pay, stipends, printing or materials
costs, incentive items, promotion materials, and other items that the team feels are necessary for
successful implementation. George and Martinez (2007) found that some school districts provide
schools funds for PBIS implementation and include this funding as a part of their single plans
while other schools with limited resources depend more on external partners such as booster
clubs, PTA, community business partners, and grants to support their PBIS implementation
efforts. What the literature states is in complete alignment with the responses by the 10
participating principals and PBIS Experts in regards to the necessary resources for the successful
and sustainable implementation of PBIS at the high school level.
Research Question 4: What type of Professional Development is Needed in Order to
Successfully Implement PBIS School-Wide?
Research question 4 is the area that showed the greatest difference between principals
and PBIS Experts. A variety of responses appeared that consisted of two major themes: (1) the
source or provider of the professional development for PBIS at the high school level, and (2) the
form of professional development or emphasis of the professional development. All five
principals focused on who delivered the professional development and the five PBIS Experts
accentuated the type of professional development versus the source. The diversity of responses
was beneficial for the researcher to determine what professional development should consist of
for the successful implementation of PBIS at the high school level. Although the responses from
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

105
the principals and PBIS Experts were different, collectively they gave a rich description of what
PBIS professional development looks like at high schools that have successfully implemented
PBIS and who should be leading the professional development.
The two sources of professional development were first and foremost the school’s PBIS
Leadership Team and second outside experts such as trainers from the district, county office of
education, or university experts. What surfaced was that in general, outside experts provided the
initial training to school leadership teams that then resulted in the teams leading the training or
professional development with the faculty and staff at the school site. This approach was similar
to a training of the trainers approach.
The type of professional development described consisted of learning about the PBIS
conceptual framework, the three-tiered continuum, PBIS assessment tools, knowing how to use
data to make decisions, and the overall importance of investing in a positive social culture in
order to create an effective learning environment. It was also emphasized that professional
development must be a part of the school culture, embedded within the instructional program,
ongoing, and inclusive of all stakeholders, particularly of students at the high school level.
Research Question 5: What Type of Evaluation System was Utilized in Order to Determine
that PBIS is Successfully Implemented School-Wide?
In terms of evaluation of PBIS implementation at the high school level two patterns
emerged as a result of the interviews with high school principals and PBIS Experts: (1) high
schools utilize both quantitative and qualitative data, and (2) the assessments and evaluations are
conducted both internally by school leaders and externally by outside evaluators. All ten
participants, both principals and PBIS Experts, shared that qualitative and quantitative measures
are needed to successfully evaluate PBIS implementation. In regards to internal or external
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

106
evaluation four of the five principals mentioned only internal evaluation while all five PBIS
Experts mentioned the need for objective external evaluation being essential to evaluating
successful PBIS implementation at the high school level.
The quantitative measures shared by both principals and PBIS Experts consisted of rates
of office discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, and other data such as academic
achievement, attendance, arrest rates and survey data. The qualitative data used was from
observations of walk-throughs of the schools and classrooms focusing on the interactions of
students and among students and adults in relationship to the overall “feeling” of the campus. In
other words, are students, faculty and staff doing what they are supposed to, and is it benefitting
the school community?
Some of the tools shared by both principals and PBIS Experts were the Team
Implementation Checklist (TIC), the School Assessment Survey (SAS), the School Evaluation
Tool (SET), the Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ), and the most current tool, the Tiered Fidelity
Inventory (TFI). All of these tools and others are available on the PBIS.org website and are
attached as appendices at the end of this study.
Additional Findings
The interviews with principals and PBIS Experts revealed three additional findings that
surfaced from this study outside of the five general research questions, (1) the importance of
involving students as a part of the PBIS implementation process at the high school level, (2)
establishing a connection between a focus on school climate and academic achievement, and (3)
the need for utilizing data for decision making.
It was highlighted by both the interview responses and the literature that high school
students make up the social fabric of high schools and as a result should be involved in all
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

107
aspects of PBIS implementation. A second additional finding was the need for the principal and
PBIS Leadership team to establish that PBIS implementation is more that just creating a more
positive environment, rewards system, or reducing behavioral incidents; it is an investment in
developing a social culture that creates the most effective learning environment so that all
students can learn and achieve. In reality, PBIS is about instruction.
Finally, a third additional finding that was heavily emphasized by both principals and
PBIS Experts was the vital need to use data for decision-making. What was shared consistently
was that the data serves to lead the initial exploration and justification for a need to implement
PBIS school-wide, to determine where the needs are at the school site, to assess if the efforts
along the implementation process are working or if changes are needed (formative assessment),
and finally to determine if the team and school is implementing with fidelity and if it is
benefitting students and all stakeholders (summative annual assessment).
Implications
The study examined the characteristics of high schools that have successfully
implemented Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) school-wide from the
perspective of high school principals and experts in the field of PBIS. The findings of this study
have four key implications for practitioners and researchers. The study provides: (1) insight to
the key characteristics of PBIS implementation for principals and PBIS Leadership teams who
are considering or currently implementing PBIS at the high school level and should assist their
efforts, (2) rationale for board members and superintendents who are considering implementation
of PBIS district-wide, (3) a criteria to be considered by boards and superintendents when
searching for candidates for principal vacancies at the high school level, and (4) it provides
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

108
researchers and practitioners a bridge between theory and practice in regards to implementation
of PBIS at the high school level.
The study revealed through its qualitative approach the perspective of principals and
PBIS Experts who shared that one of the most critical factors for successful and sustainable
implementation is the role of the principal and the various characteristics or “tasks” that have to
be in place. As shared in the findings, the principal exposes through the use of data the schools
reality and need for PBIS and leads the journey by selecting the team, anticipating the
challenges, providing the resources, including funding, professional development, access to data,
and systems such as the evaluation of fidelity of implementation and the effectiveness for
improving student behavioral and academic outcomes. The rich description and quotes from
principals and PBIS Experts supported by the literature should prove to be useful for schools
exploring the possibility of PBIS implementation and for those schools who are already
implementing but are seeking ways to improve their efforts.
School Boards of Education and Superintendents will also benefit from the findings of
this study as it provides examples of successful models supported by the opinions of not only the
principals who led the implementation efforts but also by the experts in the field of PBIS who
provide the training and professional development for schools and school districts that want to
implement PBIS. The responses from the five principals and the five experts along with the
analysis of the researcher will provide evidence and justification for making decisions on steps to
take for PBIS implementation and for decision-making along the lines of resources, professional
development, and evaluation. It will also make the exploration process of board members and
superintendents easier as much of the heavy lifting in regards to the background, evidence,
research, leadership, staffing, challenges, resources, professional development, and evaluation
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

109
have been done by the researcher. This study should focus the direction of district leaders
towards next steps for implementation both at the school site or district-wide.
A third implication of this study is in regards to decisions by superintendents and boards
of education in regards to the hiring of high school principals and the experience they have with
PBIS. Dr. Rudy Castruita once said that educational leaders have to be instructional leaders. He
shared with his students, “It’s all about instruction” (Castruita, 2014, personal communication).
The implementation of PBIS, as revealed by the literature review and the findings of this study,
is all about instruction. The implementation of PBIS is more than just developing a positive
school environment and handing out rewards, it is about creating the most effective learning
environment and a positive social culture so that all students can learn, even when they
misbehave, and so that teachers feel like they are making a difference both academically and
socially in the lives of their students. PBIS Expert 2 summarizes this best when he stated:
Not only do students benefit when you implement PBIS, but teachers perceive
themselves as being more effective educators. They are less likely to have staff turnover,
and they are far more likely to identify themselves as effective in the classroom as well as
effective socially, so that teachers actually have identified that when they implement
PBIS, the school is a more effective place for them, not just for kids.
The fourth and final implication consists of creating a bridge between practitioners and
researchers, between theory and practice. The design of this qualitative study consisted of
interviewing five principals who are the practitioners at the high school site and five experts in
the field of PBIS and triangulating the data with literature in regards to PBIS in order to get the
complete “story” of what PBIS implementation should look like at the high school level from
those three points of view (Merriam, 2009). This research design and the findings from the
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

110
analysis by the researcher revealed many similarities and alignment from the perspective and
responses of the high school principals, the PBIS Experts, and the literature regarding PBIS
implementation.
Recommendations for Future Research
After conducting an examination of the characteristics of high schools that successfully
implemented PBIS at the high school level through a qualitative study that consisted of
interviewing five high school principals and five experts in the field of PBIS, three topics for
future research surfaced: (1) given that PBIS is a framework that educators can utilize to create
positive, safe and effective learning environments that can help all students succeed
academically and socially (Sugai & Horner, 2006) an examination of school districts that have
implemented PBIS district-wide can provide patterns and insight at a larger scale that was not
provided by this study that focused on the high school level, (2) this study found that the role of
the high school principal is critical for the successful and sustainable implementation of PBIS,
given that there are high turn-over rates of high school principals and administrators in general,
an examination to the causes of administrative turn-over and the impact on initiatives like PBIS
and student achievement in general may prove to beneficial for board members and
superintendents hoping to improve retention rates of their administrators, and (3) as schools of
education hope to improve their teacher preparation and administrative credential programs to
align with the needs of schools and practitioners, an assessment of schools’ effectiveness in
preparing teachers and administrators to meet the diverse needs of the students they serve and
their ability to implement research and evidence-based models like PBIS may prove to be
beneficial for improving education at a national scale.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

111
Conclusions
“Teaching behavior as relentlessly as we teach reading or other academic content is the
ultimate act of prevention, promise, and power underlying PBIS and other preventive
interventions in America’s schools” (Algozzine et al., 2011, p. 16). Education is dynamic and the
needs of students are diverse. As a result, educational leaders must also be life-long learners and
continue to develop their skills as they are tasked and challenged to prepare every student,
regardless of their needs, to be college and career ready. It would be in the best interest of all
stakeholders that the gaps between practitioners, researchers, and policy makers be minimized by
coming to the table to collaboratively look at models and strategies such as those present in the
PBIS framework in order to develop a social culture that focuses on prevention, positively
supporting students, parents, faculty, and staff, and creating predictable environments that are the
most conducive to learning. Principal 1 summarized this when he stated:
The students know that we are here to help them. They trust us. They know that we love
them and that we work with them, and they know that if they ever get into a personal
crisis, that we’re going to help them resolve it. So having all of those systems in place
[PBIS] at a school site is amazing and you get great results from that.
Michael Thompson, Director of the Council of State Governments Justice Center stated
that “Anyone who wants to make students feel safer in school, improve high school graduation
rates, and close the achievement gap needs to have a plan to reduce the number of youth who are
suspended from school.”
1
School culture matters. It is an important topic as it deals with the lives
of our most valuable asset, our children. The researcher hopes that the findings of this study will

1
Statement to the media at the June 3, 2014, release event for Morgan, Salomon, Plotkin,
and Cohen. (2014).
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

112
not only empower educators with concrete insight from principals and PBIS experts to assist
with implementation efforts but also inspire educational leaders to continue the work despite
challenges such as a lack of funding or political push-back from staff. Leaders must be aware
that true leadership is leading from behind and the more capacity is built the more likely leaders
are to encounter success and sustain the work. Principal 4’s statement summarized this well:
. . . initially develop the vision . . . you want to see where do we want our school. I feel
that I’m [principal] responsible to develop that and then what we do is develop a
leadership capacity among the stakeholders . . . we put that into place because those are
the folks that are going to, you know, move the mountains.
The mountains Principal 4 is referring to are the mountains of a culture in American
schools that is reactive and accustomed to punitive measures to “correct” student misconduct
instead of being proactive and positively support students. True leadership will stand for what is
right even when unions try to place pressure on principals and other school leaders who feel that
not suspending students is undermining the efforts of teachers and perceived as “soft.” Principal
4 stated well when he shared his experience with PBIS:
What PBIS did for me is it allowed me to maintain the focus on the students . . . and what
it is that they need, and what they are missing. Even with statistic kids, [the question is]
how can you deal with this specific child right here?
The most important finding that surfaced from this study is that the leadership of a
school, primarily the principal is the one who sets the tone for the rest of the school in regards to
the instructional and operational program. PBIS Expert 4 stated:
We find that school leaders are probably the most essential implementation force at the
high school level, especially the principal. If the principal isn’t actively engaged, doesn’t
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

113
practice what is asked for a staff to do, if they aren’t providing opportunities for school
leadership teams to do the work, it’s really difficult for implementation to occur.
Bolman and Deal (2008) state in their four framework approach to leadership, that
leaders need to be prepared with a variety of approaches, and at times multiple approaches, in
order to move a group of people toward a common vision. PBIS Expert 2 stated this idea well by
sharing the following:
[The principal] needs to be able to convince people that this [PBIS] is not just about
building a social situation that’s going to be more welcoming or comfortable, but it’s also
going to be building schools that are more effective learning environments . . . we’re
going to create an environment that is not just predictable for those kids who are in from
highly privileged situations. We’re going to make it so predictable that you are very
comfortable that you know what’s coming on. We’re going to make it so positive that
you’re actually expecting people to be nice to you. We’re going to make it so supportive
that you actually experience success . . . now when we do that, even kids who come from
very, very challenged settings are much more likely to want to show up and try.
The researcher hopes to further challenge institutions of higher learning to re-examine
their teacher preparation and administrative credential programs and assess whether candidates
who exit their programs are truly prepared to meet the diverse needs of the populations they
serve. PBIS Expert 2 summarized this idea well when he shared:
Too often what we’ve done is we’ve taught teachers to deliver curricula rather than teach
effectively. And teaching effectively in American schools today means you can’t just do
it one way, you have to actually differentiate instruction where you recognize that in a
class of 35 kids, you have 7 who are really struggling.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

114
If we are to justly serve our students then our expectations need to be high and we should
practice what we preach by trusting our students more and involving them more frequently in
their own education. PBIS Expert 3 had the following to say about PBIS and student
involvement:
High school students are so much the fabric of how their school operates and they also
have reached the point where they have the ability, the life experience, and we like to
think maturity to understand the concept [PBIS]. The more you involve students at the
high school level, the better the chance you have of it actually becoming real, actually
change the system.
In conclusion the researcher found that this study is really about leadership and the
aspects connected to the leadership of a high school principal investing in improving the social
culture of a school in order to create the most effective learning environment possible. The work
is not easy as this study found there are challenges, but with a clear vision, the right team,
sufficient resources, professional development, and the right evaluation system, PBIS can be
implemented effectively at the high school level so that all students are supported to succeed
academically and socially. The researcher will end with quotes from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
and from Algozzine et al. (2011) that summarize the sentiment discovered during this research
study and underscore the need for educational leaders to utilize models like PBIS in all of our
schools. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated, “Intelligence plus character — that is the goal of true
education” (Goodreads, 2015b). Algozzine et al. (2011) shared that “Teaching behavior as
relentlessly as we teach reading or other academic content is the ultimate act of prevention,
promise, and power underlying PBIS and other preventive interventions in America’s schools”
(p. 16). Let’s always do what is right for students and: Fight On!
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

115
REFERENCES
Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. S. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between
academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions,
13, 3-16.
American Psychological Association Zero-Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance
policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American
Psychologist, 63(9), 852-862.
Arcia, E. (2006). Achievement and enrollment statues of suspended students: Outcomes in a
large, multicultural school district. Education and Urban Society, 38, 359-369.
Balfanz, R., Byrnes, V., & Fox, J. (2013, January). Sent home and put off-track: The antecedents,
disproportionalities, and consequences of being suspended in the ninth grade. Paper
presented at the Closing the School Discipline Gap: Research to Practice conference,
Washington, D.C.
Bender, W. N., & Shores, C. (2007). Response to intervention: A practical guide for every
teacher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bohanon, H., Fenning, P., Carney, K. L., Minnis-Kim, M. J., Anderson-Harriss, S., & Moroz, K.
B. (2006). Schoolwide application of positive behavior support in an urban high school:
A case study. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8(3), 131-145.
Bohanon, H., Flannery, K. B., Mallory, J., & Fenning, P. (2009). Utilizing positive behavior
supports in high school settings to improve school completion rates for students with high
incidence conditions. Exceptionality, 17(1), 30-44.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

116
Bohanon-Edmonson, H., Flannery, K. B., Eber, L., & Sugai, G. (Eds.). (2005). Positive behavior
support in high schools. Monograph from the 2004 Illinois High School Forum of
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, May 18-19, 2004, Naperville, IL.
Retrieved from http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/pbisresources/
PBSmonographcomplete.pdf
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C., Bevans, K., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. (2008). The impact of school-
wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) on the organizational health
of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 462-473.
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of school-wide
positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a
randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 12(3), 133-148.
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., O’Brennan, L. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Multilevel
exploration of factors contributing to the overrepresentation of Black students in office
discipline referrals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 508-520.
Cameron, M. (2006). Managing school discipline and implications for school social workers: A
review of literature. Children and Schools, 28(4), 219-227.
Carter, P., Fine, M., & Russell, S. (2014). New and developing research on disparities in
discipline. Bloomington, IN: The Equity Project at Indiana University.
Children’s Defense Fund. (1975). School suspensions: Are they helping children? Cambridge,
MA: Washington Research Project.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

117
Chin, J., Dowdy, E., Jimerson, S., & Rime, J. (2012). Alternatives to suspension: Rationale and
recommendations. Journal of School Violence, 11(2), 156-173.
Christle, C. A., Jolivette, K., & Nelson, C. M. (2005). Breaking the school to prison pipeline:
Identifying school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency. Exceptionality,
13(2), 69-88.
Cohen, R., Kincaid, D., & Childs, K. E. (2007). Measuring school-wide positive behavior
support implementation: Development and validation of the benchmark of quality.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(4), 203-213.
Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap — and others don’t.
New York, NY: Harper Business.
Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). School-wide and classroom management:
Reconceptualizing the integration and management of students with behavioral problems
in general education. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 361-381.
Cotton, K. (1990). Schoolwide and classroom discipline. Washington, D.C.: School
Improvement Research Series (SIRS), Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crotty, J. M. (2014, September 21). Should corporal punishment be allowed in schools? Forbes.
Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2014/09/21/should-
corporal-punishment-be-allowed-in-schools/
Curtis, R., Van Horne, J. W., Robertson, P., & Karvonen, M. (2010). Outcomes of school-wide
positive behavior support program. Professional School Counseling, 13(3), 159-164.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

118
Davis, J. E., & Jordan, W. J. (1995). The effects of school context, structure, and experiences on
African American males in middle and high school. Journal of Negro Education, 63(4),
570-587.
Dupper, D. (1994). Reducing out-of-school suspensions: A survey of attitudes and barriers.
Oxford Journals Children and Schools, 16(2), 115-123.
Dwyer, K., Osher, D., & Warger, C. (1998). Early warning, timely response: A guide to safe
schools. Washington, D.C.: Department of Education.
Fenning, P., & Rose, J. (2007). Overrepresentation of African American students in exclusionary
discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42(6), 536-559.
Frazen, K., & Kemps, D. (2008). The utilization and effects of positive behavior support
strategies of an urban school playground. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
10(3), 150-162.
George, H. P., & Martinez, S. A. (2007). How to get PBIS in your school. OSEP Technical
Assistance PBIS Center Newsletter, 4(1). Washington, D.C.: Office of Special Education
Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Goodreads. (2015a). Nelson Mandela quotes. Retrieved from
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/382246-it-is-better-to-lead-from-behind-and-to-put
Goodreads. (2015b). Martin Luther King Jr. quotes. Retrieved from
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7847-intelligence-plus-character-that-is-the-goal-of-
true-education
Gregory, A., Noguera, P., & Skiba, R. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap: Two
sides of the same coin? Educational Researcher, 39(1), 59-68.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

119
Handler, M. W., Rey, J., Connell, J., Their, K., Feinberg, A., & Putnam, R. (2007). Practical
considerations in creating school-wide positive behavior support in public schools.
Psychology in the Schools, 44(1), 29-39.
Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2009, March). Is school-wide positive behavior support and
evidence-based practice? Washington, D.C.: Technical Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.pbis.org/research
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), 1-8.
Horner, R. H., Sugia, 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, 133-144.
Horner, R. H., Todd, A. W., Lewis-Palmer, T., Irvin, L. K., Sugai, G., & Boland, J. B. (2004).
The school-wide evaluation tool (SET): A research instrument for assessing school-wide
positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 3-12.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
Kant, A. R., & March, R. E. (2004). Effective strategies for addressing challenging behavior in
schools. AASA Journal of Schoalrship and Practice, 1(3), 3-5.
Karub, D. T., Taylor-Green, S., March, R. E., & Horner, R. H. (2000). Reducing hallway noise:
A systems approach. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(3) 179-183.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

120
Kasper, B. (2004). Administrative support and roles for implementation of positive behavior
support in high schools. In H. Bohanon, K. B. Flannery, L. Ebder, & G. Sugai (Eds.),
Monograph from the 2004 Illinois High School Forum of Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (pp. 25-34). Washington, D.C.: Center on Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of
Education.
Kewel Ramani, A., Gilbertson, I., Fox, M., & Provansik, S. (2007). Status and trends in the
education of racial and ethnic minorities (NCES 2007-039). Washington, D.C.: National
Center for Educational Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education.
Kincaid, D., Childs, K., Blasé, K. A., & Wallace, F. (2007). Identifying barriers and facilitators
in implementing school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 9(3), 174-184.
LaNear, J., & Frattura, E. (2007). Getting the stories straight: Allowing different voices to tell an
‘effective history’ of special education law in the United States. Education and Law,
19(2), 87-109.
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.
Losen, D. J., & Martinez, T. E. (2013). Out of school and off track. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil
Rights Project at UCLA.
Losen, D. J., & Skiba, R. (2010) Suspended education: Urban middle schools in crisis. Los
Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project at UCLA.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

121
Luiselli, J. K., Putnam, R. F., Handler, M. W., & Feinberg, A. B. (2005). Whole-school behavior
support: Effects on student discipline and academic performance. Educational
Psychology, 25(2-3), 183-198.
McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined
efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and
behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 8(3), 146-154.
McKevitt, B. C., & Braaksma, A. D. (2008). Best practices in developing a positive behavior
support system at the school level. Best Practices in School Psychology, 44(3), 735-747.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, S. B., & Stipek, D. (2006). Contemporaneous and longitudinal associations between
social behavior and literacy achievement in a sample of low-income elementary school
children. Child Development, 77(1), 103-117.
Morgan, E., Salomon, N., Plotkin, J. D., & Cohen, R. (2014). The school discipline consensus
report: Strategies from the field to keep students engaged in school and out of the
juvenile justice system. New York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center.
Muscott, H. S., Mann, E. L., & LeBrun, M. R. (2008). Positive behavioral interventions and
supports in New Hampshire: Effects of large-scale implementation of schoolwide
positive behavior support on student discipline and academic achievement. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(3), 190-205.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

122
Netzel, D. M., & Eber, L. (2003) Shifting from reactive to proactive discipline in an urban school
district: A change of focus through PBIS implementation. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 5(2), 71-79.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
Office for Civil Rights. (2012, October). Civil Rights Data Collection, Data snapshot: School
discipline (Issue Brief No. 1). Washington, D.C.: Office for Civil Rights, U.S.
Department of Education.
Office for Civil Rights. (2014, March). Civil Rights Data Collection, Data snapshot: School
discipline (Issue Brief No. 1). Washington, D.C.: Office for Civil Rights, U.S.
Department of Education.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS). (2015a). PBIS and the law. Washington,
D.C.: National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from https://www.pbis.org/school/pbis-and-the-law
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS). (2015b). Training. Washington, D.C.:
National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports,
Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www.pbis.org/training
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

123
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS). (2015c). Evaluation tools. Washington,
D.C.: National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from https://www.pbis.org/blueprint/evaluation-tools
Public Agenda. (2004). Teaching interrupted: Do discipline policies in today’s public schools
foster the common good? New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.publicagenda.org/files/teaching_interrupted.pdf
Putnam, R. F., & Hehl, D. H. (2004). Development and enhancement of school-wide high school
teams. In H. Bohanon, K. B. Flannery, L. Ebder, & G. Sugai (Eds.), Monograph from the
2004 Illinois High School Forum of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (pp.
16-24). Washington, D.C.: Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports,
Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Quinn, M. M., Osher, D., Hoffman, C. C., & Hanley, T. V. (1998). Safe, drug-free, and effective
schools for all students: What works! Washington, D.C.: Center for Effective
Collaboration and Practice, American Institutes for Research.
Rose, L. C., & Gallup, A. M. (2006). The 38th annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the
public’s attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 41-56.
Scheuermann, B. K., & Hall, J. A. (2008). Positive behavioral supports for the classroom. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Scott, T. M., Park, K. L., Swain-Bradway, J., & Landers, E. (2007). Positive behavior support in
the classroom: Facilitating behavioral inclusive learning environments. International
Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 3(2), 223-235.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

124
Senge, P. M. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning
organization. New York, NY: Currency, Doubleday.
Sherrod, M. D., Getch, Y. Q., & Ziomek-Diage, J. (2009). The impact of positive behavior
support to decrease discipline referrals with elementary students. Professional School
Counseling, 12(6), 421-427.
Simonsen, B., Sugai, G., & Negron, M. (2008). Schoolwide positive behavior supports: Primary
systems and practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(6), 32-40.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C., 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(1), 85-107.
Skiba, R. J., & Rausch, M. K. (2006). Zero tolerance, suspension, and expulsion: Questions of
equity and effectiveness. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of
classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 1063-1089).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Skiba, R. J., Reynolds, C. R., Graham, S., Sheras, P., Conoley, J. C., & Garcia-Vazquez, E.
(2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and
recommendations. American Psychologist, 63(9), 852-862.
Skiba, R. J., & Sprague, J. (2008). Safety without suspensions. Educational Leadership, 66(1),
38-43.
Sprick, R. S. (2009). Doing discipline differently. Principal Leadership, 9(5), 19-22.
Storch, E. A., Brassard, M. R., & Masia-Warner, C. L. (2003). The relationship of peer
victimization to social anxiety and loneliness in adolescence. Child Study Journal, 33, 1-
19.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

125
Sugai, G., Flannery, K. B., & Bohanon, H. (2004). School-wide positive behavior support in high
schools. What will it take? In H. Bohanon, K. B. Flannery, L. Ebder, & G. Sugai (Eds.),
Monograph from the 2004 Illinois High School Forum of Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (pp. 1-15). Washington, D.C.: Center on Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of
Education.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive
behavior supports. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1/2), 23-50.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-
wide positive behavior supports. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245-259.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2008). What we know and need to know about preventing problem
behavior in schools. Exceptionality, 16, 67-77.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., & 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. Retrived from http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/
files/pbisresources/PBIS_revisited_June19r_2012.pdf
Townsend, B. L. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African American learners: Reducing
school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional Children, 66(3), 381-391.
Turnbull, A., Edmonson, H., Griggs, P., Wickham, D., Sailor, W., Freeman, R., . . . Warren, J.
(2002). A blueprint for school-wide positive behavior support: Full implementation of
three components. Exceptional Children, 68(3), 337-402.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

126
Wallace, J. M. Jr., Goodkind, S., Wallace, C. M., & Backman, J. G. (2008). Racial, ethnic and
gender differences in school discipline among U.S. high school students: 1991-2005.
Negro Educational Review, 59, 47-62
Warren, J. S., Bohanon-Edmonson, H. M., Turnbull, A. P., Sailor, W., Wickham, D., Griggs, P.,
& Beech, S. E. (2006). School-wide positive behavior support: Addressing behavior
problems that impede student learning. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 187-198.
Warren, J. S., Edmonson, H. M., Griggs, P., Lassen, S. R., McCart, A., Turnbull, A., & Sailor,
W. (2003). Urban applications of school-wide positive behavior support: Critical issues
and lessons learned. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(2), 80-91.
Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement (McRel Policy
Brief). Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

127
APPENDIX A
CERTIFIED INFORMATION SHEET

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

128

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

129
APPENDIX B
CERTIFIED RECRUITMENT LETTER

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

130
APPENDIX C
CONSENT FORM FOR INTERVIEWS

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

131
APPENDIX D
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PRINCIPALS

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

132

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

133

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

134

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

135

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

136
APPENDIX E
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR PBIS EXPERTS

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

137

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

138

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

139
APPENDIX F
SCHOOL-WIDE EVALUATION TOOL (SET) VERSION 2.1

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

140

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

141

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

142

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

143

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

144

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

145

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

146

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

147
APPENDIX G
PBIS TEAM IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLIST (TIC) VERSION 3.1

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

148

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

149

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

150

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

151

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

152

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

153

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

154

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

155
APPENDIX H
SELF-ASSESSMENT SURVEY (SAS) VERSION 2.0

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

156

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

157

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

158

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

159

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

160

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

161

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

162

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

163

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

164

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

165

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

166

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

167

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

168

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

169

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

170

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

171

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

172
APPENDIX I
SCHOOL-WIDE BENCHMARKS OF QUALITY (BOQ)

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

173

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

174

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

175

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

176

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

177

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

178

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

179

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

180

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

181

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

182

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

183

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

184

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

185

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

186

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

187

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

188

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

189

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

190
APPENDIX J
SCHOOL-WIDE PBIS TIERED FIDELITY INVENTORY (TFI) VERSION 2.1

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

191

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

192

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

193

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

194

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

195

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

196

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

197

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

198

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

199

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

200

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

201

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

202

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

203

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

204

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

205

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

206

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

207

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

208

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

209

POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS

210
APPENDIX K
PERMISSION TO USE INFORMATION FROM PBIS.ORG FOR EDUCATIONAL
CITATIONS

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Educational leaders have the responsibility of creating safe and effective learning environments so that every student can achieve and be college and career ready. Accomplishing this goal has become increasingly challenging considering that schools face fewer resources, a variety of competing initiatives, and greater demands in regards to serving students with vast emotional, learning, and behavioral needs. Schools traditionally have practiced reactionary and punitive discipline such as suspension and expulsion to deal with discipline and safety without any evidence that it corrects student behavior. Researchers have identified Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) as a framework for assisting school personnel in selecting and utilizing evidence-based interventions into an integrated continuum that improves academic and behavioral outcomes for all students. There is however, limited research and application of PBIS at the high school level, as a majority of the current research available tends to focus on the elementary level. The purpose of this study is to examine the characteristics of successful School-wide PBIS implementation at the high school level through a qualitative study that consisted of interviews of five high school principals that have successfully implemented PBIS school-wide and five experts in the field of PBIS. The responses of all of the participants were compared to the literature on PBIS in order to triangulate the data and find patterns that would provide insight to key elements for successful PBIS implementation at the high school level, from a practitioners and experts’ perspective. The study found emerging themes centered on leadership, challenges to implementation, resources, professional development, and evaluation. The researcher concluded that leadership and role of the high school principal are the most critical factors for the successful and sustainable implementation of PBIS school-wide at the high school level.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Effective leadership practices used by middle school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Effective leadership practices of catholic high school principals that support academic success

PDF

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

PDF

Promising practices of school site administrators within established ninth‐grade transition programs at large high schools

PDF

The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

PDF

Efective leadership practices used by elementary school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Evidence-based school counseling: challenges encountered by public high school counselors in implementing 21st century counseling skills

PDF

Superintendents increase student achievement by selecting effective principals

PDF

The successful implementation of STEM initiatives in lower income schools

PDF

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

PDF

Elementary principal perceptions of teacher to student bullying within classroom management practices

PDF

CAHSEE intervention strategies implemented by successful urban California superintendents

PDF

Use of Kotter’s change model by elementary school principals in the successful implementation of inclusive education programs for students with disabilities in K-6 elementary schools in Southern ...

PDF

Comparative study of the networked principal vs. the isolated principal

PDF

Data-driven decision-making practices that secondary principals use to improve student achievement

PDF

Secondary school counselor-principal relationships: impact on counselor accountability

PDF

Senior-level student affairs' administrators' self-reported leadership practices, behaviors, and strategies

PDF

The secondary school principal's role as instructional leader in teacher professional development

PDF

Model leadership: discovering successful principals' skills, strategies and approaches for student success

PDF

Effective leadership practices of principals of low socioeconomic status high schools consisting of predominantly African-American and Latino students showing sustained academic improvement

Asset Metadata

Creator Rubalcaba, Ramiro (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/08/2015

Defense Date 03/23/2015

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

Tag High schools,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBIS,PBIS implementation,Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor García, Pedro Enrique (committee chair), Castruita, Rudy Max (committee member), Escalante, Michael F. (committee member)

Creator Email ramirorubalcaba@gmail.com,rrubalca@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-543097

Unique identifier UC11297721

Identifier etd-RubalcabaR-3253.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-543097 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-RubalcabaR-3253.pdf

Dmrecord 543097

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Rubalcaba, Ramiro

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