University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A Qualitative Examination of PBIS Team Members' Perceptions of Urban High School
Teachers' Roles in Implementing Tier 2 Schoolwide Positive Behavior Supports
by
Adrienne Thomas
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2024

TEACHERS’ PERCEPTION OF ROLE IN TIER 2 SCHOOLWIDE PBIS 1
The Committee for Adrienne Thomas certifies the approval of this Dissertation.
Morgan Polikoff, PhD.
Brandi Jones,EdD
Artineh Samkian, PhD
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
2
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative exploratory study, from the perspective of PBIS team members, is
to understand why high schools implementing schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (PBIS) have not achieved the same transformative climate improvements seen at the K8 level. This research focuses on PBIS team members' efforts to support teachers in identifying
students for Tier 2 behavior prevention and intervention. The aim is to dismantle aversive
disciplinary policies through PBIS structures. The participants in this study are high school
teachers who are current or former PBIS team members working in urban schools in Los
Angeles County, with 2-8 years of experience in schools with a PBIS structure. The study
explores two research questions: (1) What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers
preventing high school teachers from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports
within the PBIS framework? (2) What beliefs about school discipline and classroom
management do PBIS team members perceive as influencing high school teachers' ability to
identify students for Tier 2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
The theoretical frameworks that underpin this study are the Pupil Control Ideology (PCI) and
Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE). These frameworks are employed to analyze and interpret the
responses to the barriers to and challenges of the high school teacher's role in identifying atpromise students for Tier 2 Positive Behavior Intervention and Support (PBIS) within the diverse
context of urban high schools in Los Angeles County. PCI (Perceived Control of Instruction)
relates to the teacher’s belief system about student discipline on a continuum from a custodial to
a humanistic perspective. TSE relates to how such beliefs influence a teacher's approach to
classroom behavior management. In particular, the custodial teacher views rules and regulations
as a priority, while the humanistic teacher views the student as the priority. The perspectives of

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
3
teachers from PCI (Perceived Control of Instruction) to TSE (Teacher Self-Efficacy) on student
discipline and behavior can influence their willingness to adopt or support the progressive
behavior structure of PBIS.
The key findings demonstrated the importance of building relational trust among administration
and teachers to transform mindsets, foster cognition, and assess the social-contextual
environment to produce an optimal understanding of the high school teachers’ role in SWPBIS.
The study's participants offer insights for PBIS teams and school administration to consider to
support teachers' knowledge of how Tier 2 PBIS interventions can progressively manage the
behavior of at-promise students. Additionally, the school administration’s acknowledgment of
previous ineffective discipline policies and procedures can further enhance teachers' perception
of their role in identifying students for Tier 2 support. The study concludes with a discussion of
educational implications and recommendations for future research.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
4
Acknowledgments
No words can express my gratitude and sincere honor to have been mentored by
formidably impressive human beings throughout my journalism and education careers. I pay it
forward daily with acts of service in my personal and professional life. I am rooted in social
justice, I am resilient, and I am forever an optimist. Completion of this dissertation may end my
academic accolades, but it has propelled me to seek “good trouble” and create allies along the
way to improve life’s opportunities for students who are unseen, unheard, and devalued.
To my Mama, Ann, and my Daddy, Aaron, for your unwavering support for my leaps of
faith into all things different and adventurous, I thank you and love you. My parents, my
grandparents, and the village that raised me were role-modeled that failure was a part of life and
losing was inevitable. I learned to take nothing for granted and count my blessings, and each day,
I awaken to have a chance and a choice.
This is my 22nd year as an educator. My journey to complete this dissertation has been
my life's hardest and most rewarding aspect. The loss of family members and listening to my
own body throughout has redefined how I connect, celebrate, and share with family and friends.
On my marquee of influential people who molded my love of education, I place Beverly Walker,
Bonita Cornute, Lorna Daniels-Nichols, Retta Brown, Yolanda Stevenson, Mrs. Richardson, Dr.
Crechena Wise, Dr. Gina Zietlow, Raymond Wilders, Theresa Wilson, Dr. Robert Cooper, Dee
Lonlon, Normandy Christian School staff, my former Willowbrook Middle and Centennial High
School students, Sonia Bankston-Cullen, Gates Millennium Scholars Program, and Marva
Collins. Thank you for your role modeling, care, and support for developing young minds.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
5
Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................2
Chapter One: Overview of the Study.......................................................................................8
Responsive Schools for At-Promise Students...................................................................9
Background of the Problem...........................................................................................18
Statement of the Problem...............................................................................................20
Purpose of the Study......................................................................................................21
Research Questions .......................................................................................................22
Significance of the Study...............................................................................................22
Limitations of the Study ................................................................................................23
Chapter Two: Literature Review ...........................................................................................25
The Negative Impact of Traditional School Discipline...................................................26
Social-Emotional Needs of High School Students.....................................................30
Significance of the Teacher-student Relationship...........................................................32
High School Teacher Cultivation of Social Competence............................................34
High School Teachers’ Beliefs about School Discipline ............................................36
Shifting from Reactive to Proactive: The PBIS Approach..............................................37
Implementation of Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support (PBIS) ............................48
Theoretical Framework..................................................................................................54
Summary of Literature Review......................................................................................56
Chapter 3: Methodology .........................................................................................................59
Research Design: Phenomenological Approach .............................................................60
Selection of the Sample .................................................................................................61
Instrumentation and Sources Data..................................................................................62
Data Collection and Analysis.........................................................................................64
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................65
Chapter 4: Research Results and Findings.................................................................................66
Description of Interview Participants.............................................................................67
Findings for Research Question 1 ..................................................................................69
Absence of a Clearly Defined Student Discipline System...........................................70
Feedback to Teachers on Classroom Discipline Referrals.........................................72
Teacher Training on Tier 2 PBIS Supports................................................................75
Findings for Research Question 2 ..................................................................................77
Teacher-Administrator Trust ...................................................................................77
Over-Reliance on Punitive Discipline .......................................................................79
Belief in Social-Emotional Needs of High School Students........................................81
Teacher’s Upbringing Impact on Managing Student Discipline ................................82
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications...................................................................................86
Methodology .................................................................................................................87
Research Questions .....................................................................................................87

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
6
Purpose of the Study......................................................................................................88
Results and Findings......................................................................................................89
Misalignment with Philosophical Belief....................................................................91
Perceived Efficacy of Interventions...........................................................................93
Teacher’s Role in Conflict with Facilitation of Behavior Management......................94
Teacher’s Upbringing Impact on Managing Student Discipline.................................97
Implications of the Study...............................................................................................98
Recommendations for Future Research..........................................................................99
Concluding Remarks...................................................................................................100
References..............................................................................................................................102
APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................124
Appendix A: Informed Consent Form .....................................................................................124
Appendix B: Interview Protocol..............................................................................................126

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
7
List of Figures
Figure 1 PBIS Multi-tiered levels of social-emotional and behavior support.............................15
Figure 2 Behavior Matrix.........................................................................................................16
Figure 3 Example of a High School Tier 1 Expectations...........................................................41
Figure 4 PBIS Integrated Responsive Practices for Classroom Behavior Management .............44
Figure 5 Elements of School Wide PBIS..................................................................................50
Figure 6: Conceptual Framework for Implementation of SWPBS in High Schools...................52

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
8
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The teacher-student relationship matters (Hershfeldt et al., 2012). High school teachers’
behavioral expectations vary across classrooms, subject matter, and grade levels (Allman &
Slate, 2011). These expectations may help or hinder fostering a learning environment conducive
to student engagement and learning. High school students may arrive to class with socialemotional issues and/or adverse educational experiences, which manifest in off-task behaviors
that impede their academic success. Lee et al. (1999) define problem or off-task behaviors as
aggression (e.g., kicking a desk, tearing paper, throwing objects) and disruptive behaviors (e.g.,
talking out, being out of the chair, making noise, playing with objects, making faces). Students
exhibiting these behaviors are considered “at-risk” [at-promise], and interventions are not often
readily accessible to support the learning of self-regulation strategies to manage their behavior,
improve focus, and reduce disruptions (Lee et al., 1999).
Consequently, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) students exhibiting
consistent negative social-emotional outcomes have been historically underserved for academic
achievement and are at the heart of school discipline reforms to reduce the problem and off-task
behaviors. Student achievement is directly associated with effective teacher-student
relationships, and making healthy connections with students communicates care (Deiro, 1996).
In response, elementary, middle, and high schools utilize behavior prevention and intervention
frameworks such as PBIS as part of their Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) to dismantle
aversive disciplinary policies and procedures. Research has shown that high schools
implementing Schoolwide PBIS have not achieved the same transformative school climate
success as those at the K-8 grade levels. The study focuses on the perspectives of high school

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
9
PBIS team leaders and members regarding the obstacles, perceptions of their role, and the impact
of student discipline and classroom management beliefs on identifying at-risk students for
targeted intervention in Tier 2 of PBIS.
Miller et al. (2017) state that students' assessments of the quality of their relationships
with their teachers significantly predict their commitment to schooling. Combining research,
practice, and policy can improve their educational experience and life opportunities. Each
student should have access to social, behavioral, and academic pre-interventions, which are
foundational to their academic success. Moreover, the existing paucity of research examining the
effectiveness of school behavior frameworks such as PBIS supports the need for more
information to inform the development, training, and coaching necessary for long-term success
in high schools, particularly with high-need populations (Molloy et al., 2013; Bradshaw et al.,
2014)
Responsive Schools for At-Promise Students
According to Renihan and Renihan (1995), successful schools take proactive steps to
create and maintain a supportive environment for not only at-promise students but all students.
This is characterized by a willingness and an ability to adapt all school practices to individual
differences, hence creating conditions conducive to personal and social growth. Consequently,
successful schools encourage a reciprocity culture between students and teachers in the academic
and social aspects. Positive Behavior Interventions and Support (PBIS) is an evidence-based,
three-tiered framework for improving and integrating all the data, systems, and practices
affecting student outcomes every day; it is a commitment to addressing student behavior through
systems change (Lee et al., 1999; Sugai & Horner, 2002). Research on the effectiveness of PBIS
has yielded a decrease in students’ negative outcomes, such as expulsions, office discipline

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
10
referrals (ODRs), and suspensions (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Simonsen et al., 2008). PBIS has
helped schools cultivate positive teacher-student relationships through an improved school
climate that better prepares students for life after high school.
Maintaining a safe and civil learning environment through universal student expectations
in high schools has increased the secondary classroom teacher’s responsibility to decrease
challenging behaviors. This is in part due to the rise in school violence. School Survey on Crime
and Safety (SSOCS) developed and managed by the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) of the U.S. Department of Education, most recently during the 2017-18 school year,
found that 95.6% of the reporting 12,600 public high schools implemented behavior modification
interventions for students and 94% invested in prevention curriculum, instruction, or training for
students (Diliberti et al., 2019). American high schools have prioritized campus safety and
students' social-emotional learning needs. School districts and site administrators quelled the
initial public scrutiny of “something must be done” by increasing zero tolerance and student
search policies (Beger, 2002).
Consequently, utilizing these policies as a tool for enforcement led to the creation of
subgroups of students who were more often profiled, searched, and questioned. Research on
school discipline, specifically the rise and fall of zero-tolerance policies, has increased. Rosen
(2014) states:
Critics of zero tolerance, administrators during the 2000s began relying on stiff
disciplinary policies to winnow out poorly performing students because schools faced
sanctions if students failed high-stakes achievement tests mandated by the sweeping No
Child Left Behind school reform measure passed in 2001. Students who were disruptive
in class could jeopardize classroom learning and drag down test scores. Also, some

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
11
school boards also adopted mandatory zero-tolerance punishments for infractions to
protect principals and administrators from lawsuits alleging that discipline was being
applied unequally based on students' race, disabilities, or other factors. Such policies
eliminated principals' discretion, it was argued, so they could not be accused of disparate
treatment (p. 21).
School violence prevention is recognized as a multitiered, multifaceted issue that affects
students, school personnel, families, and the community. More commonly, it is no longer limited
to student-student conflict and can include student–school personnel (Freeman et al., 2016).
Approximately 95% of out-of-school suspensions are for non-violent misbehaviors, e.g., “willful
defiance, profanity, acting disrespectfully” (U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, 2014).
Many of these suspensions affected historically underrepresented student populations and other
subgroups within schools. This may be due to school administration and teachers relying on
exclusionary discipline practices. According to Duncan (2014), “Positive discipline policies can
help create a safer learning environment without relying heavily on suspensions and expulsions.
Schools must understand their civil rights obligations and avoid unfair disciplinary practices. We
need to keep students in class where they learn” (para. 2).
A critical step to improving the educational outcomes for these students is for high school
teachers to understand the attitudes and circumstances that foster unhealthy and unsafe
behaviors. However, more importantly, the teacher and school must understand and talk
constructively and openly about these behaviors. Teacher efficacy, as it relates to how teachers
perceive their ability to influence positive student outcomes, is at the apex of student behavior
interventions (Nunn & Jantz, 2009). The accountability for maintaining a safe and civil learning
environment through the promotion of universal student expectations has increased the high

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
12
school teacher’s responsibility to address challenging behaviors exhibited in the classroom. The
traditional discipline model in the public education system viewed non-adherence to
classroom/school rules as requiring swift consequences for disorderly conduct.
In 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Education drafted a
school-to-prison pipeline in which “get-tough” discipline disproportionately targeted minority
and disabled students. Such discipline measures resulted in the removal of students from general
education. Subsequently, high schools began defining, teaching, monitoring, and rewarding
behavioral expectations (Netzel & Eber, 2003). Findings from studies that examined school
suspensions revealed that suspended students were more likely to become repeat offenders,
resulting in additional suspensions over time (Ambrose & Gibson, 1995; Costenbader &
Markson, 1998).
In a joint effort between the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and the US Office of Civil
Rights (OCR), an outline for more equitable school discipline was detailed in the “Dear
Colleague Letter.” The outline provided guidance for public schools to practice
nondiscriminatory administration of school discipline. Additionally, it cautioned schools to
refrain from creating racial and character-related disparities among students when developing
and enforcing school discipline policies. Lhamon et al. (2014) assert that DOJ and OCR’s
definition of school-based discrimination encouraged schools to seek comprehensive schoolwide
programs that would: (1) reduce disruption and misconduct, (2) support and reinforce positive
behavior and character development, and (3) help students succeed. The purpose of strategies
such as restorative practices and structured systems of positive interventions is to curtail and
decrease student misbehavior an increase educational equity (Weeks et al., 2019). Furthermore,
the DOJ also provided a framework for investigating schools with discriminatory practices based

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
13
on reports from parents, students, and the community. In the years that followed until the present
day, school principals have the inherent duty to implement systems of support that are in place
for fair and equitable student discipline outcomes (Gregory et al., 2008; Jarvis & Okonofua,
2020). Studies have suggested a correlation between exclusionary discipline policies and
practices and an array of serious behavior and social problems, including school avoidance and
educational engagement (Curran, 2016).
For example, the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), conducted by the Office of Civil
Rights (OCR), found that 50% of the students who were involved in school-related arrests or
referred to law enforcement are Hispanic-Latino or Black/African American (Lhamon &
Samuels, 2014). According to the 2017-2018 Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) on public
school enrollment, 15.1% are Black/African American and 27.2% are Hispanic-Latino students.
Yet, Black/African American students accounted for the highest number of school days missed
due to out-of-school suspensions at 30.6% (CRDC, 2018). The criminalization of school
discipline is further explored by Heise and Nance's (2022) study, using empirical research on the
school-to-prison pipeline and the School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), which
concluded that student discipline associated with a School Resource Officer/police (SRO)
increased school referrals to law enforcement agencies. Race, ethnicity, class, and exclusionary
discipline practices are all ingredients that can cause disparities leading to what education
researchers call the “school-to-prison pipeline”. High suspension and expulsion rates are
associated with lower academic achievement and higher rates of juvenile justice system
involvement (Brown, 2007; Skiba & Rausch, 2013). Consequently, many scholars maintain that
educators’ biases, while not the sole cause, contribute to racial disparities in exclusionary

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
14
discipline and school securitization, particularly when decision-making involves significant
subjective judgment (Nance & Heise, 2022; Girvan et al., 2017).
Research shows that a student’s behavior can adversely affect their academic progress.
High school teachers working in schools with Schoolwide Positive Behavior Intervention
Supports (SWPBIS) are charged with identifying, gathering data, and communicating with
parents for targeted classroom and group interventions. Some schools may implement
schoolwide behavior management to support the needs of some students who lack coping skills
and self-regulation, which is imperative for them to progress academically.
As a result, the PBIS tiered framework is commonly paired with academic supports to
increase overall student academic success and school connectedness. At each tier,
communication, collaboration, and data collection are conducted to identify the effectiveness of
the preventive supports. The expected student outcomes of Tiers 2 and 3 are that once students
are provided support, they will be able to achieve and maintain Tier 1 proficiency levels of
behavior (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.; Dunlap et al. 2010).
According to the Center on PBIS (2021), the decision to move students into or out of Tiers 2 and
3 should be made by a PBIS team. This team convenes to assess student progress and determine
whether each student should continue with an intervention, start a new intervention, or
discontinue an intervention. Figure 1 displays the multi-tiered social, emotional and behavior
support levels and the prescribed percentage of students serviced at each level.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
15
Figure 1
PBIS Multi-tiered levels of social-emotional and behavior support
Note. The continuum of evidence-based practices is organized in a three-tiered
continuum of promotion, prevention, and intervention.
https://images.app.goo.gl/bjvcL27XYNhgk5wr
Teachers are invaluable in the fidelity of PBIS because they are accountable for
coordinating with counselors, colleagues, administrators, and the PBIS Team. Implementation of
PBIS requires the school to create a team of reflective adults in the school community. There are
roles fulfilled by general and special education teachers, support staff, and administrators for the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
16
implementation and ongoing development of PBIS. The PBIS team is responsible for leading the
school community in developing a schoolwide action plan that outlines the character
expectations and universal student behaviour of the PBIS.
Figure 2 below is an example of a matrix that the PBIS team would co-develop with staff
that support the school’s mission/purpose. When it is visibly displayed in the classroom and
other settings, it helps to increase students’ understanding of schoolwide expectations. It even
offers specific examples of actions students can take to meet these expectations. Teachers,
principals, aides, and parents consistently reinforce key behavioral expectations during students’
daily routines.
Figure 2
Behavior Matrix

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
17
Note. The purpose of a PBIS behavior matrix is to identify and display positive
behaviors that meet behavioral expectations across all school contexts and
settings. Own Work
Simonsen et al. (2020) state schools can redesign the school environment through
evidence-based, contextually appropriate, and culturally relevant classroom practices, which can
teach these effective habits to all students. These practices help reduce discipline issues and
support academic success (Dunlop, 2019). Sugai (2007) states once staff and administrators
differentiate what constitutes classroom versus office-managed problems, students can have
equitable consequences for discipline infractions. Thereafter, the data-driven decision-making
system is employed to gather and analyze data on the services provided to students across
various tiers (Bradshaw, 2015).
Tier 1 of PBIS is universal support for all students. This foundational tier is crucial for
schools to develop and establish a behavior matrix for all students to be held accountable.
Accountability is universal, with 80%-90% of students maintaining adherence. The progression
to Tier 2 and Tier 3 is co-dependent on the strength of Tier 1 (Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
Tier 2 is where targeted interventions occur for approximately 5% -10% of students
identified as needing additional support. These interventions include a variety of research-based
strategies provided mainly by teachers within the classroom, as well as recommendations for
small group schoolwide support. For example, students receive a mentor or participate in an
afterschool program. Students may also be given a customized behavior plan called Check
In/Check Out (CICO) to help them self-correct (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports, n.d.).

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
18
Tier 3 is the intensive, narrow-focused level for students exhibiting at-risk behaviors.
Support occurs in very small groups or individually. The few students in Tier 3, approximately
1% - 5%, may need support to overcome barriers to the behavior skills required as expectations
of all students stated in Tier 1. For example, parents, teachers, and possibly a school behaviorist
meet to discuss a student’s behavior and engage in collaborative problem-solving to identify
supports such as behavior support plan, mental health evaluation referral, alcohol/drug referral,
assessment for special education services, and other wrap-around services (Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
Most importantly, PBIS is a preventive measure that allows children to receive muchneeded intervention before they reach a crisis state (Severson et al., 2007). Although the number
of schools adopting PBIS continues to increase in the U.S., the rate of high schools adopting
PBIS is slower than that of elementary schools. According to a study, only by PBIS of all
schools implementing PBIS, only 13% are high schools (Swain-Bradway et al., 2018). Gathering
in-depth perspectives of high school teachers is essential to understanding the impediments to the
fidelity of using PBIS (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
Background of the Problem
In 2007, the U.S. Department of Education under the Bush Administration recommended
teachers to proactively increase school connectedness through their classrooms and for states to
develop school cultures to foster trust and promote safety. Thereafter, in 2013, the Obama
Administration developed the School Climate Transformation grant to support school districts
that implemented a multi-tiered behavioral framework which trained teachers and staff to use
evidence-based strategies to improve school climate and student learning outcomes

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
19
(Rosen, 2018). Overall, it is integral for teachers to explicitly teach social, emotional, and
cognitive skills using evidence-based instructional materials, practices, programs, and resources.
The complex and dynamic support for K-12 students exhibiting at-risk behaviors has
necessitated teacher training and increased efficacy to redirect and/or identify behavioral support.
Due to this more non-punitive approach, states hold school districts more accountable for the
overall student educational outcomes, thus necessitating evidence-based models of a Multi-tiered
System of Support (MTSS). MTSS is a framework to provide academic and behavioral support
for all students based on their individual needs. MTSS is an umbrella framework that includes
Response to Intervention (RTI) and PBIS. RTI is a multi-tiered framework primarily for
academic support, whereas PBIS is a multi-tiered framework for behavioral support. RTI and
PBIS both focus on providing support at distinct levels of intensity based on what the student
needs–at the schoolwide (Tier 1), targeted (Tier 2), and intensive individual (Tier 3) levels of
support. PBIS has become one of these models used within the MTSS framework to provide the
space and services to improve student connectedness and the school climate. PBIS involves the
integration of valued outcomes, the science of human behavior, validated practices, and the
systems of change, which can positively affect students' academic and social interaction (Sugai,
2007, p. 113). Embedding skills in academic instruction, teachers prioritize the skills, attitudes,
and values of effective learners with students and use this focus to boost academic performance
and personal character (Aspen Institute, 2019).
A critical factor affecting how teachers within the school successfully use any schoolwide
program is the type of available professional training and support (Ringeisen & Henderson,
2003). Understanding the need for training and current knowledge of teachers regarding school-

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
20
based mental health will provide insights into how the school trains and supports teachers
(Ringeisen & Henderson, 2003).
Statement of the Problem
How does a high school teacher with over 100 students perform the responsibilities of
this Tier 2 PBIS effectively and promptly? Helping those students who need support and
understanding teachers’ perspectives about behavior is an essential element of implementing
prevention-focused initiatives because their perspectives influence their choice of behavior
management strategy (Severson et al., 2007). The teacher-student is valuable in establishing a
sense of connectedness to schooling. Within PBIS, the high school teacher becomes the initial
problem-solver for students exhibiting challenging behaviors. These students require support
because they are at risk of developing more severe problem behaviors. This support is accessed
in Tier 2 of the PBIS framework, where teachers are usually the primary recommender. As an
operational definition, behavior is what humans do that is observable, measurable, and serves a
function (Webster, 2020). In the school setting, every behavior serves a function, and
teachers/staff provide a consequence or reinforcement for the behavior. In a study evaluating the
use of classroom-level behavior management strategies aligned with Schoolwide Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) through observations of 33 elementary
classrooms, teachers considered classroom management to be the most challenging aspect of
their job (Reinke et al., 2013). Reinke et al. further stated that teachers indicated that “it was the
area where they received the least amount of training” (p.39). Therefore, teachers with the most
impactful influence on student behavior may have neither the knowledge nor resources to
support them within the classroom or beyond. Specifically, according to Reinke et al. (2013),

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
21
teachers experiencing higher instances of classroom disruptions reported feeling less efficacious
and emotional exhaustion in dealing with student behavior.
Consequently, the reauthorization of the Every Students Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015
included key building blocks for an equity-focused school system beyond that of No Child Left
Behind (NCLB), which ushered in the disaggregation of student achievement by race,
socioeconomics, and English Language acquisition. Formerly the Elementary and Secondary Act
of 1965, ESSA provided a lens for public education to have high expectations for all students,
allocate necessary resources, establish measurements for student progress, and systems of
accountability for the educational program that produce outcomes. ESSA employed protections
to ensure state investment in education, which can be used to fund Social-Emotional Learning
interventions for all students. Although all teachers face challenges, including students who
exhibit problem behavior, managing this behavior can affect teachers' motivation and the overall
school climate (Martin, 2013).
Investigating the perceptions and experiences of high school PBIS team members can
provide a depth of understanding of what works for accessing Tier 2 supports. Implementing any
school-wide initiative may not consider that the culture is made up of the values, expectations,
attitudes, and beliefs held by the people within an organization to explain the Tier-2
responsibilities of the high school teacher.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study is to understand why, as research
has shown, high schools implementing Schoolwide PBIS have not achieved the same
transformative school climate success as seen at the K-8 grade levels. Specifically, explored
through the lens of high school PBIS team leaders and members is their view on the barriers to,

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
22
perceptions of the role, and how student discipline/classroom management beliefs affect
identifying students exhibiting at-risk behaviors for PBIS targeted intervention in Tier 2. A
teacher’s main role in the implementation of PBIS is the targeted intervention tier. Although
PBIS is considered a conscious form of discipline, it is not fully embraced at the high school
level. High school teachers at schools with schoolwide Positive Behavior Intervention Supports
(PBIS) are charged with identifying, gathering data, and communicating with parents for targeted
classroom and group interventions.
Tier 2 supports are interventions that help students take ownership of action. Having
students exercise ownership of their actions by applying immediate and appropriate intervention
works because the students get the feedback they need to begin evaluating and modifying their
behavior. On the other hand, Suspension disconnects students from the natural cause-and-effect
cycle. Ownership of action helps them make connections. The following research questions
guided this study:
Research Questions
1. What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers preventing high school teachers
from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports within the PBIS
framework?
2. What beliefs about school discipline and classroom management do PBIS team
members perceive as influencng high school teachers' ability to identify students for Tier
2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
Significance of the Study
The research will identify the challenges and perceptions related to high school teachers'
role in PBIS Tier 2. The success of Tier 2 targeted student interventions builds upon Tier 1, the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
23
universal foundation implemented for all students. Tier 1 includes all the support offered to all
students to help them reach the school's behavior expectations. The accountability for
implementing PBIS is a top-down effort, although it is a bottom-up collaboration for
sustainability. High School administrators have first-hand data from office discipline referrals
(ODR) of some students who exhibit poor behavior and the ions of these behaviors. Being
transparent with staff for fear of unfavorable reflection may lead to non-transparency of this
information, hence why a PBIS is needed (Richter, 2006).
Limitations of the Study
A limitation of this study is that the researcher did not investigate the causality through
observations of teachers' relationship/interaction with students to assess their actions or inaction
to recommend students for PBIS Tier 2 intervention/support. As an exploratory study, a nonrandomized sampling method was used. As a result, a purposeful sample of two urban high
schools may not represent the overall experience of high school teachers working in schools with
SWPBIS. Secondly, teachers’ perceptions of responsibilities related to PBIS Tier 2 supports will
not be generalized beyond the two high schools. The interest of this study is descriptive and
about the experiences and respondents’ own interpretations. Thirdly, as only teachers were
interviewed, the findings may reveal the assumptions and biases of some teachers interviewed
due to their previous or current role on the PBIS team as well as their understanding of their role
in PBIS Tier 2 supports. Therefore, more comprehensive research on the students' views can also
be included. Aside from looking at the categorizations of teacher beliefs about student behavior
and the sustainability of PBIS, it will be insightful to explore students’ perceptions of
intervention supports and other critical antecedents to develop a conceptual framework for
student outcomes. The complexity of the teacher-student relationship within any framework for

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
24
effective school discipline may include the depth of the student's school connectedness and
Social-Emotional Learning (SEL). Lastly, the sample size of interviewing and surveying teachers
at two high schools to research teacher practices and perceptions of identifying students for PBIS
Tier 2 support may limit the return of diverse opinions to generate enough thematic coding.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
25
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter examines four key areas related to the role of the high school teacher in
identifying students who require more intensive support provided within PBIS Tier 2 for
behavior management. First, this chapter describes the historical background of traditional
discipline for behavior management used for decades in the public school system. These
strategies, often not aligned with research, have been ineffective and disproportionately impacted
underrepresented students of color and other subgroups of students (Flannery et al., 2013;
Kupchik, 2009; Skiba et al., 2002). Secondly, the chapter provides an overview of how school
violence in recent decades has underscored the importance of addressing teacher-student
relationships as well as social-emotional needs to improve student-school
connectedness. Specifically, a high school teacher’s confidence to recommend students for more
intensive support within PBIS Tier 2 is influenced by a teacher’s sense of efficacy in classroom
management. Therefore, building teachers’ confidence in their ability to influence student
engagement and behavior challenges in the environment is key to positive student outcomes
(Lanza, 2020).
Thirdly, this chapter discusses the PBIS approach and how it emphasizes a commitment
to staff development and allocation of financial resources to address student behavior matched to
a high school’s needs and contextual features (Flannery et al., 2013). The PBIS approach, which
underpins this study, relates to expanding the schoolwide positive behavior support framework
(SWPBIS) to provide an individualized continuum of support for at-risk students, extending
beyond teacher-classroom management (Bradshaw et al., 2015). Its tiered system of
interventions is intended to give schools a method/framework to implement a progressive and

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
26
instructional approach to school discipline rather than continued reliance on reactive and
exclusionary approaches (Hannigan & Hannigan, 2018).
Finally, this literature review concludes by describing the overarching concept of
cognitive dissonance and how it affects office discipline referrals (ODRs), out-of-school
suspensions (OSS), and the overall implementation of SWPBIS (Barret et al., 2008; Flannery et
al., 2013). The intersection of teachers’ beliefs about classroom management with school
discipline policies is also discussed.
The Negative Impact of Traditional School Discipline
The first key area is the formidable argument of whether traditional discipline versus
progressive discipline will improve school climates and positively affect student outcomes.
Although there are many areas to focus on when considering how to improve our nation’s high
schools, student behavior is essential in creating effective learning environments that facilitate
instruction (Flannery et al., 2013). School discipline begins in the classroom. Traditional
classroom management relies on a system of punishments and rewards wherein students are not
viewed as active participants (Metzger, 2004). Respect is presumed for the learning process itself
rather than for students' experiences and perceptions. In traditional discipline, the school
principal acts as the primary disciplinarian, and teachers mainly control students by threatening
to send them to the principal’s office for misbehavior or disobedience (Matus, 2001). In the
1970s, school administrators began to redefine school discipline. During this time, evaluation of
the physical /mental punishment or the permissive school environment devoid of any
consequences became viewed as ineffective because it did not fit every student or discipline
situation (Vaca, 1971). As a result, suspension became the primary tool for correcting student
behavior by school administrators. However, social science and educational

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
27
researchers expressed concern that removing students from the educational setting at the least
impeded their academic success and failed to address the root cause of misbehaviors (Allam &
Slate, 2011; Netzel & Eber, 2003; Sautner, 2001). This practice of removing students from the
educational environment as a form of punishment is called exclusionary discipline (Perry &
Morris, 2014). The most common forms of exclusionary discipline in schools are suspensions
and expulsions. Issuing a student suspension results in the student's removal from school for one
to ten days. An expulsion is a more serious consequence and results in the student's removal
from school for a district-specified number of days.
Those students who disobeyed the class management rules faced the “traditional
humiliation” of OSS, detention, and verbal reprimands in front of peers. Continued disobedience
led to schools enacting zero-tolerance policies and other school discipline policies,
disproportionately impacting Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and other
underrepresented students within high schools (Skiba, 2014). Further complicating the problem
is the increase in penalties for school behaviors imposed by federal and state lawmakers. These
well-intentioned deterrents have trumped the rights of students due to the latitudinal use of
“reasonable suspicion” (Yell & Rozalski, 2000). Utilizing these policies as a tool for enforcing
school safety has created subgroups of students who are more often profiled, searched, and
questioned.
Research on school violence and safety show that students’ exposure to violence has a
predictive regressive effect on their academics and behavior. Moreover, students’ exposure to
violence, in general, has been found to be positively associated with health risk behaviors, need
for mental health, and high school non-completion (Boynton-Jarrett et al., 2013). One study
found that the disparate impact of school expulsions, suspensions, and office discipline referrals

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
28
(ODR) on Black and Latino students unduly infringes upon their rights to due process as well as
decreases their academic success (Anyon et al., 2014). In their efforts to reduce school violence
and student misbehavior, school leaders may indirectly contribute to the potential for violence by
sanctioning exclusionary discipline practices and ignoring practices that can build student’s selfawareness, learner awareness, and belief in education as a means to an end for a better quality of
life (Ambrose & Gibson, 1995). The urgency to implement school safety policies, driven by
social, political, and public pressure, has led to the adoption of punitive, “get tough’ policies,
such as zero-tolerance truancy, suspensions and detentions policies (Marchbanks et al., 2018). A
study of urban, rural, and suburban schools conducted in the Texas Education Agency Public
Education Information Management system investigated the relationship between exclusionary
and punitive school discipline practices on juvenile referrals and its contribution to racial and
ethnic disparities. The findings highlighted an overrepresentation of racial and ethnic youth
disciplined by these traditional approaches. Additionally, it found that these policies have failed
to adequately support students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD), leaving students
from ethnically and racially diverse populations particularly vulnerable. “They are victims of an
achievement gap, characterized by disproportionate rates of school failure and poor adult life
outcomes” (Malloy et al., 2018, p. 219).
Various educational research on out-of-school suspension (OSS) and in-school
suspension (ISS) identified the causal impact of school suspension (Hinze-Pifer, 2018; Morris,
2012; Sautner, 2000). The reactive use of suspension for minor infractions is associated with fear
of crime at school (Hinze-Pifer, 2018). According to research conducted by the British Columbia
Ministry of Education (1999), the suspension of students has the following attributed outcomes:
1. Contributes to a student’s alienation from school.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
29
2. Increases dropout rates.
3. Contributes to academic failure.
4. Appears to be a factor in student involvement in risky or antisocial behaviors.
5. May precipitate more serious crimes in the community.
6. May have no effect or even increase the likelihood of the behavior recurring
rather than reducing the problem behavior.
7. May increase aggressive or avoidance behaviors.
Historically, school-level practices have been linked to the delinquency and
criminalization of minor behaviors. Arum Inequities in areas such as school discipline and
policing practices have allowed urban secondary assistant principals to collaboratively develop
discipline policies that are written and implemented to emphasize intervention, prevention, and
teaching appropriate behavior. Schools that integrate such practices within their Multi-Tiered
Systems of Support (MTSS) attempt to combine social-emotional, academic, and behavioral
needs through a unified system. This approach provides an opportunity for the entire school
community to collaborate and support one another in ensuring a safe and welcoming school
culture that holds each other accountable (Clark, 2020). In a report on indicators of U.S. school
crime and safety states, 76% of public schools have provided training for teachers to recognize
physical, social, and verbal bullying behaviors, while 52% have provided training on recognizing
early warning signs of student violent behavior (Wang et al., 2020). In this same survey
commissioned by the National Center for Educational Statistics, 84% of the schools provided
training for teachers on intervention strategies and referrals process for students with behavior
issues (Wang et al., 2020).

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
30
Netzel and Eber’s (2003) research on the implementation of PBIS in an urban school
district in Illinois sought to reduce incidences of behavior problems that lead to detentions,
suspensions, expulsions, and a high rate of referrals to special education service, yielded more
productive responses to misbehavior. After one year, the PBIS initiative resulted in a decrease in
office discipline referrals and an increase in alternative corrective measures given to students
instead of suspensions (Netzel & Eber, 2003).
Flannery et al. (2013) sampled office discipline referrals (ODRs) of 112 high school
students and found that those requiring intensive behavior support generated the most ODRs.
This evidence suggests that high schools are quite challenged in meeting the behavioral needs of
their students.
Social-Emotional Needs of High School Students
The goal of public education is the cultivation of skills/talents, preparation for the “real”
world, and the belief that all students should graduate with options for a career and/or college
acceptance. However, some policymakers and educators believe that students' social-emotional
needs are not fully addressed (Mallory et al., 2009). It is evident in high schools where the
struggle related to school climate issues is addressed with a multi-tiered system of support
(MTSS) framework that incorporates PBIS and Social-Emotional Learning (SEL). Socialemotional factors are associated with academic achievement, and infusing SEL competencies
into the school’s MTSS can increase student connectedness. This can, in turn, promote a
commitment to the school norms and values that are reflected in student behavior (Becker &
Luthar, 2002). In recent years, PBIS teaching has been expanded to a broader range of desired
student behaviors, including social skills, emotional regulation, problem-solving, and coping
strategies, which are selected based on student needs (Barrett et al., 2018). Implementers have

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
31
also utilized PBIS systems to prevent internalizing mental health concerns such as anxiety and
depression (McIntosh et al., 2014; Weist et al., 2018). Despite these advances, school teams
implementing PBIS sometimes overlook teaching important social-emotional competencies or
view this domain as separate from their PBIS framework. Connell and Wellborn (1991) and
Sugai and Horner (2006) revealed that students’ feelings of acceptance by their teachers and
school were strongly associated with their cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement in
the classroom.
The classroom and school environment can mirror the ills of American society and
broader societal issues. Specifically, problems like violence, bullying, poor attendance, and other
disciplinary issues in high schools can negatively impact students’ sense of connectedness
(Bradshaw et al., 2015). Approximately 749,200 students between the ages of 12 and 18 were
victims of nonfatal school violence in the United States during the 2012 school year, a rate
significantly higher than violence experienced outside school (Robers et al., 2014). Given this,
school safety becomes a top priority. Consequently, research on school violence and safety has
found that students’ exposure to violence has a predictive, degenerative effect on their behavior,
negatively influencing their academic performance (Boynton-Jarrett et al., 2013). SEL helps
students and adults develop specific social-emotional competencies that have been linked to
positive outcomes. These evidence-based SEL programs teach skills explicitly and provide
opportunities for practice, feedback, and application within content areas and throughout the
school setting. Both SEL and PBIS support using assessment information to help establish
organizations committed to effective practice (Barrett et al., 2018).
High school students identified as at-risk for academic or social behaviors have a difficult
task ahead of them for academic and social success. A great deal rests on their ability to earn a

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
32
diploma successfully. Without this credential, students are at increased risk of unemployment,
criminal involvement, health issues, and reliance on public assistance programs (Day &
Newburger, 2002; Rumberger, 2001). There is a strong relationship between academic failure
and problem behaviors (Becker & Luthar, 2002; McIntosh et al., 2008), and students who
struggle with both academic and social behaviors are much more likely to drop out of school
than their peers (Allenorth & Easton, 2005; Jerald, 2006). Addressing social behavior alone,
without supporting academic success, is often ineffective.
The outcomes of a self-report survey taken by students in the CORE Districts, a
consortium of 10 California districts collaboratively addressing the key challenges to improve
instruction and student learning, revealed social-emotional learning (SEL) as important to their
academic and life success (West et al., 2018). The survey assessed four SEL constructs: growth
mindset, self-efficacy, self-management, and social awareness. Black and Latino students, the
largest demographic of CORE Districts in grades 9-12, reported lower levels of self-management
and social awareness than White and Asian students (West et al., 2018).
Bradshaw et al. (2014) stress that integrating PBIS and SEL can provide students with the
tools to contribute to the behavioral expectations set by a school’s PBIS implementation plan,
such as the development or consciousness of the SEL constructs. Consequently, the teacher who
has more protected time within the classroom to teach as PBIS is shown to increase instructional
time (Scott & Barrett, 2004). Embedding SEL strategies with the PBIS can give students a voice
and the skills needed to create safe and engaging learning environments (Bradshaw et al., 2014).
Significance of the Teacher-student Relationship
Throughout the 20th century, the traditional role of the high school teacher was to impart
knowledge, and the student’s role was that of an empty vessel consuming the knowledge gained

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
33
as learning. This view is aligned with B.F. Skinner's stimulus-response learning theory, which
defined teachers as transmitters of knowledge and students as passive recipients (Wang &
Haertel, 1994). Davis (2003) researched varied conceptions and approaches to student-teacher
relationships from attachment, motivation, and sociocultural perspectives to discover emerging
themes. From a motivation perspective, the theme was that “the strength or quality of the
teacher-student relationship is influenced by the teacher’s interpersonal skills, instructional
practices and attempts to socialize the motivation to learn” (Davis, 2003, p. 208). Subsequently,
Davis’s (2003) findings challenge Skinner’s view of teaching as merely behavior training,
highlighting instead the complex sociocultural interactions involved. Based on the PBIS
framework, the interpersonal culture of the classroom affects the quality of students’
relationships. However, suppose a school engages students to cultivate a sense of belonging. In
that case, teachers may not intentionally focus on opportunities to invest in alternative
relationships and foster the abilities of the students they teach. John Dewey, an educational
reformer whose ideas have been influential in education and social reform, stated:
The task of the teacher is not simply to develop the right kind of orientation towards
activities, but to achieve an ideal balance between the inspiration and vision necessary to
engage and animate students and provide them with the guidance essential to acquiring
mastery over the means of executing that which they have been inspired to produce
within a particular subject or academic discipline (Skilbeck, 2017, p. 4).
Moreover, the rise of cognitive psychology redefined the relationship between teacher
and student. Researchers have emphasized the impact of positive teacher relationships on
students’ social development, showing that this support serves a regulatory function of
developing academic behavioral skills, and emotional skills (Fredriksen & Rhodes, 2004). These

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
34
findings suggest that teacher support can deter some of the stress-associated difficulties in
adjusting to school (Davis, 2003).
Various educational research on how learning happens at the federal, state, and collegiate
levels consistently underscore that the teacher-student relationship is germane to students’
overall educational success. Specifically, in high school, this relationship is a predictor of
positive attendance, self-awareness, social awareness, and retention (graduation). In a study
conducted by Martin and Collie (2019), the results concluded, “The presence of positive teacherstudent relationships in a high school student’s academic life helps them to become more
resilient” (p.873). Furthermore, this study identifies three areas of connectedness in addressing
the teacher-student relationship: interpersonal, substantive, and pedagogical. Positive teacherstudent interactions lead students to internalize some of their teacher’s beliefs and values (Martin
& Dowson, 2009), which, in turn, guides the beliefs and values held by students, functioning to
direct behavior and cognition via enhanced persistence, self-regulation, and goal striving
(Wentzel, 2009).
High School Teacher Cultivation of Social Competence
The structure/management of the classroom environment cultivates the sustainability of
the teacher-student relationship. Students’ social responsibility within the classroom is valued
because it occurs while acquiring knowledge and developing cognitive skills (Wentzel, 1991).
This can be fostered through teachers’ role-modeling of their social competence. According to
Sihem (2013), a teacher must provide a nurturing and welcoming learning environment for all
students and take their position of influence seriously. Social responsibility demands that
teachers not only care about their students but also recognize their influence on what students
talk about, how they think, and what they become (Wentzel, 1991). The need to show care

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
35
applies to both the elementary and secondary levels, but nurturing social conformity for realworld applicability becomes particularly crucial in high school. Seeking peer acceptance is
paramount, as some high school students with inadequate social skills can experience poor
academic progress and are at risk for emotional problems. Specifically, academic motivation is a
complex phenomenon for high school students, partly because its boundaries stretch beyond the
education domain to the broader societal context in which the student is situated (Legault et al.,
2006). More specifically, “academic attitudes and behaviors are strongly influenced by key
social agents in the student’s environment, whether these be teachers, parents, or friends”
(Legualt et al., 2006, p. 569).
In the context of PBIS, high school teachers have a multifaceted role. They are expected
to conduct social skills activities, maintain related data and/or at least be willing to refer students
who do not meet expected behaviors to the appropriate resources within the school (Lavoie,
1994). Is it unrealistic to ask a high school teacher who may be overworked to take on this
accountability? Retaining students and keeping them engaged in high school, according to a
study by Flannery et al. (2013), requires school personnel to handle problematic behavior
through a prevention-oriented approach such as PBIS. Furthermore, Flannery et al. state, “high
schools are the final stop for students to overcome any behavioral, academic and socialemotional challenges before entering the workforce or postsecondary institutions.”
Social interaction, social rules and norms, and socially responsible behavior in the form
of moral character, as well as conformity, have been the traditional and valued objectives for
public education. Phillippo (2010), in a study of teacher-student relationships in small high
school settings, assessed high school teachers and found that they may feel ill-equipped to deal
with student social-emotional needs and may fail to recommend further behavior interventions.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
36
Teachers might feel ineffective, unprepared, or overwhelmed by this complex role of providing
social-emotional support (Bartlett, 2004; Ingersoll, 2009; Phillippo, 2010), or they might refuse
to engage in this sort of work, claiming that it is not their job (Noddings, 2006). Noddings (2006)
describes the ideal classroom as a space of cohabitation between teachers and learners, where
students feel safe expressing ‘‘wonder and curiosity’’ (p. 12). Beyond teaching technical skills to
students, schools should provide environments where students feel accepted and valued. Without
this emotional support for learners, schools cannot achieve the desired academic outcomes and,
at the same time, positively impact students’ lives (Nagy, 2012).
High School Teachers’ Beliefs about School Discipline
Understanding how high school teachers perceive the disciplinary process and procedures
is vital to examining the fidelity of their buy-in for behavioral support systems. Tier 2 of PBIS in
most schools is monitored by a subcommittee working in collaboration with the larger
schoolwide behavior team. However, different contextual variables and conditions at high school
may affect this cooperation. Flannery et al. (2014) found that high school staff may believe that
their students should have already learned socially appropriate behaviors. Therefore, “high
school personnel may perceive less of a need to explicitly teach behaviors to their students”
(Flannery et al., 2014, p. 113). However, direct teaching of expected behaviors is necessary for
effective PBIS implementation in high schools. A degree to be a high school teacher does not
come with a license on how to deal with minor discipline, crisis intervention training, or even the
intuitive ability to assess “what is wrong” with this research study identifying certain students as
at-risk to receive target interventions/support. Teachers can expect at least one crisis each year
relative to their school's and surrounding community's contextual features (Damini, 2011). This
leads to a possible risk of burnout, stress, depression, and lack of preparation to cope with

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
37
students experiencing trauma or exhibiting challenging behaviors (Berkowitz et al., 2003).
Consequently, philosophical differences may be the root of why some teachers believe in swift
consequences for misbehavior and feel a sense of helplessness that the source of the problem
behavior is out of their control (Flannery et al., 2013).
Shifting from Reactive to Proactive: The PBIS Approach
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) emerged from the 1980s evolution
of positive behavior support (PBS). PBS integrated the best research practices of applied
behavioral analysis for managing problem behavior in individuals with developmental
disabilities, particularly misbehavior adversely affecting learning (Sugai & Horner, 2002).
Researchers at the University of Oregon expanded this work to identify and document effective
PBS interventions. As a person-centered construct of applied behavior analysis, PBS employed
non-punitive and proactive strategies to improve individual quality of life (QOL) by decreasing
misbehavior and increasing prosocial behavior (Carr, 2002). Understanding PBS is foundational
to understanding the PBIS stratification framework within the K-12 setting to help students
improve in the six domains of QOL: 1) material well-being, 2) health and safety, 3) social wellbeing/interpersonal competence, 4) emotional well-being, 5) leisure, and 6) personal wellbeing (Dunlap et al., 2008). PBIS is the science of applying PBS strategies through a systems
approach (Netzel, 2003). It relies heavily on ecological and/or social validity and is a multicomponent process guided by the values collected from a three-sided interaction: individual,
family, and organizational community. Further, it allows individuals and communities the
opportunity to develop adaptive and prosocial behaviors conducive to a higher quality of life
(Bradshaw et al., 2014). However, Dunlap et al. (2014) explain that the steady growth and
expansion of PBS in tandem with the PBIS legislation have created some confusion in the field

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
38
about the relationship between these terms (PBS and PBIS). Among researchers, the overall
consensus is that the use of the terms pertains to different organizational systems: PBS and PBIS
represent the evidence-based form of MTSS applied within k-12 settings.
Behaviorists and clinicians used the QOL domain in a study by Dunlap et al. (2010) as
metrics to document the effectiveness of behavior intervention plans delivered in special
education settings by teachers and support staff. Dunlap et al. (2010) study found:
An encouraging aspect of the data is that efforts to deliver comprehensive PBS,
consisting of multicomponent interventions carried out by natural intervention agents [eg.
teachers, clinicians] across all relevant life settings over protracted periods of time, was
associated with consistent reductions in problem behavior as well as improvements in
QOL across multiple domains (p. 272).
The success of PBS led to its adoption for students in both regular and special education
settings. Some schools and educators incorporated PBS to improve social and academic
behavior, which was further advanced in 1997 when Congress included PBS in the
reauthorization of the Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, renaming it the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). This
reauthorization of IDEA also established a grant for a national Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Support to promote, develop, assess, and support schools with evidence-based
practices to prevent misbehavior and to structure classrooms for student success (Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.). Throughout the 2000s, researchers from
Universities in Oregon, Kentucky, Florida, Missouri, and other health-related non-profits were
legislated to disseminate their findings of a series of applied demonstrations and projects
conducted by The National Technical Assistance Center on PBIS (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012).

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
39
Schools across the U.S. began using this systematic method to effectively increase school safety,
enhance students’ social-behavioral skills, and create a more positive school climate (Carr et al.,
1999).
PBIS is the most widely known and used model of PBS within schools (Netzel & Eber,
2003). The US Department of Education (USDOE) uses PBIS instead of PBS to reference any
model or curriculum employing a proactive multi-tiered system supporting evidence-based
student interventions. The National Technical Assistance Center on PBIS supports schools,
districts, and states to build systems capacity for implementing a multi-tiered approach to social,
emotional, and behavior support. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of
Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
(OESE), the broad purpose of PBIS is to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of
schools and other agencies (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
According to OESE, PBIS improves social, emotional, and academic outcomes for all students,
including those with disabilities and those from underrepresented groups. PBIS is identified as a
set of strategies or procedures designed to improve behavioral success by employing nonpunitive, proactive, and systematic techniques. It aims to teach students to be safe, respectful,
and responsible learners in the classroom and throughout campus. Research shows that PBIS’s
tiered support system enhances individual student’s quality of life and reduces problem/selfdestructive behavior (Bambara et al., 2009). There are three tiers of PBIS, each with progressive
support for universal, targeted, and intensive interventions.
Furthermore, PBIS aims to transform the school environment by fostering cooperation
among staff and students. It establishes a system of articulated behavioral expectations that
provides incentives for students to achieve their expectations and promotes positive teacher-

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
40
student interactions (Bradshaw et al., 2015). Horner and Sugai (2015) describe PBIS as applying
principles of behavior analysis to shape and guide its implementation in schools.
Tiered Supports
To foster buy-in for the necessity and implementation of PBIS, the administrator works
with teachers to facilitate their understanding and belief in the logic of the three-tiered model of
interventions and support (Evanovich & Scott, 2016). Presenting school data related to office
discipline referrals, detentions, counseling notes, and teacher identification of problem behavior
experienced in the classroom can encourage the reasons for schoolwide systemic change. The
PBIS tiers represent the levels of intervention and support provided for all students within the
school environment. School administrators face the growing challenges of establishing and
sustaining effective practices to promote student success (McCurdy et al., 2007).
Universal and Primary Prevention
Tier 1 behavior support is the primary prevention level, designed to be the proactive
approach to promote adherence to the communicated student behavior expectations. These Tier 1
expectations are reinforced by a matrix developed through a staff consensus gathered by the
school’s PBIS team (Bradshaw et al., 2015; Freeman et al., 2016; Horner & Sugai, 2015). Figure
3 shows an example of a High School PBIS matrix. The matrix outlines behavior expectations
for students to view each day in different settings across the school settings. Teachers/staff are to
spend time teaching, modeling, and reviewing the matrix of expectations of students throughout
the school year. All students are to maintain the expected behavior. Schools can either design or
purchase a data system for rewards to ensure positive mindsets towards the expectations (Center
on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.)

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
41
Figure 3
Example of a High School Tier 1 Expectations
Note: Reproduced from Napa Valley Unified School District PBIS matrix samples
(https://www.nvusd.org/resource/resources?d=x&id=1315231098196&group_id=1296
916334137
In Tier 1, the team meets regularly to refine schoolwide practices and evaluate the
effectiveness of their matrix. They review discipline data, curriculum-based measures, state tests,
and other data sources to improve schoolwide outcomes (Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports, n.d.). In order to move from Tier 1, the primary prevention behavior
level, to Tiers 2 and 3, schools should establish behavioral expertise in behavior analysis to reach

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
42
more sophisticated knowledge. Specifically, this requires staff training and coaching within the
school environment's natural context (Bohanon et al., 2009; Center on PBIS. n.d.). When some
students do not respond to Tier 1’s universal academic and behavioral instruction, those students
displaying minor and fewer major misbehaviors receive additional support in Tier 2 (Flannery et
al., 2013).
Secondary Prevention
Tier 2 support requires the leadership team for PBIS to establish its process to identify
students' needs that impede academic progress, behavior expectations, social/peer issues, and
self-esteem, among others. The classroom teacher is a key factor in Tier 2. The sustainability and
implementation of Tier 2 is co-dependent on communication and documentation of students’
needs (Everett et al., 2011). Tier 2 practices and systems support some students who are at risk
for developing more serious problem behaviors, relying on a strong foundation of Tier 1. Some
examples of Tier 2 interventions in Table 1 are provided to selected students identified by
teachers or other school staff.
Table 1
Examples of Evidence-based Tier 2 Interventions
TIER 2 Interventions
Explanation of Use
Behavioral contract
Focus on positive behaviors teachers want to see in the classroom (i.e., those
behaviors that are incompatible with problem behavior)
Self-Monitoring
1. Identification of positive behaviors to self-reflect upon and self-record on a
chart.
2. Development of a self-monitoring chart that the students use to record his/her
behavior.
3. Prompting - device or natural break that prompts the student to self-reflect and
self-record behavior

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
43
School-home note
1. Development of a school-home note that captures student behavior and
communicates with parents.
2. Brief parent training consists of teaching parents how to translate the information
on the school-home note into effective parenting strategies.
3. Ensuring that parents are receiving the note and following up on the next steps.
Mentor-based program
Assignment of a mentor who provides unconditional positive regard and feedback
daily, i.e., Check-in/Check-out (CICO)
Class Pass Intervention
Develop pass, number of uses, the location, and what is incentivized for proper use.
1. Students who have a low tolerance for engaging in academic work.
2. Students who appear to become frustrated when working on academic tasks
Targeted Small Group (4-6 students)
A small-group intervention structured to address specific needs and promote socialemotional growth among students in a school setting. Utilizes structured activities,
role-playing, and discussion on topics such as:
• Understanding Emotions: Identifying and expressing emotions
appropriately.
• Active Listening: Listening attentively and responding empathetically to
others.
• Assertiveness & Advocacy: Communicating needs and boundaries
effectively.
• Friendship Skills: Initiating and maintaining friendships, including sharing,
taking turns, and compromising.
• Conflict Resolution: Resolving conflicts peacefully and respectfully.
• Fostering Empathy: Understanding and empathizing with others'
perspectives and feelings.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
44
These supports help students develop the skills they need to benefit from core school programs
(Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.). Understanding the function of
the behavior is key to the design of supports in Tier 2 and Tier 3. A responsive classroom is ideal
for students to learn self-regulation and support the whole child within the PBIS framework
(Sugai & Simonsen, 2012; Sugai & Horner, 2009). Figure 4 illustrates specific classroom and
schoolwide practices that a student can receive based on functional behavior assessments. This is
used to create an intermediate Behavior Intervention plan in Tier 2 and more intensively in Tier
3. Fox et al. (2022) conducted a literature review that identified 22 variables that were on the
barriers.
Figure 4
PBIS Integrated Responsive Practices for Classroom Behavior Management

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
45
Note. The tiers of PBIS informed by strategies and practices is compliment to the
responsive classroom approach. Reproduced from the Northeast Positive Behavior
Intervention and Supports( https://nepbis.org/wpcontent/uploads/NEPBIS_Leadership_Forum/2019/G4.-PBIS-as-a-Framework-toOrganize-Competing-Initiatives-Peck.pdf)
Teachers must attend to that function to recommend/assign the appropriate student
intervention. By doing so, they can avoid inadvertently exacerbating the behavior and instead
treat the real cause of the behavior (McIntosh & Goodman, 2016). Webster (2020) identifies the
six most common functions of behaviors that teachers can use to reinforce an alternate,
acceptable behavior as a replacement. Specifically, teachers can redirect student behavior to
align with the expectations outlined in the school behavior matrix. According to Webster (2020),
the six most common functions of behavior are:
1. To obtain a preferred item or activity.
2. Escape or avoidance.
3. To get attention, either from significant adults or peers.
4. To communicate
5. Self-stimulation is when the behavior itself provides reinforcement.
6. Control or power.
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is a research-based approach to modifying behavior
by identifying the function of inappropriate behavior and finding a suitable replacement. Every
behavior serves as a function and provides a consequence or reinforcement for the behavior
(Webster, 2020). Horner and Sugai (2015) describe PBIS as an example of ABA based on over
20 years of research on implementing PBIS in over 21,00 public schools as a practical
demonstrative behavior analysis framework to improve student academic and social outcomes.
The National Technical Assistance Center for PBIS suggests having behavior specialists on the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
46
PBIS team to help design Tier 2 supports (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports, n.d.). Specific Tier 2 interventions usually involve group interventions of ten or more
students, including practices such as social skills groups, self-management, and academic
support. Horner and Sugai (2015) further agreed that:
Behavior analysts who are specifically trained in antecedent interventions, effective
teaching and conducting preference assessments and building effective reinforcement
systems can help trained teacher and staff overall when developing schoolwide behavior
support plans that emphasize the use of antecedent interventions, active teaching of
desired behaviors and appropriate equivalent replacement behaviors, as well as,
increasing the overall reinforcement for these behaviors (p. 3).
Adopting strong Tier 2 interventions to support students exhibiting challenging behaviors
but are not candidates for individualized intervention is a critical component of the multitiered
system such as PBIS (Maggin, 2015). A study involving 18 high school PBIS coaches from eight
states found positive increases in prosocial behavior and academic progress among students
using the Tier 2 intervention of Check-in/Check-Out (CICO)(Flannery et al., 2018). CICO
supplements Tier 1 interventions by (a) providing more frequent instruction regarding expected
behavior, (b) increasing structured contact between students and adults in schools, (c) providing
a formal mechanism for students to receive feedback on their behavior, and (d) increasing
opportunities for reinforcement contingent on expected behavior (Everett et al., 2011; Flannery
et al., 2018).
High schools face several challenges in establishing and maintaining safe and organized
learning environments where teachers can develop effective practices and all students can
achieve positive learning outcomes (Flannery et al., 2013). Kittelman et al. (2018) investigated

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
47
the work of 18 high school PBIS coaches from eight states to explore how the PBIS strategy of
Check-In/Check-Out (CICO), a preventative Tier 2 intervention, complements Tier 1. They
examined how CICO facilitates daily, structured student contact with a teacher or staff member,
allowing students to maintain and receive feedback on behavioral expectations. In this study,
82% of coaches reported that teachers/staff agreed with the implementation of the CICO system
in their high school. Modifications were made due to the specific contexts of each high school to
include: “(a) using daily point cards, (b) incorporating academic supports, (c) checking in and
out with school staff, (d) providing feedback home to parents, and (e) promoting student
involvement” (Kittelman et al., 2018, p. 9).
The high school teacher accountability piece was a main component in this CICO
process. Implementing a technology-based CICO system, instead of relying on paper daily cards,
enhances positive student-teacher interactions by necessitating communication and feedback on
behavior and academic goals (Maggin et al., 2015). CICO is one evidence-based strategy shown
to decrease problem behaviors and increase academic engagement across various grade levels,
including elementary, middle, and high school, when adapted to the specific school context
(Maggin et al., 2015). In Tier 2, the team ensures access to interventions and regularly uses data
to monitor the student progress of those identified for additional support with social skills, selfmanagement, attendance, and other aspects of adjustment to school expectations that may
impede their success (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
Tertiary Prevention
Students with the most significant support needs receive services within Tier 3, where
they receive an individualized action plan that supports/accommodates their needs throughout
the school day. This support plan is monitored over time to assess the progression of positive

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
48
behaviors that allow the student to succeed socially and academically (Horner & Macaya, 2018).
Students in Tier 3 can be tested for special education and/or placed in alternative school settings.
Expertise is needed for a behavioral assessment and to assemble a team that includes teachers
and other school staff and may include the family members and, if appropriate, the student
(Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, n.d.).
If many students are qualifying for Tier 2, schools should re-examine what is happening
in Tier 1. Similarly, if there are large numbers of students qualifying for Tier 3, a re-examination
of what is happening in Tier 1 and 2 is in order. Developing PBIS teams specifically focused on
each of the tiered supports and interventions to share accountability along with teachers to be
more aware of students’ needs can make accessing the tiered services more manageable. Pool et
al. (2013) describe the success of an elementary school employing this team-based process
wherein teachers receive assistance for effective classroom interventions as the team collects and
uses data for decision-making on effective interventions.
Implementation of Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support (PBIS)
The reauthorization of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015 included key
building blocks for an equity-focused school system beyond that of No Child Left Behind
(NCLB). NCLB had previously established the practice of disaggregating student achievement
data by race, socioeconomics, and English language proficiency. Formerly the Elementary and
Secondary Act of 1965, ESSA provided a lens for public education to have high expectations for
all students, allocate necessary resources, establish measurements for student progress, and
systems of accountability for the educational program that produce outcomes. The act employed
protections to ensure state investment in education, which can be used to fund social-emotional
learning interventions for all students. Although teachers face challenges that include students

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
49
who exhibit problem behavior, managing this behavior can affect their motivation and the overall
school climate (Martin, 2013).
According to the OSEP 2017 evaluation of PBIS in high schools, 35 out of 50 states are
implementing the PBIS framework. Approximately 13% of over 3,200 schools implementing
PBIS are high schools, accounting for 34% of all US schools (Freeman et al., 2018).
Implementing schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports in high Schools means
adhering to the contextual factors and the stages of implementation necessary for a positive
student and school climate. PBIS is a data-driven, team-based approach that uses effective
behavioral practices to provide a continuum of supports and interventions tailored to student
needs. This approach helps establish a school climate where both students and staff are expected
to practice prosocial behavior across all school environments (Kennedy et al., 2010; Simonsen et
al., 2008; Sugai & Horner, 2006). Figure 5 shows the key elements for a successful SWPBIS: 1)
Outcomes, 2) Data, 3) Practices, and 4) Systems can be interrelated with culturally responsive
strategies and goals.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
50
Figure 5
Elements of School Wide PBIS
Note. Figure 5, adapted from OSEP Technical Center on PBIS (2010), shows the 4-
PBIS Elements.
PBIS is a strategy to reduce behavior problems that lead to excessive ODRs suspensions
and improve perceptions of school safety. It is a proactive approach to cultivating a positive
learning environment. Unlike traditional discipline models, PBIS focuses on building reciprocal
solid teacher-student relationships and positively impacting school climate and culture through
trust (Flannery et al., 2018; Kennedy et al., 2010; McDaniel et al., 2017). Specifically, urban

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
51
high schools implementing PBIS can have positive incremental effects on adverse environmental
challenges of the school and community-based factors such as poverty, abuse, drug or
alcohol, and neighborhood demographic shifts. For instance, after the implementation of PBIS,
two high schools in an Indiana urban school district had a noticeable reduction in the total
number and percentage of the student population having one or more suspensions. Baule (2020)
conducted this impact study of PBIS implementation, showing that while Black students
constituted 21% of the population, they accounted for 48% of suspensions before PBIS
implementation.
In a study of the fidelity of PBIS implementation in a New Hampshire K-12 school
district, Muscott et al. (2008) found that four high schools had an overall 33% decrease in inschool suspension (ISS) and out-of-school suspension (OSS). This reduction led to improved
instructional time and a strengthened universal discipline system. Furthermore, “a decrease in
problem behavior and increase in time for learning, teaching, and leadership occurred, yielding
the desired outcomes of a PBIS” (Muscott et al., 2008, p. 201).
The conceptual framework for PBIS consists of contextual influences, foundational
systems, universal practices, and outcomes. The contextual influences include the school’s size,
culture and organization, and the student body's developmental level (Flannery et al., 2013).
The student body's developmental level is concerned with how the students are socialized:
through strong peer relationships, more autonomy/self-will, or if there is a need for greater
student buy-in. Next, the school leadership team is key to developing and maintaining the
building blocks of the foundational system through data-based implementation, practice
norming, and evaluation, which leads to the tiered system of support. Thereafter, universal
practices then focus on setting expectations for all students, acknowledging positive behavior,

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
52
and applying consequences based on data-driven decisions. Flannery et al. (2013) conducted a 3-
year longitudinal development study examining the implementation of SWPS components in
eight high schools. These core features were adapted to fit the secondary school context (p.270).
Based on their literature review and study findings, they developed a conceptual framework for
implementing SWPBS in high school, documenting the difference in size, school organization,
school culture, student development level, and outcomes from that of elementary and middle
schools (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Conceptual Framework for Implementation of SWPBS in High Schools is adapted
from Flannery et al., 2013 p. 270.
When a high school adopts the mindset that its responsibility is to teach academics and
social behavior skills, PBIS can be implemented to foster a predictable and positive learning
environment. Thus begins reimaging the teacher-student relationship with the approach of
interventions, strategies, and constructs to help students make better choices and make classroom
management easier for teachers (Ryan & Baker, 2020; Sugai, 2007; Sugai & Horner, 2006).

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
53
Addressing the needs of every student begins with understanding and adapting to their individual
needs by modifying what they learn (content), how they learn (process), and how they show
what they have learned (product).
Grade-level expectations are met using an academic curriculum aligned with the
Common Core state standards, experiential school experiences, and extra-curricular activities to
create a sense of school connectedness. Although most research is focused on PBIS at the
elementary level, Bradshaw et al. (2015) note that implementation of PBIS at the high school
level is more challenging, and some educators may view its components as not developmentally
appropriate for high school students. Molding the PBIS Framework to conform with the
contextual variables of a high school presents a challenge for sustainability (Flannery et al.,
2018).
Bradshaw et al. (2010) conducted a 5-year longitudinal study of SWPBIS in 37
elementary schools. They found that teacher and staff training significantly reduced student
suspensions and office discipline referrals (ODRs) while increasing academic progress.
Specifically, related to the modification of professional development and a continuum of training
to emphasize the connection between academic success and social “enabler” behaviors to tie
PBIS to the primary academic goals of the school. Linking social behavior to academic success
resonated with teachers who are reinforced by student academic gains (Swain-Bradway et al.,
2015).
Bambara et al. (2009) found that 56% of the 25 participants interviewed in a study to
discover the impediments to the implementation of SWPBIS intervention programs cited adult
beliefs and philosophy about practices of behavior management as a barrier that affected the
sustainability or even the effectiveness of the program. These participants included teachers,

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
54
district personnel, and regional members who either were involved in school-wide behavior
support teams or had a role in the training and implementation of the program. Consequently,
48% stated another barrier: lack of training /assistance to teachers to support the classroom
intervention (Bambara et al., 2009). According to the participants, there was ‘no confidence’ in
trying or seeking new strategies or opportunities for training to learn how to recognize triggers to
behavior (Bambara et al., 2009).
Filter and Brown (2019) caution that SWPBIS implementation depends on the efforts of
frontline service providers, such as teachers and staff, who make the choice to implement the
specific strategies. Each of these implementers will naturally vary in the extent to which they
buy-in to SWPBIS in general and the degree to which they will implement the strategies.
Theoretical Framework
This study incorporated a psychological construct with a theory to form a framework to
capture the complexity and gain deeper insights into the research topic. Teacher Self-Efficacy
(TSE) and the Pupil Control Ideology (PCI) are used to analyze and interpret the barriers to and
challenges of the high school teacher’s role in identifying at-risk students for Tier 2 Positive
Behavior Intervention and Support (PBIS). PCI primarily focuses on the teacher's management
strategies and disciplinary approaches within the classroom context. Specifically, it examines
how they shape their approach to maintaining order and establishing rules and consequences
(Hoy, 2001). TSE is a sub-theme of Bandura's social-cognitive theory of behavioral change and
is influenced by factors such as past experiences, feedback, and the personal characteristics of a
teacher. Consequently, the expectation of personal efficacy determines the level of buy-in, effort
expended, and fidelity to using a program/process (Bandura, 1977). TSE is considered an

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
55
important factor in teacher effectiveness, influencing instructional practices, student engagement,
and overall classroom climate (Kelm & McIntosh, 2012).
Willower et al. (1967) developed the pupil control ideology. Hoy (1967) studied the
organizational socialization of new teachers’ perception of their role in student discipline and
used PCI to explain how the spectrum of understanding for student discipline is controlled from
a custodial to a humanistic approach. Gafney (1997) furthered this research by defining custodial
teachers as prioritizing rules and regulations, while the humanistic teacher views the student as
the priority. Over 50 years of research exist on PCI to investigate how teachers use this
orientation to manage student discipline. Researchers utilizing PCI have designed survey
instruments to observe different dimensions of PCI to determine the extent to which teachers
prioritize maintaining order, emphasizing compliance, or promoting student autonomy and selfregulation. For example, Gaffney and Byrd (1996) analyzed the data from a 20-question survey
that conceptualizes how teachers' attitudes affect student behavior and performance. The PCI
framework can help educators identify the social, political, and psychological dynamics within
their school’s culture and climate (Gaffney & Byrd-Gaffney, 1996).
TSE relates to how such beliefs may influence of teachers to carry out their teaching
responsibilities effectively, while PCI influences how teachers control and regulate student
behavior to manage classroom behavior expectations. Although they may intersect in certain
aspects of teacher effectiveness, they are distinct constructs that focus on different dimensions of
teacher beliefs and behaviors. For example, Netzel and Eber (2003) determined from their study
that successful implementation of PBIS requires self-evaluation of what strategies have been
effective or ineffective for student discipline. Understanding these constructs helps explore how
high school teachers perceive their competence and success in managing student behavior within

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
56
the context of SWPBIS, particularly in Tier 2 supports. Systems change is about learning from
individual and collective mistakes so that all stakeholders are empowered to keep ideas that work
according to the data related to student needs. In the context of the school setting
Furthermore, the targeted behavior for the implementation of SWPBIS is inherently
transformative. Implementing SWPBIS is a change of viewpoint for some and an affirmation of
years of knowledge and research evidence for why it makes sense. It is a proactive approach that
will take time to yield desired outcomes. In districts where time is a valuable commodity, it has
been a challenge to persuade teachers to offer that time up front (Filter & Brown, 2019; Flannery
& McGrath, 2017).
Summary of Literature Review
The challenges faced by high school teachers in the classroom vary based on the
organizational culture and context of the school, its diversity, and its location in urban, rural, and
suburban communities (Flannery et al., 2009; Putnam et al., 2009). The literature highlights the
importance of the teacher-student relationship in fostering student connectedness and the
necessity of high schools to implement progressive student discipline approaches/frameworks
such as SWPBIS. Adapting these frameworks will dismantle decades of public school reliance
on punitive and exclusionary discipline practices. Eiraldi et al. (2019) three-year descriptive
study of the implementation of PBIS Tier 2 interventions in two under-resourced urban K-8
schools affirms that “poor teacher classroom management strategies lead to chronically
disruptive classroom environments” (p. 1241). In this study, the protocols for helping students
exhibiting behavior problems, such as depression and anxiety, were specifically examined for
implementation fidelity, acceptability, and effectiveness to reduce ODR’s. The participating
schools had decreased ODRs among students receiving Tier 2 interventions, and teachers were

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
57
integral in identifying students for this support (Eiraldi et al., (2019). Bohanon et al. (2009) state
that the influence of high school teachers’ beliefs and values about the school, including their
expectations for students, their role as academic instructors, or their belief that students should
already know how to behave, have all been noted as potential barriers to implementation.
Flannery et al. (2009) and Putnam et al. (2009) support the same finding. In addition, the
organizational structure of high schools is complex, limiting collaboration across teaching staff
and increasing the need to use systematic strategies for achieving consensus across staff
(Bohanon et al., 2009; Flannery et al., 2013; Swain-Bradway et al., 2015), decreasing
misbehaviors to increase prosocial behaviors creating a positive classroom environment of trust,
reciprocity, and progress. This reduces the reliance on punitive measures and exclusionary
policies for student behavior infractions (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Flannery et al., 2014; Freeman et
al., 2016).
Research has shown that some teachers may believe that they have limited power to
modify students' behavior, therefore viewing student behavior from a developmental
perspective (Dutton-Tillery, 2010; Crone & Horner, 2000). However, teachers may be more
willing to address problem behaviors when trained to understand how their learning environment
influences student behavior (Walker & Plomin, 2005). Barriers to implementing PBIS Tier 2
interventions include teacher buy-in, teachers’ perspectives on student discipline, and investment
in staff training, which are critical areas for the ongoing research of SWPBIS in high schools
(Bambara et al., 2009; Bohanon, 2007; Freeman et al., 2016), along with the need for more
social-emotional learning.
Relative to this literature review, the contribution of this study illuminates the
perspectives of high school teachers for SWPBIS Tier 2 interventions and their beliefs about

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
58
school discipline, for they are the practitioners whose guidance on how to overcome the
complexity of implementation within the varied contexts of high school is paramount. Molloy et
al.'s (2015) research on the quality of PBIS implementation in elementary and secondary schools
assessed that a better alliance between teachers and implementers [i.e., PBIS team] is needed to
address this quality in a “real-world” setting of the classroom. Pas and Bradshaw (2014) found
that focusing on teachers' roles in targeted interventions can reduce student referrals in their
research of 702 elementary teachers, underscoring that: “Understanding the teacher factors that
influence student outcomes may inform the development of better student screenings for
interventions and teacher-targeted intervention”.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
59
Chapter 3: Methodology
The purpose of this chapter is to describe the methods used, present the conceptual
framework that guided this study, and delineate the data and variables used to address the
following research questions:
1. What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers preventing high school teachers
from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports within the PBIS
framework?
2. What beliefs about school discipline and classroom management do PBIS team
members perceive as influencing high school teachers' ability to identify students for Tier
2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
The literature review on implementing positive behavior support frameworks, such as
PBIS, suggests that these frameworks can dismantle decades of over-reliance on punitive school
discipline policies. The benefits include improving teacher-student relationships, cultivating
positive learning environments, and fostering student connectedness. While literature indicates
that PBIS can be an effective behavioral intervention program, limited research examines how
teachers perceive this program and how it impacts their motivation and satisfaction (Horner et
al., 2007; Pavlovich, 2008). Additionally, some literature explored the impact of the teacherstudent relationship on building progressive behavior structures in the classroom (Davis, 2003;
Martin & Collie, 2019; Noddings, 2006). However, other studies concluded a causal attribution
for the positive outcomes in self-reported surveys on the impact of PBIS on student behavior
without correlating these outcomes to any change in teachers' discipline beliefs. Further research
suggests that developing teachers' social-cultural competence and self-efficacy can increase

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
60
belief in positive behavior supports (Muscott, 2008; Evanovich & Scott, 2016; Dunlap et al.,
2008).
Overall, understanding teachers’ perspectives on behavior is essential in implementing
prevention-focused initiatives because their perspectives influence their choice of behavior
management strategy (Severson et al., 2007). The presented research investigated the variable of
experiences of high school teachers on the PBIS team. Specifically, it explored the question:
How does a high school teacher with over one hundred students effectively perform the
responsibilities of identifying students for PBIS Tier 2 interventions?
Research Design: Phenomenological Approach
This study employed the qualitative research design to analyze teachers’ perceptions of
their role in identifying students for PBIS Tier 2 student support and managing classroom
behavior within the context of SWPBIS implementation. The qualitative design was selected to
support “an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on building a
holistic picture formed with words form the detailed views of participants and conducted within
their area of expertise” (Creswell, 1994). Due to an increase in high schools adopting PBIS,
empirical studies documenting the effects and implementation efforts of SWPBIS are essential,
given the unique contextual variables present in high schools.
The researchers chose a phenomenological approach to understand the participants'
experiences by exploring them from their perspectives (Tehrani et al., 2015). Participants in this
study, who are high school PBIS team members, identified barriers to PBIS implementation and
explored teachers' beliefs about school discipline in terms of what was experienced and how it
was experienced. In the inductive qualitative method, interviews and discussions illuminate the
subjective experience to gain insight into the motivations and actions. Furthermore, the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
61
phenomenological approach’s emphasis on subjectivity and personal knowledge allows for a
description rather than an explanation, free from preconceptions (Husserl, 2012; Powell, 2016).
Powell (2016) noted that, unlike other research methods, phenomenology does not offer an
argument or attempt to prove a point; rather, it allows the reader to form an understanding from a
clear, in-depth description of the phenomenon. Generating reasoning from the perspectives of the
PBIS team members at urban high schools, Los Angeles County was selected based on school
demographics showing 40% or more students of color—specifically Black and Latino—and their
status in implementing the SWPBIS framework within their Multi-Tiered of System Supports
(MTSS). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2019-2020), schools
reporting at least one serious disciplinary action had 51% to 75% of students of color and more
than 25% of students eligible for free and reduced lunch.
Selection of the Sample
The participants chosen for this study were selected using purposive and snowball
sampling methods. The researcher employed a homogenous purposive sampling procedure for
selecting PBIS team members because they could be viewed as a “panel” with the working
knowledge and expertise relevant to the research questions (Maxwell, 2012). Consequently, the
researcher was reflexive and made decisions in response to the findings and theoretical
framework. The researcher’s intent was not to establish generalizations but to explain, describe,
and interpret this phenomenon (Emmel, 2013).
The sample for this study was selected from high schools listed as PBIS implementers on
the California PBIS Coalition website. The researcher contacted principals of four schools to
request access to email their PBIS team leaders to engage willing participants in this study. In
addition, the research employed snowball sampling, whereby the initial four participants

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
62
identified the remaining six who shared the same characteristics: current or former members of a
PBIS team and currently working in a high school with SWPBIS. The ten participants
interviewed worked in six public school high schools within Los Angeles County. Out of these,
four participants worked in the same school. Nine participants self-identified as people of color,
while one identified as White. Furthermore, three of the 10 participants are currently in pursuit of
their first secondary administration position.
The student population of the high schools varied between 1,300-2,000, with
approximately 58%-92% of the students receiving free and reduced lunch. The race/ethnicity of
student enrollment included majority Latino students, ranging from 45%-85%, with Black
students accounting for 6%-25% of the student population. These specific student groups were
highlighted due to statistics from the National Center for Education Statistics on school
suspension data, which exhibited disparities in discipline among Black and Latino middle and
high school students in terms of lost instructional time and lack of school connectedness due to
suspensions (NCES, 2018). On average, the high schools in this study had a counselor caseload
of 425 to 500 students, grades 9-12. This number exceeds the recommended American Schools
Counselor Association model of 250 students per counselor (ASCA, 2019). Three of the high
schools had an assigned School Resource Officer (SRO) from the local city police department.
For this study, "urban" was defined as a school where 40% of the student population received
free or reduced lunch, based on the U.S. Department of Education’s definition.
Instrumentation and Sources Data
The development of the interview protocol questions was based on the literature review
of education statistics, research studies on the use of progressive discipline models with positive
behavior support, and the social dynamics of the teacher-student relationship. The unit of

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
63
analysis for this study was the teacher. Data collected through semi-structured interviews
required participants to submit their informed consent and demographic information (see
Appendix B). Specifically, the literature review findings necessitated understanding “the why”
behind efforts to improve teaching and learning environments to decrease the disparate impact of
traditionally punitive school discipline policies on BIPOC students. Therefore, interviewing high
school PBIS team members sought to explore a richer understanding of their perceptions and
evaluation of the implementation of the PBIS framework.
The categories of interview questions investigated the context of experience with PBIS,
the implementation of SWPBIS processes, and the perception and evaluation of PBIS’s
outcomes on student behavior management and access to Tier 2 strategic supports at the high
school level. The studies were limited in reporting the effects on teachers’ discipline
management before and after PBIS. The data outcome focused on the decrease in ODRs and
suspensions but did not address teachers’ discipline management beliefs (Collie, 2012; Damiani,
2011).
Students with and without behavior difficulties benefit from tiered interventions. Sularski
(2010) showed that universal tier interventions are also beneficial for teachers and principals in
developing a positive school culture. As stated in the literature review, fidelity of PBIS use at the
high school level has not been as effective as in elementary and middle schools. However, the
teacher-student relationship is significant as schools shift from reactive to proactive school
discipline procedures to improve school climates for all students. Questions about managing
student behavior and the reasons for implementing SWPBIS provided context for what a positive
behavior support framework was to improve. Additionally, questions related to the PBIS

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
64
matrices developed by the schools to tier support provided insight into the culture the PBIS team
sought to foster among staff.
Data Collection and Analysis
Following approval by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of
Southern California, the researcher began the data collection process. The researcher emailed the
school district administrators an introductory letter requesting access to interview teachers and
teachers on the PBIS Team at both high schools. Follow-up calls were made to school principals
to arrange interviews and provide further clarification on the study. In addition, an outreach
email describing this study was sent to teachers on the PBIS team at each school (see Appendix
A).
Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and that they could
discontinue at any time during the study. The researcher conducted video conferencing
interviews through Zoom. Each interview was recorded with the participants’ consent and lasted
approximately 45 minutes to an hour. The researcher followed the list of interview questions in
order, along with any follow-up questions, to clarify responses or explore additional information.
District or school-developed matrices, evaluation instruments, or data used in the implementation
or evaluation of SWPBIS that participants shared were collected for analysis.
A thematic analysis of teacher interview responses was conducted to categorize the data.
The categories were theoretically derived from the research questions and prioritized accordingly
(Kuckartz, 2019). This information was used to create a codebook using NVivo. Understanding
urban high school teachers’ perceptions of their role in PBIS Tier 2 and their experience with the
implementation of SWPBIS required the use of qualitative methodology. Qualitative data from
interviews was transcribed into a form that allows this content analysis. The content analysis

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
65
included coding and narrowing down codes to discover common themes among respondents'
answers to the interview questions (Creswell & Poth, 2016). The themes were presented in tables
and narratives.
Limitations and Delimitations
The researcher exercised disciplined subjectivity through reflection and observer
comments, but her positionality as a school administrator may have influenced the findings of
this study. Participants' awareness of the researcher as a fellow educator with PBIS experience
helped build rapport and credibility. However, the study was conducted when schools were
following state and Los Angeles County guidelines for distance learning due to COVID-19,
resulting in students being off-campus for 18 months. This situation hindered the researcher’s
ability to gather data through field observations of teachers to learn the strategies and tools they
used.
The delimitation of asking questions relative to other contextual variables participants
experienced as PBIS leaders and team members impacted their responses. Another delimitation
was the unexplored cultural identity of the participants in relation to the study’s purpose.
Participants' cultural background and belief system may have affected their decision to be a PBIS
leader or member.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
66
Chapter 4: Research Results and Findings
This chapter provides an analysis of the perspectives of ten urban high school teachers,
all of whom were current or former PBIS team leaders or members, regarding their experiences
with Tier 2 PBIS supports and Schoolwide PBIS (SWPBIS). Tier 2 interventions are designed to
provide targeted support to students exhibiting high-risk behaviors, with the teacher often
serving as the key facilitator in this prevention-focused initiative. Research has shown that
understanding teachers’ perspectives about behavior is essential to implementing preventionfocused initiatives because their perspectives influence their choice and use of behavior
management strategies (Tillery et al., 2010; Skinner & Hales, 1992).
The participants in this study reported a universal belief that positive behavior supports
could foster a positive school climate and decrease punitive discipline procedures. They also
expressed that volunteering for the PBIS team demonstrated their commitment to “Do
Something” differently for students disciplined for minor behavior infractions. Collie (2012)
found that teachers’ interpretations of their contextual environment influence their decisionmaking and self-efficacy in nurturing student relationships, which affects their ability to select
interventions with appropriate individualization and direct links to specific criteria. This study
focused on exploring the barriers and challenges that impeded teachers' recommendations for
Tier 2 PBIS student support and the implementation of SWPBIS at the high school level.
The ten one-on-one interview transcripts were analyzed based on inductive a priori codes
developed during the coding process, which yielded emerging themes related to each research
question. The findings of this dissertation study were framed around the following research
questions:

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
67
1. What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers preventing high school
teachers from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports within
the PBIS framework?
2. What beliefs about school discipline and classroom management do PBIS team
members perceive as influencing high school teachers' ability to identify students
for Tier 2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
Description of Interview Participants
The ten interviewed participants worked in six public high schools within Los Angeles
County; four worked at the same school. Nine participants self-identified as people of color,
while one identified as White. Additionally, three of the ten participants are currently seeking
their first secondary administration position. The participants were purposively selected because
they worked or had previously worked in urban high schools (where 58% or more of students
qualify for free-reduced lunch) in Los Angeles County that implemented SWPBIS.
In order to maintain confidentiality, this study uses selected pseudonyms to refer to the
participants interviewed. For example, participants Hampton and Tran work at the same high
school. Below is a brief description of each participant:
Belacruz is a 39-year-old Latina female with ten years of full-time teaching experience.
She holds a master’s degree in education and a certificate of eligibility for school administration.
At her high school, Belacruz is a Spanish teacher and has been on the PBIS team for eight years,
three of which were as the PBIS Team Leader.
Brooks is a 53-year-old Black male with 28 years of full-time teaching experience. He
holds a master’s degree in psychology. Brooks is a math teacher and has been on PBIS teams for
11 years throughout his career. He has been the PBIS Team Leader for three years.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
68
Hampton is a 35-year-old Black male with seven years of full-time teaching experience.
He has earned both a master’s degree in pharmaceutical science and a doctoral degree in
educational leadership. Hampton is a science teacher. He has been on the PBIS team for three
years.
Nunez is a 41-year-old Latina with 18 years of full-time teaching experience. She holds
both master’s and doctoral degrees. Nunez is a history teacher at her high school and has been
the PBIS team leader for four years.
Mims is a 60-year-old Black female with 28 years of full-time teaching experience. She
has a master’s degree in education and a certificate of eligibility as a school administrator. Mims
is a U.S. History teacher at her high school and has been a PBIS team member for five years.
Rance is a 43-year-old Black male with 20 years of full-time teaching experience. He was
a Physical Education teacher for 11 years and is currently an AVID and Health teacher. He has
been a PBIS team member for five years, four as PBIS team leader.
Roland is a 48-year-old Black male with 22 years of full-time teaching experience. At his
school, he teaches Psychology. Roland has a master’s degree in School Counseling. He has been
a PBIS team leader for three years.
Sato is a 37-year-old mixed-race, White/Japanese female with 15 years of full-time
teaching experience. She has been a PBIS team member for eight years, four as PBIS team
leader. She has a master’s degree in English literature and a certificate of eligibility for school
administrator. Sato is an AP Literature teacher.
Tran is a 26-year-old Vietnamese female who was a former Teach for America teacher.
She teaches English and has been a PBIS team member for two years. Tran has four years of
full-time teaching experience.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
69
Weaver is a 50-year-old Black female who has been a PBIS team member for five years.
She holds a master’s degree in education and has 21 years of full-time teaching experience.
Weaver is an English teacher.
Findings for Research Question 1
Research Question 1 was “What are the barriers for high school teachers to identify
students for the strategic supports provided in Tier 2 of PBIS?” Participants identified several
barriers that hinder the identification of students for Tier 2 PBIS support, primarily related to the
lack of a continuum of learning and communication. This communication breakdown negatively
impacted the fidelity of SWPBIS implementation. Approximately 50% of the participants
defined implementation as teachers’ attempts to follow and use the PBIS discipline process as
their classroom management based on the discipline matrix collaboratively created with the
school’s PBIS team. The remaining participants described implementation as the protected time
the PBIS team was given to present during staff meetings and to plan with school administration
to develop procedures and processes supporting the PBIS matrix.
Ms. Mims, a participant, stated: “Our duty to the staff for implementation was to explain
what it is, its purpose, and provide some of the strategies they could use. But none of that could
happen until time was given to us [PBIS team] to create a plan for successful implementation.”
Overall, participants' responses to this research question did not differ significantly in terms of
adequate preparation in communicating and providing deeper learning opportunities regarding
teachers' roles in PBIS Tier 2 supports. Four prominent themes emerged from the interviews
related to Research Question 1: the absence of a clearly defined student discipline system, the
need for timely teacher feedback on classroom discipline referrals, and the necessity for teachers
to understand how Tier 2 PBIS supports improve student behavior.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
70
Absence of a Clearly Defined Student Discipline System
Based on interviews, the theme of the lack of a clearly defined student discipline emerged
among 70% of the participants. They agreed that a well-defined system of accountability for
school discipline could better support the development of Tier 2 PBIS support for student
intervention. Interestingly, 30% of the participants’ schools communicated student recognition of
Tier 1 expectations through a reward system. However, they still relied on punitive consequences
for students who did not adhere to these universal expectations. The predictability of the
discipline system is just as important as the implementation of behavior instruction based on the
predictability of challenging behaviors to increase the probability of SWPBIS success (Fox et al.,
2022).
Brooks, a PBIS Team Leader and History teacher, believes creating a school climate with
well-communicated progressive discipline for infractions within Tier 2 supports is crucial:
Kids can sense when adults are or are not on the same page. High school students do not
want to feel trained; they want to feel or sense respect. They are not robots, and we have
to address their behaviors by explicitly telling them what we expect. If they need help
complying, we communicate how we can help them become better citizens.
Brooks further stated that explaining to staff how the school discipline policy works in
conjunction with the PBIS tiers to define student and teacher accountability is essential. Teachers
are most often predisposed to witness negative and positive student behaviors. Therefore, having
a clearly defined system for student discipline can strengthen the teacher-student relationship
when both parties are held equitably accountable for the communicated expectations. Developing
targeted supports in Tier 2 for behavior intervention becomes even more challenging when

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
71
teachers perceive an imbalance between consequences and rewards for students' on-task
behavior.
Rance, a former PBIS coach and Math teacher, explains that teachers at his school
initially felt PBIS was a "turn the other cheek" type of discipline:
Getting more bees with honey is the PBIS approach, and if done correctly, it can
transform a school’s climate and culture. We rewarded every student who maintained
behavior expectations of Tier 1 in our PBIS behavior matrix. However, adding the socialemotional element took some convincing. Some students may be assigned to checkin/check-out with their counselor, participate in mentoring workshops, and receive other
supports, but teachers saw it as soft discipline.
Rance expressed frustration with the inconsistency among administrators' beliefs in PBIS and
their differing management styles for school discipline, ranging from punitive to pervasive
leniency. All of which he deemed an angst to the success of SWPBIS. This inconsistency was
cited by 80% of participants as a root cause of the PBIS team’s inability to move beyond the
foundational level of Tier I universal expectations to establish Tier 2 support for struggling
students.
Tran, a PBIS Team Member and English teacher, argued that a school’s climate of respect
and a sense of community is needed for SWPBIS to flourish:
We [the school] somewhat harass students for simple things, which breaks down trust and
respect. Worrying about a student who will not take off their sweatshirt hood and giving
them an office referral for non-compliance is senseless and silly. Why is wearing a hood
devious behavior and more important than building a relationship with the student? This
never happened at the magnet school I attended. We were allowed to be ourselves.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
72
Tran further explained that the expectations for the PBIS matrix should include student input to
prevent small infractions from becoming the controlling factor in student behavior referrals. She
stressed that the sustainability of the discipline system is equally important for clearly defining
the “what and how” of the discipline process to staff and students.
Approximately 30% of the participants discussed the importance of involving students
and parents in the PBIS Team to improve the implementation process of SWPBIS (Murphy,
n.d.). Nunez, a PBIS Team Leader, stated that parents cannot support something [PBIS] if they
do not know what it is:
Too often we leave parents out of the equation of what we do at school. Although it’s
hard in our school community to get parents to even come to the open house or back-toschool night, we can at least provide information to get their support from the jump. We
did not do that.
Setting clear expectations was a challenge that 80% of participants acknowledged. As an
example, Weaver, a PBIS team member and English teacher, said, “Teachers lack faith in a
discipline system of inconsistency, and it requires the PBIS team be steadfast in the belief that
PBIS can change behavior and ultimately school culture,’’
Feedback to Teachers on Classroom Discipline Referrals
When asked how timely the school gave teachers feedback on discipline referrals, the
participants unanimously agreed, in some form, that inconsistent discipline practices and
unresolved issues hindered the implementation of SWPBIS. As a result, 40% of the participants
stated that teachers would often revert to their own approaches to managing classroom behavior.
This lack of recognition for teachers' efforts in managing student behavior can lead to frustration
and demotivation.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
73
Mims, a PBIS team member and History teacher, believes that coaching alongside
teachers as they struggle to identify root causes of student misbehavior can help them refer to
appropriate interventions. She stated, “Feedback is the support teachers need as a team
implements the PBIS behavior matrix schoolwide.’’ Belacruz, a PBIS team leader, elaborated:
We developed the matrix along with the staff, so it made sense to give space for feedback
on how it works for them. The PBIS team wanted every teacher to use the matrix as their
classroom discipline. We had about 70% using it. Our team was visible and available to
troubleshoot and answer questions for teachers.
Mims added that if teachers spent time documenting their efforts to redirect a student’s behavior,
they also deserve to know the outcome for the student. She further explained that timely
feedback on student outcomes was problematic for her team due to a lack of administrative
support for the referral reporting system.
Hampton, a PBIS team member and science teacher, offered the solution of giving the
PBIS Team Leader a stipend to manage and monitor a PBIS referral system to provide feedback
to teachers. He stated:
Taking away the old triplet referral form would have greatly helped gather data using the
Google form we implemented for PBIS. I think it confused the students as some thought
the paper referral meant their infraction had a greater consequence. Having
administration support to only accept and require teachers to use the Google form for
student discipline mattered. I think this would have allowed us to better collaborate with
teachers on how the matrix works for them and the students.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
74
Hampton added that slow to no feedback created a breakdown in communication, which
translated to teachers' efforts to identify and refer students with at-risk behaviors being unvalued
and unsupported. He explained:
Most of the participants concurred that prior to SWPBIS, the paper referral was mainly a
one-way communication of student misbehavior. Without feedback, teachers struggle to
identify the root causes of student misbehavior or to implement appropriate interventions.
As a result, disciplinary issues remain unresolved, leading to a disruptive learning
environment and ongoing behavior problems and consequently undoing the teacher buyin which is necessary for SWPBIS to gain a foothold to improve the teacher-student
relationship and the school climate overall.
Sato, the PBIS team leader, reflected on this challenge through an analogous example of her
experience as a school counselor working with students on academic or personal issues and
teaching them coping skills to make different choices. She explained:
Without providing feedback to my students on how they are using the tools gained to
their benefit, it becomes challenging to identify patterns, trends, or potential pitfalls they
experience in their journey to do better. This is the same for our teachers using the tools
of PBIS to help with student behaviors. Feedback can help teachers refine their
disciplinary approaches, support consistent practices, and address student behavior issues
more effectively.
Sato was among the 40% of participants who cited that lack of feedback on discipline referrals
using a PBIS classroom behavior matrix hinders the development and implementation of
effective school-wide discipline policies.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
75
Teacher Training on Tier 2 PBIS Supports
Participants unanimously agreed that teaching staff should be informed about and have
input on the available Tier 2 supports for students. They emphasized that teachers need a clear
understanding of the progressive nature of the tiers in SWPBIS as a form of behavior
management. Knowledge of PBIS strategies is developed through recursive opportunities to
practice strategies, understand the referral process, and receive ongoing coaching. Sato
mentioned that teachers often emailed her directly rather than completing the referral form for
Tier 2 supports. She believed they were uncomfortable with a process they did not fully
understand. Roland, a PBIS team leader, explained a similar experience for the targeted support
of Tier 2:
We were so concerned with the universal expectations and getting teacher, student, and
staff input on the matrix that we did not make time for teachers to understand how PBIS
works beyond Tier 1.
Weaver and Nunez described their experience as embedded training for PBIS at their high
schools. Weaver explained:
PBIS training was a part of our culture of care within our Multi-Tiered System of
Supports (MTSS). Staff training on PBIS was included on pupil-free days, during staff
meetings, and in the Summer as professional development opportunities. Our
administration wanted to deepen the understanding of social-emotional learning and help
staff learn effective strategies for supporting students‘ needs using the matrix of behavior.
Nunez recalled that a plan to provide resources for staff on topics such as trauma-informed
teaching, conflict resolution, and mindfulness was particularly beneficial at her school:

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
76
Let’s face it. Teachers often scoff at learning something new if it directly affects the
particular area they teach. I think that because we implemented SWPBIS as part of our
MTSS, all staff were learning together, not just teachers. The Tier 2 supports we offered
were explained by our mental health professionals, counselors, and school psychologist.
Teachers learned the integral role they have in supporting students’ overall growth,
success, and well-being.
When asked about teacher training for what Tier 2 supports and the teacher’s role, Belacruz
described how a lack of training within the PBIS Team hindered the knowledge to support the
staff. She reported:
We did not have a district-level person to keep us aware of training through the Los
Angeles County Office of Education PBIS Unit. We had funding to pay the team and
other staff. We just missed training and found ourselves reviewing materials on our own
and trying to teach our counselors and the school psychologist how PBIS fits into the
supports we offer students. In hindsight, we should have prioritized how the PBIS Team,
counselors, school psychologist, and other out-of-classroom staff were to be a part of the
holistic development of our students.
Tran acknowledged that getting teachers involved in Tier 2 was challenging, whether the training
was embedded or teachers were compensated for their time:
If I were to do it all over again for my high school, I would have asked my administration
to survey teachers to see who is willing to visit a high school with PBIS or at least visit a
high school with a Wellness or Life Skills type center that focused on the whole child. An
experience like this would have greatly helped. Some of my teachers thought that if they
identified a student for Tier 2 supports then they were a failure at building a relationship

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
77
with a student. So, some would keep quiet and try to deal with it in the classroom. The
outcome of this was either a bad blow-up and/or a power struggle that caused more harm
than help.
Brooks lamented having discontent with how high school students' need for behavior redirection
is too often focused on punitive measures:
Restorative practices, social-emotional learning, and positive behavioral interventions
are all Tier 2 supports. Each can help shift the culture toward more supportive and
equitable disciplinary practices that prioritize student well-being and positive behavior
development. Additionally, my school could do a lot more in providing ongoing
professional development and support for teachers in implementing these approaches. As
a PBIS team leader, I am still hoping to facilitate positive change in disciplinary practices
at the high school level.
Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question 2 was “How do high school teachers' beliefs about school discipline
and classroom management impact their identification of students for Tier 2 interventions?” Four
salient themes emerged through the interviews: the teacher-administrator trust in school
discipline decision-making, belief about and purpose of social-emotional elements in the
discipline process, over-reliance on punitive discipline, and teacher’s upbringing impact on their
confidence in managing student discipline.
Teacher-Administrator Trust
Four of the interview participants (40%) in this study cited that trust between the teaching
staff and school administration was paramount for teachers to recommend students for Tier 2
interventions. The participants each described their confusion about the supports students

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
78
received, how they were to be monitored, and a lack of belief that administrators would follow
through to foster positive student behavior outcomes. This distrust may deter teachers from
following the SWPBIS levels for student intervention. Weaver, as a PBIS team member, felt a
sense of responsibility to her teacher colleagues to gain their trust so they could address student
behaviors:
Simply because I was on the PBIS team, I automatically became associated with the
same lack of accountability imposed on the administration. I was not paid to help
teachers complete PBIS forms, but I wanted them to feel supported and believe in the
process.
Hampton stated that for PBIS to succeed, school administration must establish a system for
implementation, monitoring, and assessment, ensuring that all stakeholders are involved in its
success. He remarked:
PBIS will completely fail, yet check a box of other means of correction for
Administration if the principal and the other administrator do not visibly support it. My
principal acknowledges our efforts through data and their classroom walkthroughs.
However, we have not won over the naysayers, maybe because they still do not think
SWPBIS will continue. We have changed principals three times in 4 years. The PBIS
team has remained intact throughout. Luckily, each principal and the current principal
had a belief in PBIS. My dilemma is maintaining the two supports we have for PBIS
Tier 2 and teachers trusting the process.
Hampton noted that his school’s two Tier 2 supports were restorative circles for peer conflict and
Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) with a counselor or Mental Health professional, depending on
students’ needs. Mims concurred with the lack of trust some teachers have in the administration's

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
79
commitment to PBIS. She explained that some teachers are traumatized by past experiences
where the administration did not support them with challenging student behaviors:
I was once a teacher who thought the administration did not do enough to deal with
students who fight, are disruptive, or do not go to class. I, too, thought they gave
weak consequences. For PBIS to be better understood, the administration needs to
communicate how school discipline must be progressive based on the changing
California Education code. Teachers really do not get those memos. It can help better
explain the tiering of behavior supports. Teachers who distrust still do not view
themselves as playing a role, no matter the training; it’s all about relationships.
Additionally, 20% of the participants believed teachers viewed PBIS as labeling students and a
system of treats rather than treatment.
Over-Reliance on Punitive Discipline
A history of school leadership emphasizing punitive discipline has led to inconsistent
disciplinary practices across classrooms, which pressures teachers to adopt similar punitive
approaches to align with leadership expectations. Ninety percent of participants cited this as a
barrier to identifying and referring students for Tier 2 interventions. Nunez, Belacruz, Hampton,
and Sato provided the most descriptive impediments to reliance on punitive discipline
measures—measures that some teachers find necessary to establish authority and ensure
compliance with rules and expectations.
Nunez believes changing the exclusionary discipline mindset may create an environment
of fear and punishment among teachers. She stated:
My team had to determine how PBIS fit with our culture of care and student learning
outcomes. We needed a hook to show how PBIS enhances what we already do, yet it still

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
80
has a consequential aspect that builds bridges and belief. As a PBIS team leader, I am
battling years of a lack of coherence and inconsistency in how disciplinary issues are
handled. High school teachers may perceive adolescent behavior as more challenging or
defiant compared to younger students. They may believe that punitive measures are
necessary to address what they perceive as deliberate disobedience or disrespect.
Different teachers may interpret and apply the punitive measures differently.
Belacruz, a PBIS coach and Spanish teacher, explained that maintaining discipline in the school
community is the responsibility of every staff member, and teachers need to be aware of their
expectations to sustain a positive school climate:
We [the PBIS team] create a PBIS Matrix that makes sense for our school with behavior
or climate expectations, but if it is not tied to the current administration process on how
they want us to deal with student discipline, then we can not get to the secondary tier of
support. Teachers will just ignore it and do as they always have done. High school is a
different beast because some teachers believe students should already know how to act,
so PBIS is an unnecessary training wheel.
Hampton used the Broken Window Theory to explain the difficulty of getting high school
teachers to abandon their punitive discipline beliefs. According to Sakar (2023), the Broken
Windows Theory is a criminological theory that suggests that visible signs of disorder and
neglect in an environment, such as broken windows, graffiti, or litter, can contribute to increased
crime and antisocial behavior. The theory posits that if minor signs of the disorder are not
addressed promptly, they can signal potential offenders that the area is not monitored or cared
for, leading to further deterioration. Therefore, action should be swift and punitive. Hampton
observed:

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
81
It is the Broken Window theory that how the surrounding community of school looks
can, I believe, affect the type of discipline teachers believe the students deserve. Our
school is well-maintained, but the neighborhood around it has crime, some poverty, and a
stereotypical reputation for family dynamics. Too often, teachers seeking swift action on
ODRs can unjustly criminalize minor student infractions. If it isn’t broken, do not fix it,
but if your lens determines it is broken, then fix it and not the system it exists within.
Sato, like Hampton, believes exclusionary discipline practices are a symptom, not a cause, of her
colleagues' steadfast, punitive mindset. Her desire to change this was what motivated her to join
the PBIS team. Sato emphasized that Tier 2 PBIS provides teachers with the opportunity to see
the student, not just the behavior:
There are teachers I genuinely vibe with when it comes to lesson planning, but their
classroom management style damages kids. Tier 2 is where, as we have explained during
staff meetings, a teacher provides enhanced classroom management. Integrating Tier 2
supports offers teachers valuable strategies and resources to preemptively manage
difficult behaviors. Consequently, this can cultivate a positive and conducive learning
atmosphere for every student.
Participants consistently reported experiences with high school teachers adopting more punitive
approaches to discipline management. Other key factors contributing to this trend include a
perceived need for control and prior teacher training emphasizing rules and consequences as the
most effective way to maintain order.
Belief in Social-Emotional Needs of High School Students
Participants emphasized the importance of working collaboratively with their staff to
establish student behavior expectations. This matrix guided the building of a school climate

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
82
rooted in mutual respect for the learning environment. SWPBIS also provided the opportunity to
nurture the social-emotional awareness and skills of students (Collie, 2010; Collaborative for
Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, 2003; Payton et al., 2008), including the ability to
“recognize and manage their emotions; set and achieve positive goals; demonstrate caring and
concern for others; establish and maintain positive relationships; make responsible decisions; and
handle interpersonal situations effectively” (Payton et al., 2008, p. 6).
Participants project significant connections to teachers’ ability to exhibit positive role
modeling, levels of empathy, and support of students struggling socially for responsiveness to
SWPBIS (Fox et al., 2022). Setting expectations for the PBIS matrix is foundational to the
concerted efforts of students, parents, and teachers on the PBIS Team.
Teacher’s Upbringing Impact on Managing Student Discipline
PBIS Tier 2 focuses on individualized care for the social-emotional development of
students. Study participants were asked to share their philosophy on student discipline and
whether their upbringing influenced their classroom management. According to Netzel and Eber
(2003), PBIS is an overall philosophical change to a proactive approach, and a shared discipline
philosophy among staff must be fostered for implementation success. Various studies on
classroom management and PBIS document found that persistent challenging behaviors can
cause teacher frustration, burnout, negative feelings of self-efficacy, and job dissatisfaction
(Bambara et al., 2012). Consequently, all these can be barriers to identifying students for PBIS
Tier 2 interventions. The common themes among participants' discipline philosophies further
illustrate the influence teachers' beliefs have on their response to students’ challenging behaviors.
Whether these behaviors stem from internal student characteristics (e.g., disability, trauma) or

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
83
external factors (e.g., history, home) beyond the school’s control, changing teachers' beliefs and
practices will not be easy, but an assessment can explore these perceived barriers.
Focus on Student Needs. Listening to students’ needs is one of the participant discipline
philosophy themes mentioned on 15 different occasions by all ten participants. Mims shared that
she strives to communicate with students to understand their feelings and needs and that
“everyone should be able to express themselves freely and feel comfortable in the class to be
themselves and be accepted.” Belacruz stated:
We too often shut down students. I treat my students the way I wish I was respected by
my family and teachers. I grew up in a low-income neighborhood and went to Title I
schools. I was only heard when I was asked to speak, which was rarely ever. I teach my
students to be critical thinkers and advocates for themselves.
The One Size Fits All Approach Does Not Work. Participants emphasized the
importance of taking time to learn about students’ backgrounds, struggles, and needs to
appropriately address misbehavior. Tran said she believes in proactive measures that serve the
whole child and are not based on implicit biases or misguided authority. Tran explained, “There
can be many reasons a student behaves a certain way; it's our job to learn the intent for the
behavior.” Hampton focused on the positive connotation of discipline as a means for student
self-awareness, self-reliance, and self-management. He said, “I try to impart the idea that your
consequences are rewards for a better you. We should individualize student self-care.”
Have Expectations. The word “expectations” was the most recurring term among
participants regarding their upbringing and discipline philosophies. Sato shared that academic
achievement was non-negotiable growing up in an Asian-American home. She said, “My parents
were not disciplinarians, but they had expectations for us and allowed me to freely express

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
84
myself when we went places and did things.” The participants also shared that respect,
preparedness, and a positive attitude toward their ability were non-negotiable expectations.
Provide a Space for Every Identity. Seventy percent of participants reported that
having a welcoming and nurturing high school experience was a key reason they volunteered to
be PBIS team members or leaders. Nunez shared that being an English Learner (EL) in high
school affected school connectedness, but a caring teacher made space and time for her and other
EL students:
PBIS aims to do the same thing my 9th grade English teacher did: to create a positive
school through cultural responsiveness, tough love, belief in students’ ability,
expectations of being responsible, and accountability for role modeling to or
positively supporting my peers.
The accountability Nunez refers to exemplifies self-efficacy and role modeling within Tier 2
PBIS supports. PBIS in high school can work to foster a climate where all students feel valued
and included. Student identity within PBIS involves feeling like an integral part of the school
community, where their contributions and behaviors are acknowledged and respected. PBIS is a
progressive discipline model that requires teachers to confront their experiences and viewpoints
on student discipline. Over 50% of participants admitted they experienced initial dissonance
related to building the capacity of staff and students in the following areas:
1. Self-Efficacy: PBIS encourages students to take ownership of their behavior and
develop self-regulation skills. Student identity in PBIS involves feeling capable
and confident in managing their behavior and making positive choices.
2. Social Roles: Within the PBIS framework, students may take on different roles,
such as peer mentors or leaders, in promoting positive behavior. Student identity

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
85
involves understanding and embracing these roles, whether as a role model for
others or someone seeking support and guidance from peers and adults.
3. Responsibility: PBIS emphasizes teaching and reinforcing positive behaviors
rather than focusing solely on discipline. Student identity within PBIS involves
understanding and accepting personal responsibility for one's actions and their
impact on the school community.
4. Cultural Responsiveness: PBIS encourages schools to consider their students'
cultural backgrounds and experiences when implementing behavior support
strategies. Student identity within PBIS involves recognizing and respecting the
diversity of identities within the school community and ensuring that behavioral
expectations and supports are culturally responsive.
Overall, tiering behavior expectations, supports, and intervention is about fostering a
sense of belonging, agency, responsibility, and cultural responsiveness for teachers and students,
ultimately contributing to a positive and inclusive school environment. The crux of the themes
illuminated in this study is the need to center professional development on the influence of the
teacher’s role in a continuous improvement cycle of school discipline, which takes into account
both teacher and student school experiences.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
86
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications
The focus on students' social-emotional needs and well-being has been at the forefront of
students’ academic achievement before and since the COVID-19 pandemic. PBIS Tier 2
interventions are not a panacea for the challenging behaviors of high school students.
Undisputedly, educators' efforts to improve students' prosocial behavior in K-12 by emphasizing
social-emotional learning have significantly been fostered by the PBIS framework to establish
positive cultures. However, based on the participant interviews in this study, if implemented
within the context of the high schools’ climate and based on discipline data, it can be a valuable
tool to create more equitable schooling for students. During the last decade, school districts and
K-12 educators have been urged by the U.S. Department of Education’s school climate and
discipline policy guidance, as well as state initiatives such as the California Safe and Supportive
Schools, to provide training and resources to create a physically and emotionally safe school
environment. Specifically, the data collected by the U.S. Department of Education has
highlighted the widening discipline gap between racial/ethnic minority students and White
students for more than 35 years (O’Connor et al., 2014). The sole reliance on exclusionary
discipline and zero-tolerance policy is no longer a justified way to achieve a positive school
climate and does not foster school connectedness.
In Chapter 4, the participants in this study, through semi-structured interviews, provided
first-person experience on the challenges of implementing a positive discipline framework in
high schools, with the teacher at the center of its success and failure. PBIS Tier 2 supports, as
these participants explained, should be better explained to teachers so that they can be an
intentional and purposive conduit of behavior intervention process for students. The interview
shed light on the factors to consider when implementing PBIS. These factors include the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
87
complex social dynamics, external influences, time and resources, and balancing accountability
as the foundation of a comprehensive and system approach. Furthermore, the collaboration
among teachers, administrators, students, and parents/guardians, despite facing challenges, is an
investment in strengthening teacher-student relationships, enhancing school climate, and better
academic outcomes. Hansford's (2021) research, conducted through qualitative data analysis,
found that principals and clinicians (such as school psychologists and behavioral specialists)
believe PBIS to be an important tool for fostering a positive school culture in response to the
COVID-19 pandemic due to the common language, expectations, and consistency across
stakeholders.
Methodology
This study employed a phenomenological approach to prioritize detailed descriptions of
participants' experiences as PBIS team members and coaches/leaders. Verbatim quotes from
semi-structured interviews were used to highlight key points derived through coded analysis.
This study was guided by the conceptual frameworks of Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE) and Pupil
Control Ideology (PCI). TSE focuses on the factors that can impact discipline decisions, while
PCI focuses on the management strategies and disciplinary approaches high school teachers use.
Both of these frameworks affect identifying students for PBIS Tier 2 intervention. The
delineation of the data, other variables, and the conceptual framework was used to address the
research questions:
Research Questions
1. What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers preventing high school
teachers from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports within
the PBIS framework?

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
88
2. What beliefs about school discipline and classroom management do PBIS team
members perceive as influencng high school teachers' ability to identify students
for Tier 2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
Moreover, data was gathered, analyzed, and organized into themes to produce the results
and findings of this study. The juxtaposition of the finding and the literature review on
implementing positive behavior support frameworks, such as PBIS, to dismantle decades of
over-reliance on punitive school discipline policies suggests benefits for the teacher-student
relationship, cultivating positive learning environments and fostering student connectedness.
PBIS team members interviewed high school teachers as pivotal to Tier 2 implementation
because they directly identify students needing strategic support, yet they face barriers such as
time constraints, insufficient training, and lack of collaboration. Teachers' beliefs about school
discipline and classroom management, such as favoring punitive over supportive approaches,
further hinder their ability to recognize students for Tier 2 interventions. This study reveals that
both systemic barriers and teachers' mindsets impact the effectiveness of PBIS, addressing the
two research questions by highlighting the challenges in identification and how disciplinary
beliefs shape intervention practices.
Purpose of the Study
This qualitative exploratory study focused on PBIS team members description of the
barriers to and perceptions of high school teachers’ role in identifying students with at-risk
behaviors for preventive PBIS Tier 2 interventions and supports. Study participants relayed that a
teacher's key role in the implementation of PBIS is the targeted intervention – Tier 2, which
begins with the classroom teacher. Although -PBIS fosters progressive discipline, it is not fully
embraced at the high school level. High school teachers at schools implementing schoolwide

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
89
Positive Behavior Intervention Supports (PBIS) are charged with identifying, gathering data, and
communicating with parents for targeted classroom and group interventions. Although the
number of schools adopting SWPBIS continues to increase in the U.S., the rate of high schools
adopting -PBIS is slower than elementary schools (Swain-Bradway et al., 2018).
Findings from this study may inform best practices and procedures specific to urban high
schools to guide school leadership in the implementation efforts of SWPBIS and Tier 2 support
resources.
Results and Findings
Participants in this study shared a common experience that the school discipline policies
and procedures were inequitable, and serving on the PBIS team meant making a difference for
the most marginalized/at-promise student populations. What is your classroom management
style? How do your students respond to your style? Do you know who your students are? Are
you open to schoolwide training in this area to help us connect with our students to improve
behavior issues and foster a sense of belonging? These are examples of questions that
participants in this study shared that were not asked of them or their colleagues before the
implementation of SWPBIS.
The conceptual frameworks of Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE) and Pupil Control Ideology
(PCI) provide valuable lenses through which to interpret the barriers identified by PBIS team
members regarding high school teachers' roles in identifying students for Tier 2 supports. TSE
can be applied to understand how teachers' confidence in their ability to manage classroom
behavior and effectively use PBIS systems influences their willingness and capability to identify
students for interventions. Similarly, PCI helps explain how teachers' beliefs about discipline and

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
90
control shape their classroom management approaches, which may either facilitate or hinder
their ability to recognize students who require Tier 2 supports
The findings participant interviews highlight significant barriers that hinder high school
teachers in identifying students for Tier 2 supports. One key issue is the absence of a clearly
defined student discipline system, which leads to inconsistent practices across classrooms. This
inconsistency impacts teachers' sense of teacher self-efficacy (TSE), as they may feel unsure of
their ability to manage behaviors or make appropriate discipline referrals without a unified
framework. According to Albert Bandura's social cognitive theory, TSE is critical in determining
whether teachers feel confident in their skills to influence student behavior and learning
outcomes. When the discipline system lacks clarity, teachers' confidence weakens, potentially
preventing them from accurately identifying students who need Tier 2 interventions. Similarly,
pupil control ideology (PCI) influences this process, as teachers with a custodial (controloriented) approach might prioritize punitive measures over supportive interventions, further
complicating the identification of students in need of strategic supports.
Another finding focuses on the lack of feedback to teachers on classroom discipline
referrals, which further erodes their TSE. Without timely and constructive feedback, teachers
may not be able to reflect on or adjust their discipline strategies, leaving them uncertain about
the effectiveness of their referrals and interventions. This lack of feedback also affects their
understanding of tier 2 PBIS supports, as many high school teachers have limited training in this
area. PBIS team members reported that inadequate training prevents teachers from fully utilizing
the progressive discipline structure and identifying students for Tier 2 supports. Research on PCI
suggests that teachers' beliefs about control and classroom management significantly shape how
they interact with students and interpret behavioral issues. Without proper training, teachers may

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
91
continue to rely on outdated or ineffective control strategies, making it harder for them to
transition to a more proactive and supportive role in the PBIS system. Therefore, both TSE and
PCI are essential frameworks for understanding these barriers and guiding solutions for more
effective implementation of Tier 2 supports.
The findings highlighted the challenges high school teachers face in implementing PBIS
Tier 2 interventions. These challenges include a misalignment with their philosophical beliefs,
doubts about the effectiveness of the interventions, conflicts between their role as a teacher and
behavior management facilitators, and inconsistencies in the implementation process. Each of
these challenges illustrates themes identified in the research interviews.
Misalignment with Philosophical Belief
Participants identified teachers with the philosophical belief in traditional, punitive
student discipline as the gatekeepers to successfully implementing the progressive discipline of
SWPBIS. Although participants stated these teachers were a small number, their influence on the
staff negatively affected the idea of providing additional support to students who exhibited
challenging behaviors. Out of the 10 participants in the study, 6 (or 60%) of the participants
reported that their PBIS experienced a failure to launch as they repeatedly had to serve as a
juxtaposition to how PBIS can transform the school climate to improve the community. Existing
literature has shown that PBIS can be an effective behavioral intervention program; however,
there is limited research that examines how teachers perceive this program and how it impacts
their motivation and satisfaction (Horner et al., 2007; Pavlovich, 2008).
The concept of cognitive dissonance, the mental discomfort experienced when holding
two conflicting beliefs, can be applied to the misalignment between teachers’ personal
philosophical beliefs about school discipline and classroom management and the expectations set

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
92
by PBIS. According to PBIS team members, this misalignment creates tension, as many teachers
operate with a Pupil Control Ideology (PCI) rooted in more custodial or punitive approaches to
discipline, which contrasts with the more proactive and supportive interventions advocated in
Tier 2 PBIS. This dissonance may result in teachers struggling to fully embrace their role in
identifying and supporting students for Tier 2 interventions, as their beliefs about discipline
conflict with the collaborative, positive behavior supports PBIS promotes.
Additionally, this dissonance affects teachers' Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE). Teachers
who believe in stricter, control-based classroom management strategies may feel less confident
or effective in identifying students who require Tier 2 interventions, as these interventions focus
on building supportive relationships and fostering student engagement rather than on enforcing
compliance. Consequently, teachers’ personal beliefs and the mismatch with the school’s PBIS
framework can act as a barrier, limiting their capacity to identify students for necessary strategic
supports. Consequently, 40% of participants agreed that providing evidence of the effectiveness
of Tier 2 interventions and ensuring that resources are appropriately allocated can help mitigate
cognitive dissonance and promote teacher buy-in.
Cognitive dissonance, though not fully explored in the analysis of the findings, may have
significant implications for high school teachers' buy-in to the effectiveness of PBIS in a high
school setting. When teachers' philosophical beliefs about discipline and classroom
management—often aligned with more traditional, control-oriented approaches—clash with the
positive, student-centered strategies promoted by PBIS, they may experience discomfort or doubt
about the program’s potential success. This internal conflict can hinder their willingness to fully
commit to or implement PBIS practices, particularly in identifying and supporting students for
Tier 2 interventions.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
93
As a result, addressing this cognitive dissonance could be key to enhancing teachers' buyin by aligning their beliefs with PBIS principles through targeted professional development,
clearer communication of PBIS goals, and demonstrating the program’s benefits in practice.
Without addressing these underlying belief systems, the effectiveness of PBIS in high schools
may be limited, as teachers may remain skeptical of its applicability in their classrooms.
Perceived Efficacy of Interventions
Themes: Feedback to Teachers on Classroom Behavior Referrals and Teacher Training on Tier
2 PBIS Supports
The finding of Inconsistencies with Implementation was closely tied to the concept of
Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE), particularly in relation to the Perceived Efficacy of Interventions.
PBIS team members indicated that the lack of Feedback to Teachers on Classroom Behavior
Referrals significantly undermined teachers' confidence in their ability to manage behavior and
implement Tier 2 interventions. Participants provided a culmination of challenges related to the
perceived teacher self-efficacy in identifying students for Tier 2 intervention. TSE is influenced
by factors such as past experiences, feedback, and a teacher's personal characteristics.
Consequently, the expectation of personal efficacy determines the level of buy-in, effort
expended, and fidelity to using a program/process (Bandura, 1977). In no order of influence,
participants identified empowerment, responsibility, support, collaboration, advocacy,
continuous learning, success, and flexibility as common beliefs and feelings that the PBIS team
must promote for teachers to acknowledge their role in PBIS Tier 2 interventions. Based on their
training, experiences, and understanding of the framework, teachers need support in reinforcing
PBIS principles, as well as in identifying and providing feedback on strategies that effectively
prevent or address behavioral issues (Bradshaw et al., 2010; Simonsen et al., 2008). Furthermore,

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
94
recognizing their efforts, making data-driven decisions, and providing individualized support
boosts teacher confidence in their PBIS Tier 2 role.
TSE is considered a key factor in determining teacher effectiveness and can impact
instructional practices, student engagement, and overall classroom climate (Kelm & McIntosh,
2012). Overall, teachers’ belief and feelings about PBIS can significantly influence their
implementation of the framework and impact the success of SWPBIS. Without proper feedback,
teachers were left uncertain about the effectiveness of their actions, which diminished their sense
of efficacy. In interviews, PBIS team members emphasized that the assumption made by
administration and district office that teachers could simply "just do it" without the need for
feedback was irresponsible and contributed to teachers' frustration. Furthermore, the lack of
Teacher training on Tier 2 PBIS Supports exacerbated this issue, as teachers felt unprepared and
unsupported in applying interventions. The absence of feedback and training collectively
weakened teachers' perceived efficacy, making it more difficult for them to confidently identify
students in need of Tier 2 supports.
Teacher’s Role in Conflict with Facilitation of Behavior Management
Theme: Belief in Social-emotional Needs of High School Students
This finding emerged during interviews with PBIS team members, highlighting how high
school teachers' beliefs in the social-emotional needs of students often conflict with their role in
managing classroom behavior. Many teachers, particularly those with a strong custodial Pupil
Control Ideology (PCI) view their primary role as maintaining control and enforcing discipline,
rather than addressing the emotional and behavioral needs of students. This custodial mindset
directly conflicts with the objectives of Tier 2 PBIS, which emphasizes personalized, socialemotional interventions for students requiring additional behavioral support. Teachers who focus

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
95
solely on control may struggle to embrace PBIS strategies, perceiving them as incompatible with
their traditional views of discipline. “I am a teacher, not a therapist.” The participants stated that
some high school teachers' classroom management training was based on the use of punitive
measures to achieve student compliance. This conflict is closely tied to PCI, as teachers with a
custodial approach prioritize strict discipline and compliance over relational, humanistic
strategies that address students' emotional needs. As a result, these teachers often resist or feel
uncomfortable implementing Tier 2 interventions, which require them to engage in more
supportive, student-centered approaches. The belief that addressing social-emotional needs does
not align with their role as disciplinarians inhibits their ability to effectively identify and support
students for Tier 2 PBIS interventions. This finding highlights the importance of addressing this
tension in order to improve teacher buy-in and the successful implementation of PBIS in high
schools.
Inconsistencies with Implementation
Themes: Teacher-Administration Trust and Lack of a Clearly Defined Discipline System
The finding of Inconsistencies with Implementation was noted when interviewing PBIS
team members about high school teachers' roles in Tier 2 PBIS. Out of the 10 participants in the
study, 7 (or 70%) expressed that inconsistencies in the way PBIS is implemented, particularly
regarding Teacher-Administration Trust, posed a significant barrier. Teachers frequently felt
uncertain or unsupported due to the administration’s inconsistent application of PBIS practices,
which eroded their trust in the system. This inconsistency negatively affected teachers'
willingness to engage in the process of identifying students for Tier 2 supports, as they were
unsure whether their decisions would be upheld or followed through consistently. This finding
aligns with the Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE) framework, which emphasizes that teachers'

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
96
confidence in managing student behavior is strongly tied to the support and feedback they
receive from their school leadership. When teachers perceive a lack of consistent support, their
self-efficacy diminishes, reducing their motivation to identify and intervene with students
requiring Tier 2 supports.
According to the literature review, the rules and curriculum for PBIS in the high school
setting must be based on the desirable behaviors that students are expected to exhibit (Evanovich
& Scott, 2016; McIntosh et al., 2008). These behavior expectations are more likely to be
effective at reducing behaviors, especially if the teachers contribute to the plan by brainstorming
the problems they have personally observed (Scott, 2012). Brooks, a participant, explained that
such plans might include teaching rules and the development of effective routines and physical
arrangements so teachers clearly know their role and what the PBIS system supports. All
participants emphasized the significance of the PBIS matrix in setting universal rules on
the desirable behaviors in Tier 1, which students are expected to exhibit. Rance stated that these
must be explicitly taught to all students so teachers feel confident about Tier 2 interventions
(Litchman, 2011; McIntosh et al., 2008; Malone & Tietjens, 2000; Simonsen et al., 2008).
The literature examined the interpersonal context of the teacher-student relationship and
its impact on the development of progressive behavior structures within the classroom (Martin &
Collie, 2019; Davis, 2003; Noddings, 2006). Other literature concluded a causal attribution for
the positive outcomes of self-reported surveys on PBIS's impact on student behavior but did not
correlate any change in teacher-student discipline beliefs. In other research, developing teachers’
social-cultural competence and self-efficacy can increase belief in positive behavior support
(Muscott, 2008; Evanovich & Scott, 2016; Dunlap et al., 2008).

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
97
Additionally, 6 out of the 10 participants (or 60%) cited the Lack of a Clearly Defined
Discipline System as a key obstacle to implementing Tier 2 supports. Teachers reported that the
absence of clear guidelines and standardized procedures for handling student behavior led to
confusion and inconsistent application of PBIS strategies. This relates closely to the Pupil
Control Ideology (PCI) framework, as teachers with a custodial PCI, who prefer stricter control
and discipline, often default to punitive measures in the absence of a clear discipline system.
Without a defined structure, these teachers may find it difficult to implement the supportive
interventions needed for Tier 2 PBIS. The lack of clarity further exacerbates the conflict between
teachers' disciplinary ideologies and the expectations of PBIS, making it more challenging for
them to fulfill their role in identifying students for Tier 2 supports effectively.
Overall, understanding teachers’ perspectives about behavior is essential to implementing
prevention-focused initiatives because their perspectives influence their choice of behavior
management strategy (Severson et al., 2007). The research presented investigated the variable
experiences of high school teachers on the PBIS team. How does a high school teacher with over
one hundred students effectively identify students for PBIS Tier 2 interventions?
Teacher’s Upbringing Impact on Managing Student Discipline
In interviews with PBIS team members, 70% (7 out of 10) agreed that teachers'
upbringing plays a significant role in how they manage student discipline. This finding is closely
related to Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE), Perceived Control over Instruction (PCI), and cognitive
dissonance. Teachers with higher TSE those confident in their ability to manage classrooms and
influence student behavior are more adaptable and effective in implementing PBIS strategies.
However, when their upbringing emphasizes strict disciplinary practices, they may struggle with
cognitive dissonance, especially if PBIS encourages a more restorative approach. This insight is

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
98
critical because it shows that valuing students' identities is essential to creating a positive school
climate, particularly in high schools. Teachers who recognize and respect individual identities
are better equipped to engage students, reduce behavioral issues, and implement PBIS
successfully, making student identity central to the program’s success.
Implications of the Study
This study contributes to the research on best practices for PBIS implementation and
sustainability in urban high schools to support teachers in recommending struggling students for
Tier 2 support to dismantle punitive and exclusionary discipline practices to a progressive
discipline framework. The experiences of the PBIS team leaders and members in this study,
along with their beliefs about school discipline, align with existing research on the diverse
contexts and foundational systems in high schools. Although these participants taught in urban
high schools, the data collection was based on their teacher experience with SWPBIS rather than
the specific demographics of the students they served. Gathering and disaggregating data based
on student race/ethnicity appears imperative in most existing research. This helps identify what
works and what does not work for students disproportionately represented among students with
behavioral problems. However, this study provides an alternative method for assessing the
efficacy of PBIS as a behavioral intervention, focusing on the teacher's understanding of their
responsibilities rather than analyzing its impact on different demographic groups.
Undoubtedly, considering demographic factors can be crucial in understanding how
interventions like PBIS affect different student populations and addressing potential disparities in
outcomes. Throughout the literature review, the disparate impact of school discipline on BIPOC
students is well-documented in research and national education statistics. Additionally, the

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
99
literature highlights the teacher as the common denominator that affects change in ODRs based
on punitive discipline measures.
Specifically, by examining high school teachers’ roles in implementing and identifying
students who struggle behaviorally, we can better understand the complexities of implementing
and sustaining positive behavior support programs within the school setting. These insights can
inform policy, practice, and future research aimed at promoting positive outcomes for students
and improving school climate can benefit from Tier 2 support. PBIS is a framework for behavior
compliance that promotes self-actualization in children from elementary through secondary
education.
In summary, the study participants’ viewpoints outline several implications for students,
teachers, and the school community to consider. Implementing PBIS Tier 2 support requires
teachers to take on additional responsibilities, collaborate with colleagues, utilize data-driven
decision-making, and maintain a strengths-based approach to support the diverse needs of
students in their classrooms. With appropriate training, support, and a commitment to student
success, teachers can play a crucial role in effectively implementing Tier 2 interventions and
promoting positive student outcomes. Defining Tier 2 supports for intervention, ensuring
resources match students' needs, and having a clearly communicated entrance/exit process are
essential for reducing doubt and building buy-in.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study interviewed ten high school teachers who are current or former PBIS team
leaders and team members working in urban high schools in Los Angeles County to understand
their perspective on Tier 2 PBIS supports and efforts to improve student behavior. This study's
findings revealed additional research areas. Further research in the following areas can support

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
100
the transformative implications of PBIS in providing comprehensive targeted support to
struggling students within urban high schools:
• Further explore effective district and school leadership practices for SWPBIS
implementation, assessment, and monitoring.
• Investigate the perceptions of school administrators who have successfully
implemented SWPBIS.
• Conduct student interviews to assess the effectiveness of SWPBIS on student
achievement/graduation, behavior management, and engagement.
• Expand research on professional development components to build teacher
capacity and efficacy to use PBIS tools and strategies.
• Further explore the beliefs and perceptions of high school teachers [non-PBIS
team members] regarding school discipline policies and procedures.
Concluding Remarks
The role of teachers has become reimagined as the social-emotional needs of
students have been more illuminated following the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a shift in the
belief that historically underserved students of color and students from socio-economically
disadvantaged communities experience environmental and familial trauma. Any student can
develop anxiety and depression due to dysfunction or trauma. According to Dr. Nadine Burk
Harris, former Surgeon General of California, every student should be screened for childhood
trauma. Dr. Burk also believes that educators should be able to recognize students’ emotions and
behaviors and be concerned about the cause of their disruptive behavior (Gaines, 2019).
Implementing behavior intervention frameworks like PBIS in K-12 public schools is not
a panacea for creating positive and caring school climates. SWPBIS will succeed in a school

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
101
environment that cultivates a culture of care for students and staff. Having a “coalition of the
willing”, such as the PBIS team leader and team members, to do the heavy lifting will not sustain
a transformative change in school culture. This is because the accountability for SWPBIS
implementation and sustainability is a top-down approach, from the school district administration
to the custodial staff, to invest the time and training and respond to trials of use.
Teachers are not psychologists, and psychologists are not teachers. However, the
strategies and practices employed by each, including school counselors, have helped further
develop the prosocial behavior and self-awareness of K-12 students. Whether through
mindfulness, whole-brain teaching, restorative practices, or other strategies, teachers are at the
forefront of developing students’ social cognition. It has been asserted that students do not learn
from teachers they do not like, and I concur, as students can tell when a teacher does not show
authentic care for their academic potential. Students are not empty vessels into which endless
subject matter knowledge is to be poured. In high school, the teacher-student interaction
becomes more focused on simulating real-world reciprocity to help students develop the
confidence, skills, and knowledge necessary to solve problems and become independent thinkers
and learners (Costa, 1991).
The participants in this study joined the PBIS team to provide agency and advocacy for a
segment of their high school population disproportionately affected by punitive discipline
policies and procedures. Furthermore, as this study illustrates, using behavior and learning
frameworks to support high school students’ college readiness can potentially result in greater
prosocial behavior and social-emotional well-being outcomes for students when there is an
effective use of resources and dedicated adult time to learn how.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
102
References
Allensworth, E., & Easton, J. Q. (2005). The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school
graduation.
Allman, K. L., & Slate, J. R. (2011). School discipline in public education: A brief review of
current practices. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6(2).
Ambrose, M., & Gibson, M. (1995, March). Does suspension work? NEA
Today, 13(7). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A16682690/AONE?u=usocal_main&sid=A
ONE&xid=2f17613c
Anyon, Y., Jenson, J. M., Altschul, I., Farrar, J., McQueen, J., Greer, E., Downing, B., &
Simmons, J. (2014). The persistent effect of race and the promise of alternatives to
suspension in school discipline outcomes. Children and Youth Services Review, 44, 379–
386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.06.025
Aspen Institute, National Commission on Social, Emotional & Academic Development. (2019).
From a nation at risk, to a nation at hope: Recommendations from the National
Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development.
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=source%3A%22Aspen+Institute%22&id=ED606337
Bambara, L. M., Goh, A., Kern, L., & Caskie, G. (2012). Perceived barriers and enablers to
implementing individualized positive behavior interventions and supports in school
settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(4), 228-240.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300712437219
Bambara, L. M., Nonnemacher, S., & Kern, L. (2009). Sustaining school-based individualized
positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(3), 161–176.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708330878

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
103
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral
change. Psychological Review.
Barrett, S., Eber, L., McIntosh, K., Perales, K., & Romer, N. (2018). Teaching social-emotional
competencies within a PBIS framework. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports, Eugene, OR.
Bartlett*, L. (2004). Expanding teacher work roles: a resource for retention or a recipe for
overwork?. Journal of education policy, 19(5), 565-582.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093042000269144
Baule, S. M. (2020). The Impact of Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) on
Suspensions by Race and Ethnicity in an Urban School District. AASA Journal of
Scholarship & Practice, 16(4).
Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2002). Social-emotional factors affecting achievement outcomes
among disadvantaged students: Closing the achievement gap. Educational Psychologist,
37(4), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3704_1
Beger, R. R. (2002). Expansion of police power in public schools and the vanishing rights of
students. Social Justice, 29(1/2 (87-88), 119-130.
Berkowitz, A. D., Jaffe, P., Peacock, D., Rosenbluth, B., & Sousa, C. (2003). Young men as
allies in preventing violence and abuse: Building effective partnerships with schools. San
Francisco: Family Violence Prevention Fund. http://www. engagingmen.
net/files/resources/2010/RaymondBrandes/Young_men_as_allies_0. pdf.
Bohanon, H., Fenning, P., Borgmeier, C., Flannery, K. B., & Malloy, J. (2009). Finding a
direction for high school positive behavior support. In W. Sailor, G. Dunlap, G. Sugai, &
R. Horner (Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior support (pp. 581–602). Springer.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
104
Bohanon, H., Fenning, P., Eber, L., & Flannery, B. (2007). Identifying a roadmap of support for
secondary students in school-wide positive behavior support applications. International
Journal of Special Education, 22(1), 39-52.
Boynton-Jarrett, R., Hair, E., & Zuckerman, B. (2013). Turbulent times: Effects of turbulence
and violence exposure in adolescence on high school completion, health risk behavior,
and mental health in young adulthood. Social Science & Medicine, 95, 77–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.09.007
Bradshaw, C. P., Bottiani, J. H., Osher, D., & Sugai, G. (2014). The integration of positive
behavioral interventions and supports and social and emotional learning. Handbook of
school mental health: Research, training, practice, and policy, 101-118.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7624-5_8
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of schoolwide
positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 12(3), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300709334798
Bradshaw, C., Pas, E., Debnam, K., & Lindstrom Johnson, S. (2015). A focus on implementation
of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) in high schools: Associations
with bullying and other indicators of school disorder. School Psychology Review, 44(4),
480–498. https://doi.org/10.17105/spr-15-0105.1
British Columbia. Ministry of Education. (1999). Focus on suspension: A resource for schools.
Government of British Columbia
Brown, T. M. (2007). Lost and turned out: Academic, social, and emotional experiences of
students excluded from school. Urban Education, 42(5), 432-455.
https://doi.org/10.1177/004208590730494755.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
105
California Department of Education (2020). Multi-tiered system of supports.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/ri/
Carr, D. (2002). Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 4(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070200400102
Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Turnbull, A. P., Marquis, J. G., McLaughlin, D. M., McAtee, M. L.,
Smith, C. E., Ryan, K. A., Ruef, M. B., Doolabh, A., & Braddock, D. (1999). Positive
behavior support for people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis.
American Association on Mental Retardation.
Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (n.d.). District/state PBIS.
www.pbis.org.
Clark, M. J. (2020). The influence of student discipline practices on students, school climate and
culture (Order No. 28153579). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest One
Academic. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquestcom.libproxy2.usc.edu/dissertations-theses/influence-student-discipline-practiceson/docview/2488132135/se-2?accountid=14749
Collie, S. (2012). School climate and social-emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job
satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1189–
1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029356
Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A
motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.),
The Minnesota symposia on child psychology. Self processes and development (Vol. 23,
pp. 43–77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
106
Costa, A. L. (1991). Developing Minds: Programs for Teaching Thinking. Revised Edition,
Volume 2. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1250 North Pitt
St., Alexandria, VA 22314 (Stock No. 611-91027, $10.95).
Costenbader, V., & Markson, S. (1998). School suspension: A study with secondary school
students. Journal of school psychology, 36(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-
4405(97)00050-2
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. Sage publications.
Crone, D. A., & Horner, R. H. (2000). Contextual, conceptual, and empirical foundations of
functional behavioral assessment in schools. Exceptionality, 8(3), 161–172.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327035ex0803_3
Curran, F. C. (2016). Estimating the effect of state zero tolerance laws on exclusionary
discipline, racial discipline gaps, and student behavior. Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis, 38(4), 647-668. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373716652728
Damiani, V. B. (2011). Crisis prevention and intervention in the classroom: What teachers
should know. R&L Education.
Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher relationships on
children’s social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 207–234.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3804_2
Day, J. C., & Newburger, E. C. (2002). The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic
Estimates of Work-Life Earnings. Special Studies. Current Population Reports.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
107
Deiro, J. A. (1996). Teaching with Heart. Making Healthy Connections with Students. Corwin
Press, Inc., 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320-2218 (ISBN-0-8039-6344-0,
cloth; ISBN-0-8039-6345-9, paper)..
Diliberti, M., Jackson, M., Correa, S., & Padgett, Z. (2019). Crime, violence, discipline, and
safety in U.S. public schools: Findings from the school survey on crime and safety: 2017-
18. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019061.pdf
Duncan, A. (2014). Guiding principles: A resource guide for improving school climate and
discipline. US Department of Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544743
Dunlap, G., Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Koegel, R. L., Sailor, W., Clarke, S., Koegel, L. K.,
Albin, R. W., Vaughn, B. J., McLaughlin, D. M., James, K. M., Todd, A. W., Newton, J.
S., Lucyshyn, J., Griggs, P., Bohanon, H., Choi, J. H., Vismara, L., Minjarez, M. B., &
Buschbacher, P. (2010). A descriptive, multiyear examination of positive behavior
support. Behavioral Disorders, 35(4), 259–279.
https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291003500401
Dunlap, G., Carr, E. G., Horner, R. H., Zarcone, J. R., & Schwartz, I. (2008). Positive behavior
support and applied behavior analysis: A familial alliance. Behavior Modification, 32(5),
682-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445508317132
Dunlap, G., Kincaid, D., Horner, R. H., Knoster, T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2014). A comment on
the term “positive behavior support.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(3),
133–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300713497099
Dunlop, C. A. (2019). Bracing for impact: is public administration ready to be relevant?. In A
research agenda for public administration (pp. 79-96). Edward Elgar Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788117258.00011

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
108
Dutton Tillery, A., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., & Collins, A. S. (2010). General education teachers’
perceptions of behavior management and intervention strategies. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 12(2), 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708330879
Eiraldi, R., McCurdy, B., Schwartz, B., Wolk, C. B., Abraham, M., Jawad, A. F., ... & Mautone,
J. A. (2019). Pilot study for the fidelity, acceptability, and effectiveness of a PBIS
program plus mental health supports in under-resourced urban schools. Psychology in the
Schools, 56(8), 1230-1245. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22272
Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach.
Sage.
Evanovich, L. L., & Scott, T. M. (2016). Facilitating PBIS implementation: An administrator's
guide to presenting the logic and steps to faculty and staff. Beyond Behavior, 25(1), 4-8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/107429561602500102
Everett, S., Sugai, G., Fallon, L., Simonsen, B., & O'keeffe, B. (2011). School-wide tier ii
interventions: Check-in check-out getting started workbook. OSEP Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports. https://www.pbis.serc.co/docs/training/year2/Tier-2-Workbook.pdf
Filter, K. J., & Brown, J. (2019). Validation of the PBIS-ACT full: An updated measure of staff
commitment to implement SWPBIS. Remedial and Special Education, 40(1), 40–50.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518775735
Flannery, K. B., Fenning, P., McGrath Kato, M., & Bohanon, H. (2013). A descriptive study of
office disciplinary referrals in high schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 21(2), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426611419512

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
109
Flannery, K. B., Fenning, P., Kato, M. M., & McIntosh, K. (2014). Effects of School-Wide
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports and Fidelity of Implementation on
Problem Behavior in High Schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(2), 111-124.
Flannery, K. B., Frank, J. L., Kato, M. M., Doren, B., & Fenning, P. (2013). Implementing
schoolwide positive behavior support in high school settings: Analysis of eight high
schools. The High School Journal, 96(4), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2013.0015
Flannery, K. B., Hershfeldt, P., & Freeman, J. (2018). Lessons learned on implementation of
PBIS in high schools: Current trends and future directions. Center for Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports (funded by the Office of Special Education
Programs, US Department of Education). https://www.pbis.org/resource/lessons-learnedon-implementation-of-pbis-in-high-schools-current-trends-and-future-directions
Flannery, K. B., & McGrath Kato, M. (2017). Implementation of SWPBIS in high school: Why
is it different? Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth,
61(1), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2016.1196644
Flannery, K. B., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2009). School-Wide positive behavior support in
high school: Early lessons learned. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(3),
177–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708316257
Fox, R. A., Leif, E. S., Moore, D. W., Furlonger, B., Anderson, A., & Sharma, U. (2022). A
systematic review of the facilitators and barriers to the sustained implementation of
school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Education and Treatment of
Children, 45(1), 105-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-021-00056-0
Fredriksen, K., & Rhodes, J. (2004). The role of teacher relationships in the lives of students.
New Directions for Youth Development, 2004(103), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.90

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
110
Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., McCoach, D. B., Sugai, G., Lombardi, A., & Horner, R. (2016).
Relationship between school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports and
academic, attendance, and behavior outcomes in high schools. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 18(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715580992
Freeman, J., Wilkinson, S., & Vanlone, J. (2018). Status of high school PBIS implementation in
the U.S. Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED591150
Gaffney, P. V. (1997). A Test Reliability Analysis of an Abbreviated Version of the Pupil
Control Ideology Form.
Gaffney, P. V., & Byrd-Gaffney, S. (1996). An Investigation into the Test Reliability of the Pupil
Control Ideology Form.
Girvan, E. J., Gion, C., McIntosh, K., & Smolkowski, K. (2017). The relative contribution of
subjective office referrals to racial disproportionality in school discipline. School
psychology quarterly, 32(3), 392. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/spq0000178
Gregory, A., & Ripski, M. B. (2008). Adolescent trust in teachers: Implications for behavior in
the high school classroom. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 337–353.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2008.12087881
Hannigan, J. D., & Hannigan, J. E. (2018). The PBIS tier two handbook: A practical approach to
implementing targeted interventions. Corwin Press.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Harmon-Jones, C. (2008). Cognitive dissonance theory. Handbook of
motivation science, 71-83.
Hansford, S. K. (2021). Elementary and Middle School Leaders’ Beliefs about the Viability of
the PBIS Framework during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sage Graduate School.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
111
Hershfeldt, P. A., Pell, K., Sechrest, R., Pas, E. T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2012). Lessons learned
coaching teachers in behavior management: ThePBISplus coaching model. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22(4), 280–299.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2012.731293
Hinze-Pifer, S. (2018). Rethinking universal suspension for severe student behavior. Peabody
Journal of Education, 93(2), 228–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1435051
Horner, R., Freeman, R., Nelson, C., & Sugai, G. (2007). Using information in state or district
level implementation of school-wide PBIS. Positive Behavioral Supports
Newsletter, 2(1), 1-3.
Horner, R. H., & Macaya, M. M. (2018). A framework for building safe and effective school
environments: Positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS). Pedagogická
Orientace, 28(4), 663. https://doi.org/10.5817/pedor2018-4-663
Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2015). School-wide PBIS: An example of applied behavior analysis
implemented at a scale of social importance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 80–85.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-015-0045-4
Hoy, W. K. (1967). Organizational socialization: The student teacher and pupil control
ideology. The Journal of Educational Research, 61(4), 153-155.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1967.10883625
Hoy, W. K. (2001). The pupil control studies. A historical, theoretical and empirical
analysis. Journal of educational administration, 39(5), 424-441.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005812
Husserl E. (2012) Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology. Springer, New
York

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
112
Ingersoll, R. M. (2009). Who controls teachers' work?: Power and accountability in America's
schools. Harvard University Press.
Jarvis, S. N., & Okonofua, J. A. (2020). School deferred: When bias affects school leaders.
Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(4), 492-498.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619875150
Jerald, C. D. (2006). Dropping Out Is Hard to Do. Issue Brief. Center for Comprehensive School
Reform and Improvement
Kelm, J. L., & McIntosh, K. (2012). Effects of school-wide positive behavior support on teacher
self-efficacy. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 137-147.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20624
Kennedy, M., Homer, R. H., McNelly, D., Mimmack, J., Sobel, D., & Tillman, D. R. &
Fullerton, M. (2010). Data-based decision making in PBIS high schools: Informed
implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support. In K. B. Flannery & G. Sugai
(Eds.), SWPBS implementation in high schools: Current practice and future directions
(pp.81-114). University of Oregon.
Kittelman, A., Monzalve, M., Flannery, K. B., & Hershfeldt, P. A. (2018). Adaptations of checkin/check-out to meet the needs of high school students. The High School Journal, 102(1),
4–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2018.0017
Kuckartz U. (2019) Qualitative Text Analysis: A Systematic Approach. In: Kaiser G., Presmeg
N. (eds) Compendium for Early Career Researchers in Mathematics Education. ICME-13
Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15636-7_8

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
113
Kupchik, A. (2009). Things are tough all over: Race, ethnicity, class and school discipline.
Punishment & Society, 11(3), 291–317.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474509334552
Lanza, G. (2020). Teachers’ self-efficacy when managing disruptive student behaviors and its
influence on teacher burnout [Doctoral Dissertation].
https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/2406/
Lee, Y. Y., Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (1999). Using an instructional intervention to reduce
problem and off-task behaviors. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(4), 195-
204. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830079900100402
Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., & Pelletier, L. (2006). Why do high school students lack
motivation in the classroom? Toward an understanding of academic amotivation and
the role of social support. Journal of educational psychology, 98(3), 567.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.567
Lhamon, C. E., Rosenfelt, P. H., & Samuels, J. (2014). Dear Colleague Letter: School
Enrollment Procedures. US Department of Justice.
Lhamon, C., & Samuels, J. (2014). Dear colleague letter on the nondiscriminatory administration
of school discipline. Washington, DC: US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights
& US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division.
Maggin, Z. (2015). A systematic evidence review of the check-in/check-out program for
reducing student challenging behaviors. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 17(4), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715573630
Malloy, J., Bohanon, H., & Francoeur, K. (2018). Positive behavioral interventions and supports
in high schools: A case study from New Hampshire. Journal of Educational and

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
114
Psychological Consultation, 28(2), 219–247.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2017.1385398
Malone, B. G., & Tietjens, C. L. (2000). Re-examination of classroom rules: The need for clarity
and specified behavior. Special Services in the Schools, 16(1-2), 159-170.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v16n01_11
Marchbanks, T., Peguero, A. A., Varela, K. S., Blake, J. J., & Eason, J. M. (2018). School
strictness and disproportionate minority contact: Investigating racial and ethnic
disparities with the “school-to-prison pipeline.” Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice,
16(2), 241–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204016680403
Martin, A., & Collie, R. (2019). Teacher–student relationships and students’ engagement in high
school: Does the number of negative and positive relationships with teachers matter?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 861–876.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000317
Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and
achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of
educational research, 79(1), 327-365. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325583
Martin, D. C. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions and satisfaction with PBIS in a Southeast Georgia
school district [Doctoral Dissertation].
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1885&context=e
td
Matus, D. E. (2001). Traditional classroom management revisited in the urban school. American
Secondary Education, 30(1), 46.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach . Sage publications.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
115
McCurdy, B. L., Kunsch, C., & Reibstein, S. (2007). Secondary prevention in the urban school:
Implementing the behavior education program. Preventing School Failure: Alternative
Education for Children and Youth, 51(3), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.51.3.12-19
McDaniel, S. C., Kim, S., & Guyotte, K. W. (2017). Perceptions of implementing positive
behavior interventions and supports in high-need school contexts through the
voice of local stakeholders. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 20(2), 35-44.
McIntosh, K., Brigid Flannery, K., Sugai, G., Braun, D. H., & Cochrane, K. L. (2008).
Relationships between academics and problem behavior in the transition from middle
school to high school. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(4), 243-255.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708318961
McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI
and PBIS. Guilford Publications.
McIntosh, K., Predy, L. K., Upreti, G., Hume, A. E., Turri, M. G., & Mathews, S. (2014).
Perceptions of contextual features related to implementation and sustainability of schoolwide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 16(1), 31–43.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300712470723
Metzger, D. (2004). Rethinking classroom management. Social Studies and the Young
Learner, 17(2), 13-15.
Miller, A. D., Ramirez, E. M., & Murdock, T. B. (2017). The influence of teachers’ self-efficacy
on perceptions: Perceived teacher competence and respect and student effort and
achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 260–269.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.008

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
116
Molloy, L. E., Moore, J. E., Trail, J., Van Epps, J. J., & Hopfer, S. (2013). Understanding realworld implementation quality and “active ingredients” of PBIS. Prevention science, 14,
593-605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0343-9
Morris, M. W. (2012). Race, gender, and the school to prison pipeline: Expanding our
discussion to include black girls. African American Policy Forum.
http://schottfoundation.org/resources/race-gender-and-school-prison-pipeline-expandingour-discussion-include-black-girls
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.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708316258
Nagy, A. C. (2012). A review of: “Nodding, Nel (2006).The challenge to care in schools: An
alternative approach to education (2nd ed.).New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia
University. 193 pages.” Journal of Research on Christian Education, 21(1), 91–96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10656219.2012.658604
Nance, J. P., & Heise, M. (2022). Law enforcement officers, students, and the school-to-prison
pipeline: A longitudinal perspective. Ariz. St. LJ, 54, 527.
National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments. (n.d.). School climate improvement
resource package: Safe supportive learning.
https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/scirp/about

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
117
Netzel, D., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007030050020201
Nunn, G. D., & Jantz, P. B. (2009). Factors within response to intervention implementation
training associated with teacher efficacy beliefs. Education, 129(4), 599-607.
Pas, E. T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2014). What affects teacher ratings of student behaviors? The
potential influence of teachers’ perceptions of the school environment and
experiences. Prevention science, 15, 940-950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-013-0432-4
Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K. B., &
Pachan, M. (2008). The Positive Impact of Social and Emotional Learning for
Kindergarten to Eighth-Grade Students: Findings from Three Scientific Reviews.
Technical Report. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (NJ1).
Perry, B. L., & Morris, E. W. (2014). Suspending progress: Collateral consequences of
exclusionary punishment in public schools. American Sociological Review, 79(6), 1067-
1087. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414556308
Phillippo, K. L. (2010). Teachers providing social and emotional support: A study of advisor role
enactment in small high schools. Teachers College Record, 112(8), 2258-2293.
Pool, J. L., Carter, D. R., & Johnson, E. S. (2013). Tier 2 team processes and decision-making in
a comprehensive three-tiered model. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(4), 232-239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451212463961
Putnam, R., Romano, S., Agorastou, M., Baker, E., Irvin, L., O’Connell, D., ... & Stone, L.
(2009). Establishing and maintaining staff participation in PBIS high schools. SWPBS
implementation in high schools: Current practice and future directions, 43-56.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
118
Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Stormont, M. (2013). Classroom-level positive behavior
supports in schools implementing -PBIS: Identifying areas for enhancement. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(1), 39-50.
Renihan, F. I., & Renihan, P. J. (1995). Responsive high schools: Structuring success for the
at-risk student. The High School Journal, 79(1), 1-13.
Richter, M. M. (2006). The relationship between principal leadership skills and school-wide
positive behavior support: An exploratory study [Thesis].
https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/handle/10355/4443
Ringeisen, H., & Henderson, K. (2003). Context matters: Schools and the “research to practice
gap” in children’s mental health. School Psychology Review, 32(2), 153–168.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2003.12086188
Robers, S., Kemp, J., Rathbun, A., & Morgan, R. E. (2014). Indicators of school crime and
safety: 2013. NCES 2014-042/NCJ 243299. National Center for Education Statistics.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED557756
Rosen, A. (2014, May 9). School discipline. CQ Researcher, 24, 409-432.
http://library.cqpress.com/153-168.
Rumberger, R. W. (2001). Why students drop out of school and what can be done.
Ryan, C., & Baker, B. (2020). The PBIS team handbook: Setting expectations and building
positive behavior. Free Spirit Publishing.
Sautner, B. (2000). Rethinking the effectiveness of suspensions. Reclaiming Children and Youth,
9(4), 210-214.
Sautner, B. (2001). Rethinking the Effectiveness of Suspensions. Reclaiming Children and
Youth, 9(4), 210-214.

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
119
Scott, T. M. (2012). Universal systems for preventing behavior problems. In Classroom
Behavior, Contexts, and Interventions (pp. 191-216). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S0735-004X(2012)0000025011
Scott, T. M., & Barrett, S. B. (2004). Using staff and student time engaged in disciplinary
procedures to evaluate the impact of school-wide PBS. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 6(1), 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007040060010401
Severson, H. H., Walker, H. M., Hope-Doolittle, J., Kratochwill, T. R., & Gresham, F. M.
(2007). Proactive, early screening to detect behaviorally at-risk students: Issues,
approaches, emerging innovations, and professional practices. Journal of School
Psychology, 45(2), 193-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.11.003
Sihem, B. (2013). Social responsibility of educators. International Journal of Educational
Research and Technology, 4(1), 46-51.
Skiba, R. J. (2014). The failure of zero tolerance. Reclaiming children and youth, 22(4), 27.
Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. L. (2002). The color of discipline:
Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. The urban
review, 34(4), 317-342.
Skiba, R. J., & Rausch, M. K. (2013). Zero tolerance, suspension, and expulsion: Questions of
equity and effectiveness. In Handbook of classroom management (pp. 1073-1100).
Routledge.
Skilbeck, A. (2017). Dewey on seriousness, playfulness and the role of the teacher. Education
Sciences, 7(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010016
Skinner, M. E., & Hales, M. R. (1992). Classroom teachers''explanations' of student behavior:
One possible barrier to the acceptance and use of applied behavior analysis procedures in

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
120
the schools. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 3(3), 219-232.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532768xjepc0303_2
Swain-Bradway, J., Network, M. P., Freeman, J., Kittelman, A., & Nese, R. (2018). Fidelity of -
PBIS in high schools: Patterns of implementation strengths and needs.
Swain-Bradway, J., Pinkney, C., & Flannery, K. B. (2015). Implementing schoolwide positive
behavior interventions and supports in high schools: Contextual factors and stages of
implementation. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(5), 245-255.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915580030
Simonsen, B., Sugai, G., & Negron, M. (2008). Schoolwide positive behavior supports: Primary
systems and practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(6), 32-40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990804000604
Simonsen, B., Yanek, K., Sugai, G., & Borgmeier, C., (2020). Habits of effective classroom
practice. Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. https://www.pbis.org/resource/habits-ofeffective-classroom-practice
Sugai, G. (2007). Promoting behavioral competence in schools: A commentary on exemplary
practices. Psychology in the Schools, 44(1), 113-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20210
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2002). Introduction to the special series on positive behavior support
in schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10(3).
https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266020100030101
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining schoolwide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2006.12087989

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
121
Sugai, G., & Horner, R.H. (2009). Defining and describing schoolwide positive behavior
support. In W. Sailor, G. Dunlap, G. Sugai & R. Horner (Eds.), Handbook of positive
behavior support (pp. 307–326). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09632-2_13
Sugai, G., & Simonsen, B. (2012). Positive behavioral interventions and supports: History,
defining features, and misconceptions. Center for PBIS & Center for Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports.
Sularski, S. J. (2010). An evaluation of the implementation of a positive behavior support
approach in an urban preschool setting. Rutgers The State University of New Jersey,
Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology.
Tillery, A. D., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., & Collins, A. S. (2010). General education teachers’
perceptions of behavior management and intervention strategies. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 12(2), 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708330879
U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. (2014). Dear colleague letter: Nondiscriminatory
administration of school discipline.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201401-title-vi.html
Walker, S. O., & Plomin, R. (2005). The nature–nurture question: Teachers’ perceptions of how
genes and the environment influence educationally relevant behaviour.
Educational Psychology, 25(5), 509-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500046697
Wang, K., Chen, Y., Zhang, J., & Oudekerk, B.A. (2020). Indicators of school crime and safety:
2019 (NCES 2020-063/NCJ 254485). National Center for Education Statistics.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs19.pdf

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
122
Wang, M. C., & Haertel, G. D. (1994). Teacher relationships. Laboratory for Student Success
Publications.http://msan.wceruw.org/documents/resources_for_educators/Relationships/T
eacher%20Relationships.pdf
Webster, J. (2020). The topography of behavior. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/
topography- of- behavior- 3110854
Weist, M. D., Eber, L., Horner, R., Splett, J., Putnam, R., Barrett, S., ... & Hoover, S. (2018).
Improving multitiered systems of support for students with “internalizing”
emotional/behavioral problems. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20(3), 172-
184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300717753832
Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Relations between social competence and academic achievement in early
adolescence. Child development, 62(5), 1066-1078. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8624.1991.tb01589.x
Wentzel, K. R. (2009). Students’ relationships with teachers as motivational contexts. In K. R.
Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 301–322).
Routledge.
West, M. R., Pier, L., Fricke, H., Loeb, S., Meyer, R. H., & Rice, A. B. (2018). Trends in
student social-emotional learning: Evidence from the core districts. Policy Analysis for
California Education, PACE. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED591084
Willower, D. J., Eidell, T. L., & Hoy, W. K. (1967). The school and pupil control ideology (No.
24). Pennsylvania State University.
Yell, M. L., & Rozalski, M. E. (2000). Searching for safe schools: Legal issues in the prevention
of school violence. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(3), 187–196.
https://doi.org/10.1177/106342660000800306

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
123

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
124
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Informed Consent Form
Study Title: A Qualitative Examination of Urban High Schools Teachers’ Perception of Role
in Tier 2 Schoolwide Positive Behavior Supports and Interventions
Principal Investigator: Adrienne Thomas
Department: USC Rossier School of Education
Faculty Advisor: Morgan Polikoff, PhD.
INTRODUCTION
You are being asked to participate in a research study conducted by Adrienne Thomas
as a part of a USC Rossier School of Education dissertation because you meet the selection
criteria for the study. You are employed in an urban Los Angeles County High School with at
least two years of teaching experience with significant and meaningful experiences and
perspectives of School-Wide Application of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support
(SWPBIS). Your participation in this study is voluntary. Please read the information below. You
may ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding to participate.
There will be 12 interviews of members of the PBIS teams and 156 teachers surveyed.
.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study is to describe the barriers to and
perceptions of high school teachers’ role in identifying students with at-risk behaviors
for preventive PBIS Tier 2 interventions and supports. We hope to learn from high school
teachers and teams
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be compensated for your participation.
PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to do the following:
1. I will ask you to electronically sign a required informed consent form.
2. I will inform you that semi-structured interview will be conducted to collect data only
related to SWPBIS.
3. I will I audio record your interview for approximately 40 minutes.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team, and the University of Southern California
Institutional Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
125
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. When the results of the
research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used.
Audio/Video recordings will take place, and the participant has the right to review the transcripts
from the zoom recordings. Only the researcher and faculty advisor will have access to the
audio/video recordings. All information will be erased approximately May 2021. Participants
will have the option to withdraw from the interview at any time and all video/audio recording
will be deleted.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study. If you volunteer to be in this study, you may
withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind or loss of benefits to which you are
otherwise entitled. You may also refuse to answer any questions you do not want to answer.
There is no penalty if you withdraw from the study.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Adrienne Thomas at
adrienmt@usc.edu or (310)
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.
STATEMENT OF CONSENT
I have read (or someone has read to me) the information provided above. I have been given a
chance to ask questions. All my questions have been answered. By signing this form, I am
agreeing to take part in this study.
Printed Name of Research Participant _____________________________________________
Name of Research Participant Signature____________________________________________
Date and Time Signed ________________________________

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
126
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
INSTRUCTIONS
Hello, my name is Adrienne Thomas, thank you for taking the time to participate in this
interview regarding your experience as a member of a high school PBIS team. This interview
will ask you a variety of questions and consist of both open -ended and closed-ended questions.
I will ask you about your perceptions and experiences working with teachers to understand and
utilize the SWPBIS Tier 2 supports and interventions with students exhibiting at-risk behaviors.
There is no right, wrong, desirable or undesirable answers. Please feel comfortable with speaking
about your true thoughts and experiences, as it relates to the interview questions asked. A onehour time slot has been scheduled for this interview. You have been selected as a participate for
our interview, you are employed in an urban Los Angeles County High School with at least two
years of teaching experience with significant and meaningful experiences and perspectives of
School-Wide Application of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support (SWPBIS). This
study aims to focus on the experiences high school teachers staff of educational-re-entry
programs and gain insight on their perceived success of the program to encourage other 4-year
institutions to develop similar programs to assist this population.
ZOOM RECORDING INSTRUCTIONS
With your consent, I will be video/audio recording our Zoom meeting. The purpose is to ensure
that I have accurate documentation of your responses to the interview questions asked, as well as
give you my full attention throughout the interview. All recordings are confidential, and upon
completion of the interviews, I will document your responses, which will not include references
to specific students or staff.
CONSENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS
Before we begin with the interview, I have previously emailed you over a copy of the consent
form, for your review and electronic signature. Please let me know if you have any questions
regarding that form.
INTERVIEW BEGINS
I will now begin with the interview and start recording of our session.
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Background Questions
Teachers on PBIS Team
• What is your position and how long have you worked at this high school?
• How long have you been on the PBIS team?
• Briefly describe your role on the PBIS team?

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
127
• Why did you volunteer for the PBIS team?
• What has been your experience with managing classroom misbehaviors?
General Education Teachers
• What is your position and how long have you worked at this high school?
• What has been your experience with managing classroom misbehaviors?
Context/ Questions
• Why did the school implement schoolwide positive behavior support and
interventions?
• Prior to SWPBIS, what school procedures/policies were in place for teachers to deal
with minor student discipline?
• What are some challenging behaviors teachers deal with most frequently?
Process/Implementation Questions
• Describe the school’s process for developing the PBIS Matrix
• What is the teacher’s role in Tier 2 of SWPBIS?
• What were the challenges to implementing SWPBIS?
• What professional development did teachers/faculty receive during the
implementation stage of SWPBIS?
• What are the PBIS Tier 2 supports and interventions available to students?
Perceptions/Evaluation Questions
• What affect does SWPBIS have on the student-teacher relationship?
• What are the school administration and/or district supports for the sustainability
efforts of SWPBIS?
• How are students’ needs being met or unmet within SWPBIS?
• What has been used to assess implementation of SWPBIS?
• What needs to be considered for teachers to buy-in that SWPBIS can work for a high
school?
CLOSING
Once again, thank you for participating in this interview. I appreciate your time, thoughtful
responses and your contributions to my study. Do I have your permission to stop this zoom
recording?

PBIS TEAM MEMBERS’ PERCEPTION OF TEACHERS’ ROLE IN TIER 2 PBIS
128

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this qualitative exploratory study, from the perspective of PBIS team members, is to understand why high schools implementing schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) have not achieved the same transformative climate improvements seen at the K-8 level. This research focuses on PBIS team members' efforts to support teachers in identifying students for Tier 2 behavior prevention and intervention. The aim is to dismantle aversive disciplinary policies through PBIS structures. The participants in this study are high school teachers who are current or former PBIS team members working in urban schools in Los Angeles County, with 2-8 years of experience in schools with a PBIS structure. The study explores two research questions: (1) What do PBIS team members perceive as the barriers preventing high school teachers from effectively identifying students for Tier 2 strategic supports within the PBIS framework? (2) What beliefs about school discipline and classroom management do PBIS team members perceive as influencing high school teachers' ability to identify students for Tier 2 interventions within the PBIS progressive discipline structure?
The theoretical frameworks that underpin this study are the Pupil Control Ideology (PCI) and Teacher Self-Efficacy (TSE). These frameworks are employed to analyze and interpret the responses to the barriers to and challenges of the high school teacher's role in identifying at-promise students for Tier 2 Positive Behavior Intervention and Support (PBIS) within the diverse context of urban high schools in Los Angeles County. PCI (Perceived Control of Instruction) relates to the teacher’s belief system about student discipline on a continuum from a custodial to a humanistic perspective. TSE relates to how such beliefs influence a teacher's approach to classroom behavior management. In particular, the custodial teacher views rules and regulations as a priority, while the humanistic teacher views the student as the priority. The perspectives of teachers from PCI (Perceived Control of Instruction) to TSE (Teacher Self-Efficacy) on student discipline and behavior can influence their willingness to adopt or support the progressive behavior structure of PBIS.
The key findings demonstrated the importance of building relational trust among administration and teachers to transform mindsets, foster cognition, and assess the social-contextual environment to produce an optimal understanding of the high school teachers’ role in SWPBIS. The study's participants offer insights for PBIS teams and school administration to consider to support teachers' knowledge of how Tier 2 PBIS interventions can progressively manage the behavior of at-promise students. Additionally, the school administration’s acknowledgment of previous ineffective discipline policies and procedures can further enhance teachers' perception of their role in identifying students for Tier 2 support. The study concludes with a discussion of educational implications and recommendations for future research.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation

PDF

The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

PDF

The interaction of teacher knowledge and motivation with organizational influences on the implementation of a hybrid reading intervention model taught in elementary grades

PDF

Teacher perceptions of evaluation policy in Hawaii

PDF

Reducing suspensions through implementation of schoolwide PBIS

PDF

The role of student study team members in the special education referral process for English Learners

PDF

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

PDF

Perceptions of inclusion: high school students diagnosed with learning disabilities and their level of self-efficacy

PDF

Administrators' role in supporting teachers through feedback

PDF

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

PDF

Enacting ideology: an examination of the connections between teacher ideology, classroom climate, and teacher interpretation of student behavior

PDF

Positive behavior intervention support plan: a gap analysis

PDF

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

PDF

Pre-service teacher educator perceptions on preparing novice teachers for high quality teaching of K–12 students

PDF

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

PDF

A teacher's use of data to support classroom instruction in an urban elementary school

Asset Metadata

Creator Thomas, Adrienne Marie (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2024-08

Publication Date 09/30/2024

Defense Date 08/28/2024

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

Tag high school Tier 2,OAI-PMH Harvest,other means of correction (OMC),PBIS in MTSS,PBIS team members' perceptions,school-wide PBIS,urban high schools PBIS interventions

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Polikoff, Morgan (committee chair), Jones, Brandi (committee member), Samkian, Artineh (committee member)

Creator Email adrienmt@usc.edu,amtcraft@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11399BCU7

Unique identifier UC11399BCU7

Identifier etd-ThomasAdri-13557.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-ThomasAdri-13557

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Thomas, Adrienne Marie

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20241001-usctheses-batch-1215 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu