University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Well-being of school communities

(USC Thesis Other)

Well-being of school communities

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 1

Well-Being of School Communities
by
Umair Vaid

Rossier School of Education

University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the
Requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

2

© Copyright by Umair Vaid 2023
All Rights Reserved

ii
3
Signature Page (Committee Page without signatures)

iii
4
Abstract
This study applied Structural Framework and Social Learning Theory, which is about solving a
problem, restructuring the system, and/or reimaging it and developing a new status quo with
which to practice. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact schoolwide positive
behavior intervention strategies and supports have had on the well-being of school communities
(students and their families), their teachers, and school leaders (principals). Also, this study
determined what is being done to examine how effective positive behavior intervention strategies
and supports have been thus far, what the challenges are, and what can be done better by
providing recommendations from a preventive angle. This was a qualitative study with five
frontline participants (teachers) who engaged in semi-structured interviews. Findings from this
study indicated that continual advocacy for the well-being of school communities with
embedding more positive behavior intervention strategies and supports across the board, helped
students and staff adjust to the new normal in this post-pandemic era, and helped create brave
spaces for students to have difficult conversations, especially students of color. Moreover, there
was a collective emphasis that the participants placed on involving student caregivers and
building community for the students to have a more cohesive, holistic, and well-balanced school-
home life and that it is vital toward achieving subjective success for students. This study began
to bridge a gap between two substantial aspects: lack of sense of belonging and community-
building with students of color and the school communities therein.

iv
5
Dedication
I dedicate this dissertation to my loving parents. I love you deeply with all my heart. A
heartfelt thank you for continuing to support, motivate, and encourage me with all your might
and unwavering championship toward my ambitious goals. I would also like to dedicate this
achievement to anyone who has doubted themselves and thought they could not accomplish a
monumental milestone within their lifetime. You can and will do this if it is something you want.

v
6
Acknowledgments
The completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without my dissertation
chair, Dr. Riggio, and my committee members, Dr. Kellar and Dr. Trahan. I want to express my
utmost and sincere gratitude as well as appreciation for the continued support all of you have
provided me throughout my doctoral journey. Dr. Riggio, without your invaluable direction,
motivation, and continued support, I could not have produced this final piece of work. I am
boundlessly thankful to you for being an advisor and a confidant. Drs. Kellar and Trahan, I am
very grateful to both of you for your contribution in providing valuable feedback and counsel
throughout my doctoral journey. I am also eternally grateful to the DSC, in particular, Dr. Ilda
Jimenez, for talking to me during moments when I doubted that I could not do this, especially
during the fantastic DSC retreat. You are a true inspiration and thank you for instilling wisdom,
motivating me, and giving me the courage to go on. Finally, I am thankful for wonderfully
supportive friends and extended family members who kept me grounded and motivated me
throughout my doctoral journey.

vi
7
Table of Contents
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………….iv
Dedication……………………………………………………………………………………..v
Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………………vi
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………..xiii
Chapter One: Introduction…………………………………………………………………...14
Background of the Problem……………………………………………………………….15
Students…………………………………………………………………………………15
Teachers…………………………………………………………………………………16
Schools………………………………………………………………………………….16
Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………….17
Students…………………………………………………………………………………17
Teachers…………………………………………………………………………………18
Schools………………………………………………………………………………….18
Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………………18
Research Questions………………………………………………………………………..19
Significance of the Study………………………………………………………………….19
Students…………………………………………………………………………………21
Teachers…………………………………………………………………………………22
Schools………………………………………………………………………………….22
Definitions of Terms………………………………………………………………………23
vii
8
Assumptions…………………………………………………………………………….25
Limitations……………………………………………………………………………...26
Delimitations……………………………………………………………………………28
Positionality…………………………………………………………………………….28
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………………28
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………29
Organization of the Dissertation…………………………………………………………...30
Chapter Two: Literature Review…………………………………………………………….32
Search Description…………………………………………………………………………32
Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………………33
Structural Framework…………………………………………………………………...33
Social Cognitive Theory………………………………...................................................36
Servant Leadership……………………………………………………………………...37
Mindfulness……………………………………………………………………………..37
Sense of Belonging……………......................................................................................38
Review of Research……………………………………………………………………….38
Students…………………………………………………………………………………39
Current Struggles: Lack of Sense of Belonging………………………………………...39
Demographics Impacts on the Students of Color……………………………………….40
Socioeconomic Status: Does it Play a Part?…………………………………………….41
Teachers/Educators……………………………………………………………………..44
viii
9
Role of Teachers: What Challenges Do They Face?....................................................44
Schools………………………………………………………………………………….45
Today’s Challenges…………………………………………………………………..45
K-12: Which Types of Schools are Adopting PBIS More?…………………………….47
Communities and Their Role (e.g., Parents, Organizations)……………………………49
What Schools are Doing to Maintain Well-being………………………………………49
Challenges in Optimal Well-being……………………………………………………..50
How to Improve Well-being……………………………………………………………52
Successfully Implemented Well-being Programs………………………………………54
Positive Behavior Intervention Strategies and Supports……………………………...54
Chapter Three: Methodology………………………………………………………………...60
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….60
Research Design…………………………………………………………………………..60
Research Questions……………………………………………………………………….61
Participants and Setting…………………………………………………………………..61
Setting…………………………………………………………………………………..61
Target and Accessible Population and Sample…………………………………………61
Sampling Method………………………………………………………………………62
Recruitment…………………………………………………………………………….63
Data Collection……………………………………………………………………………64
Demographic Survey……………………………………………………………………64
ix
10
Interview Protocol………………………………………………………………………65
Procedures………………………………………………………………………………67
Confidentiality Parameters……………………………………………………………...67
Data Management………………………………………………………………………68
Encryption………………………………………………………………………………68
Dissemination of Findings……………………………………………………………...68
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..68
Descriptive Analysis……………………………………………………………………69
Demographic Data……………………………………………………………………..69
Thematic Analysis…………………………………………………………………….70
Reliability……………………………………………………………………………...70
Dependability………………………………………………………………………….71
Confirmability………………………………………………………………………….71
Validity…………………………………………………………………………………72
Credibility and Transferability…………………………………………………………72
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………..74
Chapter Four: Findings……………………………………………………………………...75
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….75
Findings Organized By Research Question………….……………………………………81
Research Question One: What is the Well-Being of School Communities?.......................81
Students………….……………………………………………………………………...81
x
11
Teachers………….……………………………………………………………………..82
Schools………….………………………………………………………………………83
Communities….…………………………………………………………………………84
Research Question Two: What are the Challenges of Well-Being in School Communities?..86
Students….……………………………………………………………………………...86
Teachers….……………………………………………………………………………...87
Schools….………………………………………………………………………………88
Communities…………………………………………………………………………….89
Research Question Three: How Can the Well-Being of School Communities be Improved?..91
Students…………………………………………………………………………………91
Teachers…………………………………………………………………………………92
Schools………………………………………………………………………………….93
Communities……………………………………………………………………………94
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………...95
Chapter Five: Conclusions…………………………………………………………………..98
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….98
Summary of Findings…………………………………………………………………….98
Conclusions of Research Questions Organized by Research Question or Hypothesis….100
Research Question One: What is the Well-Being of School Communities?................100

xi

12
Research Question Two: What are the Challenges of Well-Being in School
Communities?.............................................................................................................101
Research Question Three: How Can the Well-Being of School Communities be
Improved?....................................................................................................................102
Discussion.......................................................................................................................104
Suggestions for Future Research.....................................................................................104
Recommendation One: Engaging in Affirmations......................................................105
Recommendation Two: Being a Change Agent and Being Situationally Aware……106
Recommendation Three: Adapting to Diversity, Valuing Diversity and Managing the
Dynamics of Differences Within the School..............................................................108
Recommendations……………………………………………………………………..110
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………..110
References………………………………………………………………………………..113
Appendices……………………………………………………………………………….123
Appendix A: IRB Approval……………………………………………………………124
Appendix B: Email/Letter to Principal………………………………………………...125
Appendix C: Recruitment Letter & Scheduling Interviews…………………………...126
Appendix D: Informed Consent……………………………………………………. ...127
Appendix E: Consent Form……………………………………………………………129
Appendix F: Demographic Survey…………………………………………………….130
Appendix G: Protocols…………………………………………………………………131
xii
13
List of Tables
Table 1a: Data Sources 66
Table 1b: Data Sources 76
Table 2: Participant Teaching Information 76
Table 3: List of Themes for each RQ and Quotes 77

xiii
14
Chapter One: Introduction
Well-being in school communities encourages resilience, focuses on health, and fosters
positive academic systems for all stakeholders (Centers for Disease Control, n.d.). Establishing
well-being involves parent awareness, teacher/school connectedness, student mental health, and
emotional stability of the community (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development, 2017). One way of establishing well-being is for schools to implement positive
behavioral intervention strategies and supports (PBIS, 2023). PBIS is a schoolwide systems
approach intended to establish positive student culture and individualized behavior supports
necessary to create a safe and effective learning environment for all students (Sugai & Horner,
2009). Furthermore, “PBIS is an evidence-based tiered framework for supporting students’
behavioral, academic, social, emotional, and mental health” (PBIS, 2023, p. 1). In addition,
“when implemented with fidelity, PBIS improves socioemotional competence, academic success,
and school climate. It also improves teacher health and well-being. It is a way to create positive,
predictable, equitable and safe learning environments where everyone thrives” (PBIS, 2023, p.
1). PBIS can serve as a restorative justice option to traditional school discipline methods, which
do not always have well-being at their center. This is especially the case with schools that
struggle with high-needs students, teacher self-efficacy, professional development funding, and
community engagement. Often, students in these schools are pushed through disciplinary
pipelines resulting in many negative life-altering paths for youths. For this study, well-being in
school communities was examined via the use/non-use of PBIS by teachers and schools. The
following provides the background of the problem of why non-PBIS approaches are damaging to
the well-being of teachers and schools. Next, the impact of these problems on teachers and
schools is reviewed. Then the purpose of this research is presented on how to understand the
15
lived experiences of teachers using PBIS. This allowed for the collection of important data so
that recommendations could be determined for school stakeholders.
Background of the Problem
Some background-related context to reflect on is as follows: Students are not learning,
they continue to have behavior challenges, and their families remain unsupported, thus leading to
a criminal pipeline for vulnerable students (Achilles et al., 2007). Furthermore, schools still
struggle with behavior issues, teachers are not consistently implementing behavior strategies,
principals do not budget for funds to train frontline educators/teachers appropriately, leading to
the students being pushed through to the school-to-prison pipeline, thereby leading to weak PBIS
implementation methods that are meant to be preventive measures in lieu of reactive/reactionary
behaviors. PBIS and well-being are closely interwoven because of the long-term emotional gains
students can benefit from should PBIS be implemented well, thus, contributing to the well-being
of the students (Clark, 2021). Behavioral challenges promote and fuel detrimental futures for
school-aged children in terms of long-term success.
Students
The background of the problem was examined via three systems: students, teachers, and
schools. For students, emphasizing the importance of physical activities to improve the mood
and produce more endorphins, thus improving the mood of students, as well as creating a culture
of collaboration should be at the forefront. Furthermore, a focus on diversity, equity, and
belonging, access to clean water, quality healthcare, elimination of food insecurities, reduction of
housing insecurities with the goal to eliminate said insecurities all-together in the future should
also be a focus. Noguera (2019) supported this and stated that children have different needs, and
16
one needs to place emphasis on equity and understand that is not the same as equality. Noguera
(2019) further stated that while school administrators may somewhat understand the concept of
equity, they sometimes fail to understand their hidden biases “and [their] behaviors may be
creating barriers to success for disadvantaged students” (p. 2).
Teachers
In a study conducted by Chitiyo and Wheeler (2008), teachers stated they needed more
assistance from support staff and administrators and that they would do the following in the
future, “(a) get more input from administration, (b) find a way to get more staff buy-in before
implementation, (c) make interventions more individualized, (d) implement more staff training,
and (e) use many behavioral management tools during the interventions” (p. 62). As such, the
teachers are faced with a gamut of challenges discussed earlier in this section. Gay (2016)
highlighted that “teacher fidelity” (p. 5), is vital in achieving positive outcomes for implementing
PBIS in the most effective way possible to promote the well-being of students and the school
communities. However, the aforementioned is not taking place.
Schools
To reflect on the background-related behavioral challenges, one must think about how
only 16,000 schools in the United States (U.S.) have implemented schoolwide PBIS (Bradshaw
et al., 2012). This constitutes just 8% of the total number of pre-K-12 schools in the country
(National Center for Education Statistics, n.d.). Molloy et al. (2013) discussed the need for more
research to “examine how implementation quality relates to program outcomes in the real world”
(p. 2). They discussed that “real-world” implementation is very different from how a school may
have designed an intervention “on paper” and how one needs to alter the status quo of a school’s
17
programmatic goals and unified objectives for the effectiveness to come to fruition by utilizing
PBIS to contribute to the student population’s holistic well-being.
Statement of the Problem
The problem statement was examined via three systems: students, teachers, and schools.
The impact of the challenges mentioned in the last section includes not enough diversity, equity,
inclusion and belonging initiatives, teacher fidelity and retention, and not enough schools
implementing PBIS. All of this contributes to the students’ lack of well-being because, again,
PBIS, which includes a large socioemotional component, promotes optimal well-being for the
student, which is where the correlation and relationship lie between well-being and PBIS.
Students may be meeting their academic needs, but they lack social, emotional, and behavioral
competency, they are continuing to have behavior challenges, their families remain unsupported,
and the students are being pushed into the criminal pipeline because educators are not developing
positive and safe environments that would promote robust interpersonal relationships for
students through teaching, modeling, and encouragement, all of which are important to ensure
the well-being of school communities.
Students
Studies conducted with students have supported the hypothesis that, to have higher
academic performance, successful learning and development, adaptive motivation and emotion,
as well as overall effectiveness of student success, it is important for students to feel a sense of
belonging, appreciation, and have a connection to their teachers and the campus climate (Lewis
et al., 2019; Lundberg, 2014; Shelton, 2019). Achilles et al. (2007) highlighted that students who
suffer from emotional/behavioral disorders paired with a diagnosis of attention-deficit
18
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have a higher likelihood of suspensions from school due to their
behavior being misdiagnosed because PBIS is not being practiced effectively or holistically. This
is the impact that the problem is having on the students.
Teachers
The impact on the teachers pertaining to the problem is that there is a very low retention
rate caused by burnout and overwhelmed teachers, and the drive and respect they may have once
had for the profession has been reduced by the stressors of the pandemic. A study conducted by
the National Education Institution stated “poor teacher retention has been shown to impact
students’ educational achievement negatively, according to the Learning Policy Institute”
(American University School of Education, 2022, p. 1). Furthermore, “a 2020 study published by
AERA Open found that high teacher turnover yielded notable drops in the academic performance
of middle school students, particularly in reading and math” (American University, 2022, p. 2).
Schools
Behavioral challenges promote and fuel detrimental futures for school-aged children
regarding long-term success. It is important to note that despite PBIS being put in place by many
schools, it is being implemented at a slow pace, thereby impacting the well-being of the school
communities, especially the students (Freeman et al., 2017). Hence, this creates a lack of sense of
belonging, negatively affects the students’ social skills, does not prevent violence from occurring
in schools, and contributes to the failures of anti-bullying programs and workshops set in place at
various schools.
Purpose of the Study
19
The purpose of my study was to investigate the impact PBIS has had on the well-being of
school communities, in particular, the students and their teachers, and to examine what was
being done to determine how effective PBIS has been thus far, what the challenges are, and what
can be done better by providing recommendations from a preventive perspective. Moreover, it
was to see what the well-being of school communities looks like, what challenges are posed in
examining the well-being of school communities, and how the well-being of school communities
could be improved. In terms of incorporating the relationship between well-being and PBIS, one
must examine how PBIS has an impactful socioemotional component that promotes optimal
well-being for the students, which is where the correlation and relationship lie between well-
being and PBIS.
Research Questions
The following were the research questions in this study:
RQ1: What is the well-being of school communities?
RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in school communities?
RQ3: How can the well-being of school communities be improved?
All interview questions were aligned with these research questions.
Significance of the Study
My study offers a framework of what is needed to improve the well-being of school
communities for students of color. The framework includes two areas around what can be
changed for teachers and for schools. First, the study is significant in identifying how teachers
can feel more supported from leadership and how teacher retention can be increased. Second,
how schools can be more inclusive of students and how they can recognize and navigate student
generational trauma. This is where the incorporated relationship between a student’s well-being
20
and PBIS are vital because otherwise, the main socioemotional component that is impactful for a
student is missing. It is also vital to decenter authority in the classroom by empowering students
to become aware of their own social and emotional well-being. This way, institutional racism is
not ignored, and an awareness of a social position is created (Kishimoto, 2018). Furthermore, the
significance of the study is critical because there is little evidence that anti-racist pedagogies and
PBIS are widely practiced in the U.S. educational system and that institutional racism is
addressed holistically. To support this, Kishimoto (2018) stated, “When racism is understood
only as individual prejudice, racism embedded in institutions is ignored” (p. 4).
Students may be meeting their academic needs, but they are lacking social, emotional,
and behavioral competency, they are continuing to have behavior challenges, their families
remain unsupported, and the students are being pushed into the criminal pipeline because
educators are not developing positive and safe environments that would promote robust
interpersonal relationships for students through teaching, modeling, and encouragement, all of
which is important to ensure the well-being of school communities. Therefore, it is important to
offer better strategies to implement and practice PBIS such as specifically individualized one-on-
one interventions (problem-solving therapy) as well as group ones (cognitive behavioral
therapy), and there is a call for further research regarding the well-being of school communities.
As such, effective intervention strategies are needed to address the aforementioned and reduce
risky behavior to secure a brighter future for the well-being of school communities. Bradshaw et
al. (2012) supported this phenomenon and suggested “The PBIS framework appears to be a
promising approach for reducing problems and promoting adjustment among school children” (p.
1).
One of the main struggles in implementing PBIS effectively and achieving better well-
being for school communities is the lack of inclusion of student voice. Flannery et al. (2018)
21
discussed this stance and stated that the goal is to gain student voice “with the development and
implements of a PBIS process” (p. 70). Flannery et al. (2018) further stated that, at present,
student voices are being included via surveys and focus groups. However, these methods are
proven ineffective, and one of the main reasons behind this is the “adult interpretation of the
children’s voice” (p. 71). One can infer and deduce that a call for children (students) to have a
seat at the table is fundamental. In other words, students need to be vital stakeholders in
implementing contextually appropriate interventions like PBIS to promote well-being within
school communities.
Several studies have been conducted in the K-12 setting to assess, evaluate, and address
behavioral needs of school children in elementary schools and young adults in high schools to
achieve better well-being for school communities. Pas et al. (2015) conducted a study of 58 high
schools; they examined 31 of them and concluded that schools were more likely to adopt, adapt,
and utilize PBIS only if the bullying rates of these schools were an indicator of addressing
behavioral challenges for students. Their study was conducted over the course of two years. Gay
(2016) highlighted that teacher fidelity is vital in achieving positive outcomes for implementing
PBIS in the most effective way possible to promote the well-being of students and the school
communities. However, the aforementioned is not taking place. This is also due to the lack of
leadership accountability in several schools.
Students
In discussing specific rates of the number of high schools implementing PBIS, Freeman
et al. (2017) stated that the rate at which PBIS are being implemented has risen from 2595 in
2013 to 3138 in 2016. Thirteen percent of all PBIS schools (K-12) are high schools. High
schools represent approximately 34% of all U.S. schools. Seven percent of all high schools in the
22
U.S. (US) are implementing PBIS. In total, 35 states across the U.S. are implementing PBIS.
This is significant to note because not enough states are implementing PBIS, which is important
toward contributing to a higher level of student engagement and holistic achievement and leads
to students being active and meaningful participants when it comes to their focus during
instructional time.
Teachers
Teachers feel unsupported. This is mainly due to the lack of leadership accountability in
many schools. A study conducted by Gay (2016) concluded that effective implementation of
PBIS rested on three vital conceptual implements: teacher resistance toward change in practicing
PBIS, the lack of administration leadership factors that were involved in leading change
processes pertaining to PBIS, and the scarcity of effective professional development for teachers
to support the well-being of their students and the school communities (p. 22). Furthermore, this
was significant to the study because without support from administrators and teacher buy-in to
appropriately implement PBIS, the optimal well-being of the students cannot be fully achieved.
Schools
At present, PBIS support practices are addressing “school environments by establishing
clear school rules through improved systems (e.g., rewards, discipline) and procedures (e.g.,
continual use of data for decision-making) that promote positive change in staff and student
behaviors” (Molloy et al., 2013, p. 3). As such, effective intervention strategies are needed to
address the aforementioned and reduce risky behavior to secure a brighter future for the well-
being of school communities.
23
Schoolwide PBIS hold a promising future, especially for students referred to the school
principal’s office to serve discipline, students who are perhaps diagnosed with ADHD or
attention-deficit disorder (ADD) because of having trouble concentrating due to multifaceted
factors in their lives, students who display aggressive or disruptive behaviors as deemed by their
teachers, as well as students who do not possess a component of emotional intelligence called
self-regulation or mood regulation since those students are unable to regulate their emotions and
behaviors, also known as prosocial behavior.
In terms of what schools are doing to contribute toward better well-being for parents,
caregivers, and students’ families in general, there is a gamut of resources involving program
initiatives that fall under the parent, family, and community engagement model, with supports
such as Investing with Families Initiative, support around children and families experiencing
homelessness, support systems to prevent and respond to intimate partner violence (domestic
violence), addressing child abuse to prevent it, asset building strategies for families, food
security and stability, access to care for mental health as well as physical health well-being, and
others (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2021).
Definitions of Terms
Community: According to Stanford Social Innovation Review (2023), “Community is
both a feeling and a set of relationships among people. People form and maintain communities to
meet common needs” (p. 1).
Positive behavior intervention strategy and supports (PBIS) framework: As stated earlier,
behavioral challenges contribute to the detriment of students and the overall lack of well-being
for the school communities. Therefore, “The PBIS framework is a promising
approach/intervention for reducing behavioral problems and promoting adjustment among school
24
children” (Bradshaw et al., 2012, p. 1). Furthermore, PBIS practices address “school
environments by establishing clear school rules through improved systems like rewards,
discipline and procedures, such as continual use of data for decision-making that promotes
positive change in staff and student behaviors” (Molloy et al., 2013, p. 3). Finally, PBIS is also a
holistic approach that employs a systems approach by having a “school-wide prevention strategy
that establishes a positive school climate and the behavioral supports needed to reduce behavior
problems and enhance academic performance” (Molloy et al., 2013, p. 3).
School: According to Cambridge (2023), “An institution for educating children; a place where
children go to school” (p. 2).
School communities: Individuals who are:
invested in the welfare and vitality of the whole child and where the integrated focus of
said individuals is on aspects such as a strong and proven curriculum, high-quality
teaching, inclusive leadership, positive behavior practices [i.e., PBIS], family and
community partnerships, and community support services. (National Education
Association, n.d., p. 1)
Social cognitive theory: School leaders and teachers alike should support each other in
ensuring that the socioemotional and academic well-being of the students and their communities
that are a part of their system can be served by adapting to and adopting PBIS; the social
cognitive theory supports this. According to Schunk (2020), “Social cognitive theory contends
that people learn from their social environments. In Bandura’s theory, human functioning is
viewed as a series of reciprocal interactions among personal factors, behaviors, and
environmental events” (p. 118).
Student: According to Cambridge (2023) “A person who is studying at a school, college
or university” (p. 1).
25
Teacher: According to Cambridge (2023), “A person who instructs or trains others,
especially in a school; a confidant; a mentor; a coach” (p. 1).
Well-being: A student’s well-being includes:
psychological, cognitive, social and physical functioning and. capabilities that students
need to live a happy and fulfilling life. Proximal sources toward optimal well-being
include family, household resources, peers, teachers, and school environment. Contextual
sources include inequality, global issues, educational policies, economic and social
policies, innovation and technology, macroeconomic conditions: income and
development as well as cultural determinants: diversity, values, norms. (Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development, 2017, p. 1)
Assumptions
An assumption of the study would be that the students are not well supported, the
teachers may not be forthcoming at times with their answers due to fear of being judged or
seemingly incompetent through no fault of their own, and the schools are not implementing PBIS
fast enough.
My role and relationships with potential participants may have coerced individuals into
participating because they might have felt compelled to participate given our rapport that has
been founded on mutual professional understanding and respect for one another. Having said
that, I tried my hardest not to take advantage of our existing professional rapport and
relationship, so the participants did not feel obligated to participate in the study, therefore having
full autonomy. I also stated to them, “Your participation in this survey is voluntary.”
The participants might have been harmed and experienced covert intimidation from their
leadership personnel if said personnel believed the teachers (participants) had reported negative
26
traits about the leadership personnel, thus “leaking insider information” and being a confidential-
informant, per se, or being a “whistleblower” when answering questions about leadership style
and lack of support, if any, from the leadership at their respective organization/school-
site/agency. A final assumption I had was that some participants might be resistant to change
depending on how long they have been in the profession. My ideology behind this was to gauge
to see which age group of teachers were more forthcoming and open to practicing PBIS versus
which group was resistant and guarded toward implementing culturally relevant pedagogies as I
anticipated that teachers who were a little more open-minded would be open to change such as,
implementing PBIS appropriately.
One strategy that I can do to minimize hardships experienced by the participants would
be to offer to connect them to additional support for their personal and professional well-being
and to ensure that this process was more of a learning experience versus a daunting afternoon
they engaged in. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed this and stated that one could “make
referrals to resources for assistance in dealing with problems that may surface during an
interview” (p. 262), and this was done after each interview for this study.
Limitations
Some of the limitations were the truthfulness of the respondents in terms of them feeling
embarrassed if they did not feel like they had mastery in PBIS or something else pedagogy
related that I was asking in the interview. Furthermore, my positionality and power dynamics
might also have been a limitation. In identifying my positionality in relation to the problem of
practice as a current mental health practitioner and previously having worked in a school setting
with students labeled “at-risk” by teachers and principals alike, it is important to initially discuss
that it is vital to be a systems thinker even at a mezzo level of practice. This means having an all-
27
encompassing approach within a given organization. To support this, Terrell et al. (2018) stated,
“proficient leaders focus on equitable access and outcomes as they build a systemic culture that
takes into account all aspects of the educational process” (p. 137).
The power dynamics of the setting I studied have to do with my educational and
professional background in mental health (social work) and the way educators shape their
teaching pedagogies, which shaped my interest and agenda related to the problem of
practice/research question. This is because I worked with a gamut of patients whose lack of self-
esteem could be traced back to their lack of sense of belonging on education institutional
campuses due to limited support in terms of inadequate to no culturally relevant teaching
pedagogies being practiced, as well as the lack of or limited identity-based student organizations
available to them on a given campus. This is one of the gamut of reasons in addition to familial
structures and lack of social support at home while growing up in their respective homes or being
born to transient caregivers who were unable to provide basic needs such as proper food and
clothing to them. In terms of who I was in relation to the participants and the gatekeepers, I was
their colleague, and since I was the one conducting the interview, I was technically in a position
of power as I would be sharing an amalgamation of the results with the school administrator all
while honoring discretion and confidentiality to the interviewees.
I addressed these issues of power and positionality in the following way: to be conscious
about my predispositions along with the interviewees’ inclinations toward how I may perceive
them. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed this and stated, “both parties bring biases, attitudes,
and physical characteristics that affect the interaction and the data; a skilled interviewer accounts
for these factors to evaluate the obtained information” (p. 130). Furthermore, I tried to be
conscious of my bias because, as Milner (2007) stated, “How education research is conducted
may be just as important as what is actually discovered in a study” (p. 397).
28
Delimitations
A delimitation of my study was that I was curious about the topic, and I wanted to
improve the standards and frequency of how well and often PBIS is implemented by revealing
certain findings that support the fact that PBIS contributes toward the optimal well-being of a
student and supports their holistic state, thus, setting up the student successfully for their future
endeavors.
Positionality
I am a cis gender male of Asian American and Middle Eastern heritage living in the U.S.
I hold a Bachelor’s degree in Applied Behavioral Science and a Master’s degree in the field of
Social Work. As a mental health professional, an administrator in field of education and a
researcher, I bring the experience of both my nuanced cultural heritage and my professional
development to my work. I acknowledge the privilege I have in being able to access certain
resources, and I try to be mindful and strive to be aware of my own biases and recognize how
these may shape my research. Furthermore, I acknowledge that my position as a privileged,
educated administrator working in the field of education, along with a background in
socioemotional learning work as a social worker in the past, influenced this study to some extent.
Theoretical Framework
First, the incorporated relationship between well-being and PBIS as it relates to the
theoretical framework is that it could be utilized to “operationalize school culture” (ASCN, n.d.).
Second, expanding a framework could be a guiding principle with which teachers and schools
could hold themselves accountable for implementing PBIS appropriately and contributing to the
students’ well-being. The theoretical framework used was Bolman and Deal’s structural
29
framework, which is about solving a problem, restructuring the system, and/or reimagining it and
developing a new status quo with which to practice (Bolman & Deal, 2017). This helped answer
the research questions about the well-being of school communities, the challenges toward
achieving it, and how the well-being could be improved. For example, if the students cannot read
in third grade, restructuring the curriculum would be one initial solution a leader might adopt to
support the well-being of the students and the school communities. Alternatively, if the students
continue to experience suspensions and/or expulsions, a leader could then reevaluate their status
quo of how PBIS are being implemented at one’s school or district to effectively support the
well-being of the school communities therein.
This study was an exploratory qualitative research design with semi-structured interviews
which included 12 questions that helped answer the broader research questions. Furthermore, this
was an exploratory study because it laid the groundwork for future work and identified key
aspects to study in the future. This aligned with the theoretical framework because the Bolman
and Deal framework is about developing a new status quo with which to practice (Bolman &
Deal, 2017).
Conclusion
This chapter discussed what PBIS is, why it is vital in contributing toward the well-being
of a student’s holistic development, why teacher buy-in is important along with teacher fidelity
and retention and how it strengthens the development of students when teachers are not
experiencing burnout, the importance of understanding equity and the intentionality that should
go behind equitable practices, and how several studies conducted support all of the
aforementioned.
30
In summation, educators must engage in restorative practices versus practicing punitive
measures, which marginalize students, in particular students of color. Furthermore, teachers must
de-center the authority in the classroom, include students in decision-making processes,
collaborate with counselors to implement anger management focus groups, place appropriate
mental health counseling referrals, and implement more “social-emotional cognitive skill
building in their curriculum, have conferences with students’ caregivers, and other behavioral
supports such as student-peer mediators, as well as make referrals to a psychologist as
appropriate” (Taylor, 2020, p. 1).
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter One contains the contextual background of the problem of practice, the purpose
of the study/research questions, discusses why the study is important, provides an overview of
the theoretical framework that was utilized in the study, discusses a few definitions of terms used
in the dissertation, and provides an overview of the study itself, which is now being done in this
section.
Chapter Two reviews today’s challenges pertaining to schools where the following were
explored: behavior and whether it is most effective with early-onset behaviors or otherwise, K-12
settings in terms of which schools are adopting PBIS or other similar programs, the role of
teachers and what challenges they are faced with, the students and their current struggles with
lack of sense of belonging, specific demographics and the impacts on the students of color, and
the socioeconomic status to determine if it plays a part. I also examined what the schools were
doing to maintain well-being, challenges in “optimal” well-being, and how to improve well-
being. Finally, in Chapter Two, I examine examples of schools that have successfully
31
implemented well-being programs for schools, teachers, students, parents, organizations, and
others.
Chapter Three focuses on the study’s design, a qualitative methodology with semi-
structured interviews, which included twelve questions surrounding the following: What is the
well-being of school communities? (three questions), What are the challenges of well-being in
school communities? (three questions), and How can the well-being of school communities be
improved? (three questions). Chapter Three discusses validity, reliability, ethics, and limitations.
Chapter Four includes the findings from the methodology and the data analysis. Chapter Five
discusses the recommendations and a call to action for future research.

32
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter discusses the search description used in this study where challenges toward
well-being of school communities are discussed. It also presents the theoretical framework and
talks about the structures withing the framework. Moreover, this chapter also reviews the
literature, and explores four systems and examples of effective systems.
Search Description
The systems are: (a) students: current struggles (lack of sense of belonging),
demographics (impacts on the students of color), socioeconomic status (does it play a part?); (b)
teachers/educators (term used interchangeably): role of teachers (what challenges they are faced
with); (c) schools: today’s challenges-behavior (is PBIS most effective with early-onset
behaviors or otherwise?), K-12 (which types of schools are adopting PBIS more?); (d)
communities and their role (e.g., parents, organizations): what schools are doing to maintain the
well-being of students and the communities served, what challenges present themselves and act
as barriers toward “optimal” well-being for students, and how to improve well-being for the
student and the communities served; (e) examples of schools that have successfully implemented
well-being programs for schools, teachers, students, parents, organizations, and others: PBIS and
any other program.
A variety of databases were used in developing and researching my dissertation. The
Boolean search method, JSTOR, Google Scholar, and EBSCO were utilized. In addition, terms
such as “and,” “or,” and “not” were used to research articles that were helpful for my
dissertation. Furthermore, the keywords searched included PBIS, positive behavior interventions
supports positive behavior interventions strategies, K-12 schools and PBIS, teacher and PBIS,
students and PBIS in K-12 schools, principals and PBIS in K-12 schools, Bolman and Deal
33
structural framework, and others. I identified five themes in conducting these searches and
perusing through the literature where I found: (a) students and their current struggles, along with
their demographics and socioeconomic statuses (b) the role of the teachers/educators and what
struggles they face in implementing PBIS, school and the challenges they face, school
communities and their role, and examples of schools that have successfully implemented PBIS.
A total of over 60 references were utilized and referred to in writing the dissertation.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework used in this study was Structural Framework (Bolman & Deal,
2017) which focuses on the “rational aspects of a problem that are based on rules, roles, goals,
and policies. It is aimed at solving a problem, restructuring the system, or developing a new
one” (Marzano et al., 2005). This study also used Social Cognitive Theory which predicts that
individuals who believe that they are largely responsible for their positive outcomes may
experience high self-efficacy and are likely to continue their endeavors (Schunk, 2020).
Structural Framework
The incorporated relationship between well-being and PBIS as it relates to the theoretical
framework is that it can be utilized to “operationalize school culture” (ASCN, n.d.). In addition,
expanding a framework can be used as a guiding principle with which teachers and schools can
hold themselves accountable toward implementing PBIS appropriately and contributing to the
students’ well-being. The world of a leader can be chaotic, ambiguous, and filled with dilemmas
on any given day. Bolman and Deal (2017) discussed this and stated that the core goal of a leader
who possesses “intuitive capacity should be able to move the organization to a world of
excitement and promising possibilities” (p. 40). It can be inferred here that they are also referring
34
to a leader possessing emotional intelligence to where the leader can strategize by gaining
perspective and use their positionality to bring a ploy to fruition to effectively thrive and support
the organization as well as the people who are helping said leader take the organizational status
quo and structure to a promising level.
Essentially, it boils down to the structural frame, which is, solving a problem,
restructuring the system, and/or reimagining it and developing a new status quo with which to
practice (Bolman & Deal, 2017). For example, if students cannot read in third grade,
restructuring the curriculum would be one initial solution a leader might adopt to support the
well-being of the students and the school communities. Alternatively, if the students continue to
experience suspensions and/or expulsions, a leader could then reevaluate their status quo of how
PBIS are being implemented at one’s school or district) to effectively support the well-being of
the school communities therein.
When it comes to restructuring and/or reimagining the way frontline practitioners
contribute to a common goal, in this case, PBIS, it is vital to discuss autonomy versus
independence. This is because teachers must be given an acceptable amount of autonomy and
independence to utilize the PBIS. However, if either of the two is excessively allowed, the
“teachers might feel isolated and unsupported or might have difficulty working with other
teachers because they have been in self-containment for too long due to being excessively
autonomous” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 74).
It is important to make intentional and conscious change, systematically consider better
ways of conducting pedagogical methods, and remain consistent toward being an agent of
change to support the well-being of the students and school communities being served. Marzano
et al. (2005) supported this and discussed several ways that a school leader can depict
responsible leadership; they are:
35
affirmations (recognizing and celebrating successes), change agent (willing to be an
active participant in challenging status quos), being situationally aware (using
undercurrents to handle potential and current problems) and putting culture at the
forefront (fostering shared beliefs with a sense of community and cooperation)” (p. 42)
The latter encompasses the three preceding strategies because culture in academic
institutions is a vital factor in how successful equity-minded PBIS are embedded in a teacher’s
pedagogies to support the well-being of a school community. Terrell et al. (2018) discussed
culturally proficient leadership and talked about the five essential elements of culturally
proficient leadership, two of which are “assessing cultural knowledge (leading the school and its
departments as cultural entities), and valuing diversity (giving voice to those whose opinion
differs from yours and other dominant groups in schools in the form of decision-making groups)”
(p. 113). Furthermore, Terrell et al. (2018) highlighted three more ways:
managing the dynamics of differences (modeling and normalizing problem-solving
strategies), adapting to diversity (acknowledging other cultural experiences and
backgrounds and being the lead learner with it), and institutionalizing cultural knowledge
(making learning about cultural groups and their trauma an integral part of staff
development). (p. 113)
Fullan (2007) supported the aforementioned in terms of leading in a culture of change
and talked about the four components of leadership and culture:
moral purpose (leading with the intention of making positive differences), understanding
change (understanding the essentiality of change), building relationships (successful
change is possible when relationships improve), and creating and sharing knowledge
(continually increasing and generating knowledge both inside and outside the
organization). (p. 4)
36
Ultimately, structural efforts take savvy and strong leadership skills that “rarely start
from scratch. Leaders must search for options among an array of possibilities drawn from
accumulated wisdom and experience” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 75). Additionally, it is
important to highlight what a conceptual framework is. Maxwell (2013) discussed what a
conceptual framework is, and it can be summarized as a tentative theory (lens) of how the
phenomenon of interest works and the way the world works in relation to a research question.
Furthermore, it combines the literature, empirical and theoretical, personal experience, and other
experiments (Slayton, 2022). Moreover, the conceptual framework can either be a narrative or
visual in the form of a conceptual map or a mixture of both, which provides insight into the “key
factors, concepts, or variables and the presumed relationships among them” (Miles & Huberman,
as cited in Maxwell, 2013, p. 39).
Social Cognitive Theory
Social Cognitive Theory as described by Schunk (2020), predicts that individuals who
believe that they are largely responsible for their positive outcomes may experience high self-
efficacy and are likely to continue their endeavors. In particular there is Social-Emotional
Learning. School leaders and teachers alike should support each other in ensuring that the social-
emotional and academic well-being of the students and their communities that are a part of their
system can be served by adapting to and adopting PBIS. The social cognitive theory supports
this, and Schunk (2020) discussed the theory and stated, “social cognitive theory contends that
people learn from their social environments. In Bandura’s Social Cognitive theory, as discussed
in Schunk (2020), human functioning is viewed as a series of reciprocal interactions among
personal factors, behaviors, and environmental events.
37
Servant Leadership
An aspect of Social Learning Cognitive Theory is, Servant leadership, which is defined
as “leaders who can be attentive to the concerns of their followers (teachers), can empathize with
them, and nurture them. Servant leaders put followers first, empower them, and help them
develop their full personal and professional capacities and are ethical” (Northouse, 2019). The
principals who serve as servant leaders possess the following to help their teachers adopt and
adapt to culturally relevant, anti-racist pedagogies that also support the phenomenon of PBIS: (a)
ensure that the needs of the students’ highest priorities are being served, (b) they demonstrate
strong moral and ethical behaviors to support the teachers in holding themselves accountable to
implement culturally relevant, anti-racist PBIS-related pedagogical methods, and (c) the
leadership personnel (principals) foster follower (teacher) development over anything else so that
the student’s emotional and social well-being is being satisfied within the school communities.
With the aforementioned, it is also important for a leader to be supportive and make sure
the structural procedures in place are working well and do not present themselves as hindrances
to even the most qualified of teachers. Lee and Northouse (2019) discussed this and stated:
poor structure is likely a culprit if the same undesirable results repeat themselves year
after year. The good and bad news about any organizational structure is that it keeps
producing what it was designed to produce, even if that is not what anyone wants. (p. 51)
Mindfulness
Another aspect of Social Learning Cognitive Theory is, Mindfulness. This is being
present in the moment, without judgment to yourself, others, or the situation therein. Goleman
(2011) explored this phenomenon and talked about being aware, more importantly, being self-
aware of our positionality and epistemology, and how self-reflection and communication are
38
vital to fulfilling both aspects optimally. He then further discussed and stated that when we
communicate from the inside out, we are talking directly to the part of the brain (limbic brain)
that controls behavior, and we allow people to rationalize it with the tangible things we say and
do. This is where gut decisions/decision-making come from. Having described this, it is
significant to state that both teachers and leaders who demonstrate such skills mentioned above
with finesse would be able to implement culturally relevant, anti-racist PBIS pedagogies that
include PBIS effectively because they would be practicing mindfulness to its fullest potential,
thereby benefiting the students who they are there to serve.
Sense of Belonging
When discussing the Social Learning Cognitive Theory, it is also vital to discuss the
importance of creating a sense of belonging and a better learning atmosphere for students to
serve the well-being of school communities has been identified as an underrated concept by
many educators. Studies conducted with students have supported the theory that to have fruitful
learning and development, address maladaptive behaviors, and support the overall effectiveness
of student success, it is crucial for students to be in an environment that fosters healthy emotional
well-being to support their social development, interpersonal relationships, and overall mental
health (Amanvermez et al., 2020; APA, 2015; Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016). Therefore, the
leaders (principals) must support the teachers’ efforts to implement culturally relevant, anti-racist
pedagogical methods that support the idea of PBIS to serve the students well.
Review of Research
This section will review existing research on the themes that are discussed throughout
this dissertation. The themes that will be discussed are, students and their current struggles
39
with experiencing a lack of sense-of-belonging, the impacts on the students of color, and
studies discussing whether if socioeconomic status plays a part toward contributing to well-
being. The review of the research will also discuss the role of teachers and the challenges
they face and which schools are adopting PBIS more. Finally, it will discuss the school
communities, the challenges they face, and how to improve well-being for school
communities.
Students
Current Struggles: Lack of Sense of Belonging
One of the main struggles in implementing PBIS effectively and achieving better well-
being for school communities is the lack of inclusion of student voice. Flannery et al. (2018)
discussed this stance, and they stated that the goal is to gain student voice “with the development
and implements of a PBIS process” (p. 70). Flannery et al. (2018) further stated that, at present,
student voices are being included via surveys and focus groups. However, these methods have
proven ineffective, and one of the main reasons behind this is the “adult interpretation of the
children’s voice” (p. 71). One can infer and deduce that a call for children (students) to have a
seat at the table, per se, is fundamental. In other words, students need to be vital stakeholders in
implementing contextually appropriate interventions like PBIS to promote well-being within
school communities.
Studies conducted with students have supported the hypothesis that, to have higher
academic performance, successful learning and development, adaptive motivation and emotion,
as well as the overall effectiveness of student success, it is important for students to feel a sense
of belonging, appreciation, and have a connection to their teachers and the campus climate
(Lewis et al., 2019; Lundberg, 2014; Shelton, 2019). Moreover, this also helps promote healthier
40
emotional well-being to support students’ social development, interpersonal relationships, and
overall mental health (Amanvermez et al., 2020; APA, 2015; Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016).
Students who experience stress due to academia, economic pressures, outside societal
performance pressures, or home-life familial stressors are likely to function better overall should
they engage in medium or long-term stress management programs that administer interventions
that encompass cognitive behavioral therapy and teach them coping skills and via PBIS, which
have the potential to decrease stress and prevent mental health challenges within the field of
education. This phenomenon and assumption are further supported by the taxonomy of
achievement emotions, which stated that emotional stressors such as high levels of anxiety
activate negative emotions and reduce interest as well as intrinsic motivation when it comes to
completing academic tasks (Amanvermez et al., 2020; Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016; Schunk,
2020).
Furthermore, students of color who experience marginalization create a social support
system among themselves in the form of identity-based student organizations to address the
discriminatory experiences; said experiences fuel a lack of sense of belonging for vulnerable
students, do not foster positive relationships between teachers and students, and do not promote
the significance of social-emotional learning (APA, 2015; Lewis et al., 2019; Lundberg, 2014;
Shelton, 2019).
Demographics Impacts on the Students of Color
A study conducted by Freeman et al. (2017) suggested that elementary schools are more
likely to adopt PBIS to support the well-being of school communities compared to high schools.
In discussing the demographics, Freeman et al. (2017) highlighted, “55.4% of students are white,
19% are Black, 16.8% are Hispanic, 2.7% are Asian/Pacific Islander, 2.9% are American Indian,
41
and 2.8% are multi-racial” (p. 5). In summarizing the national data, Freeman et al. (2017)
reported that half of the population is White, “while 15.6% are black, 24.9% are Hispanic, 5.2%
are Asian/Pacific Islander, 1.0% are American Indian, 3.0% are multi-racial” (p. 5). Furthermore,
in contrast to a study by Frank et al. (2009), which is discussed in the next subsection of this
section, Freeman et al. (2017) suggested that almost an equal percentage of students who
received PBIS received free or reduced-price lunches.
Given the statistics above, it is also important to note the following notion discussed by
Freeman et al. (2017), which indicates that despite PBIS being in place by many schools, it is
being implemented at a slow pace, thereby impacting the well-being of the school communities,
especially the students. Thus, this creates a lack of sense of belonging and negatively affects the
students’ social skills, does not prevent violence from occurring in schools, and contributes to the
failures of anti-bullying programs and workshops set in place at various schools.
In discussing specific rates of the number of high schools implementing PBIS, Freeman et al.
(2017) stated that the rate at which PBIS are being implemented has risen from:
2595 in 2013 to 3138 in 2016. 13% of all PBIS schools (K-12) are high schools. High
schools represent approximately 34% of all U.S. schools. 7% of all high schools in the
U.S. are implementing PBIS; in summation, 35 states across the U.S. are implementing
positive behavioral interventions strategies. (pp. 3-9)
Socioeconomic Status: Does it Play a Part?
Multiple studies have highlighted the correlation or lack thereof in relation to lower or
higher socioeconomic status being linked to well-being in school communities when it comes to
the implementation of PBIS. Frank et al. (2009) examined this element and concluded:
42
there was very little difference between very high (less than 10% of students who
received a free/reduced-priced lunch) and very low (more than 75% of students who
received a free/reduced-priced lunch) SES schools with regards to implementation status
at the end of one year of PBIS. (p. 4)
Frank et al. (2009) also stated, “in fact, approximately 59% of very high SES and 61% of
very low SES schools attained 80% success rate within one year of implementing PBIS” (p. 4).
There may have been possible selection bias in this study because this sample was self-selected
by the school in terms of reporting the data. To discuss the interrelatedness and connectivity
between socioeconomic status and the implementation of PBIS, it helps to uncover factors such
as whether socioeconomic status within a school is associated with the implementation of PBIS,
as well as whether a school’s racial diversity is related to the outcomes of said implementation
pertaining to positive behavioral interventions strategies. Frank et al. (2009) discussed these
phenomena concerning 890 schools in almost 300 districts across 20 states. Of the 890 schools,
600 were of elementary level, with 205 being dubbed as middle schools and 73 of them being of
high-school-level education academic institutions. Furthermore, “33%, which is 296 schools,
were located in urban locales, whereas 28%, which is 250, were located in suburban areas, and
39%, which is 344, were situated in rural areas” (Frank et al., 2009, p. 2). In discussing the
amount of enrollment in the aforementioned schools, Frank et al. (2009) stated, “the average
enrollment in the elementary schools was 450 students, and on the other hand, middle school
enrollment was higher with about 650 students, with high school enrollment being the highest of
the three, at over a 1,000 students” (p. 2).
The preliminary results from this study indicated that over half of the schools (61%) had
about an 80% success rate within the first year of the implementation of PBIS. In comparison,
other schools were able to achieve satisfactory criteria for PBIS after one year of implementation
43
(Frank et al., 2009). In answering the question of whether the socioeconomic status of the student
population played a role in the successful implementation of PBIS or lack thereof, there was no
significant association with SES for attainment within one year of the succession for PBIS being
implemented. This was measured by the amount of free and reduced-fee lunches students
received. Finally, in answering the question of whether student racial diversity played a part in
achieving successful outcomes for PBIS, there were some conflicting data discussed by Frank et
al. (2009), which indicated:
racial minority played a significant role for attainment of PBIS within one year, however,
the relation between student racial diversity and probability of attaining 80% status was
not linear, and schools with higher levels of student racial diversity did not differ
substantially from their low diversity counterparts. (p. 4)
To deduce this further, I looked at the illustrations present in the study and concluded that
schools with an average amount of diversity of minority enrollments between 25-50% had the
highest percentage of schools attaining 80% status within 1 year (70%). However, in
comparison, 57% of lower diversity schools and 59% of higher diversity schools attained about
80% status within 1 year (Frank et al., 2009).
In concluding the theme of students pertaining to their lack of sense of belonging, the
impact on the students of color, and whether socioeconomic status plays a part in the succession
of PBIS, one can argue that while some studies show there is no correlation between a school’s
zip code and the student body population, it is evident that students of color are impacted greatly
when equity and social justice are not at the forefront for decision-makers, as students are not
included in the voice of said decision-making. As such, it is vital that students and their voices
are included.
44
Teachers/Educators
Role of Teachers: What Challenges Do They Face?
Gay (2016) highlighted teacher fidelity is vital in achieving positive outcomes for
implementing PBIS in the most effective way possible to promote the well-being of students and
the school communities. However, the aforementioned is not taking place. This is also due to the
lack of leadership accountability in several schools. In summation, Gay (2016) concluded that
effective implementation of PBIS rested on three vital conceptual implements: teacher resistance
toward change in practicing PBIS, the lack of administration leadership factors involved in
leading change processes pertaining to PBIS, and the scarcity of effective professional
development for teachers to support the well-being of their students and the school communities
(p. 22).
Chitiyo and Wheeler (2008) conducted a study on today’s challenges to implementing
PBIS where they “examined difficulties that schoolteachers face in the implementation of PBIS
in their classrooms and schools” (p. 58). This study examined PBIS from a systems perspective
in that these authors believed that external conditions and circumstances faced by the students
impacted the well-being of the school communities. Therefore, they conducted a quantitative
study where they designed a Likert-type scale survey instrument to answer the following
research questions, “(a) What problems do teachers face in implementing PBIS in their school
systems? and (b) How difficult do teachers find these problems to be?” (Chitiyo & Wheeler,
2008, p. 59). The methodology utilized in this study was conducted with 21 teachers where 19 of
them taught classrooms deemed regular education, and 2 of the teachers taught special education
curriculum classrooms. Their years of experience varied from 3 to 33, and their education level
was a mix of master’s, bachelor’s, as well as some who held certifications through federally-
45
funded PBIS workshops and did not hold a formal college degree. The authors also stated that 8
of the 21 teachers did not disclose their educational background (Chitiyo & Wheeler, 2008).
The demographics of students in the school district included predominantly Caucasian
students recorded at 79%, with African American students following suit at 16%, followed by
3% Hispanic, 0.2% Asian and Native American students each, and 2.2% of the student
population identified as multiracial. The school district consisted of 2 elementary schools with a
total of 948 students enrolled, of which 64% were eligible for free or reduced meals, 1 middle
school with a total enrollment of 461 students, of which 56% qualified for free or reduced meals,
and 1 high school with a total of 661 students, of which, 41% were entitled to free or reduced
meals (Chitiyo & Wheeler, 2008).
The findings of the study, as discussed by Chitiyo and Wheeler (2008), indicated that
teachers stated they needed more assistance from support staff and administrators and that they
would do the following in the future, “(a) get more input from administration, (b) find a way to
get more staff buy-in before implementation, (c) make interventions more individualized, (d)
implement more staff training, and (e) use many behavioral management tools during the
interventions” (p. 62). As such, in summary, the teachers were faced with a gamut of challenges
discussed earlier in this section.
Schools
Today’s Challenges
Behavioral challenges promote and fuel detrimental futures for school-aged children in
terms of long-term success. As such, effective intervention strategies are needed to address the
aforementioned and reduce risky behavior to secure a brighter future concerning the well-being
46
of school communities. Bradshaw et al. (2012) supported this phenomenon and suggested, “The
PBIS framework appears to be a promising approach for reducing problems and promoting
adjustment among school children” (p. 1).
Bradshaw et al. (2012) discussed that today’s behavioral challenges are being fueled by
the fact that only 16,000 schools in the U.S. have implemented schoolwide PBIS as their
universal strategy to significantly reduce challenges and promote optimal well-being for the
students and their school communities. As such, they conducted a quantitative randomized
controlled design study, which was implemented in “37 schools and used a sample of 12,344
elementary school children” (Bradshaw et al., 2012, p. 1).
Furthermore, the statistics of the demographics of the students were as follows, “52.9%
male, 45.1% African American, and 46.1% Caucasian. Approximately 49% received free or
reduced-priced meals, and 12.9% received special education services at baseline” (Bradshaw et
al., 2012, p. 1). Their method can be summarized as such, a manifold level analysis conducted
over four years, and the teachers were selected on the following basis: “teachers’ ratings of
children’s behavior problems, concentration problems, social-emotional functioning, prosocial
behavior, office discipline referrals, and suspensions” at five points in time (Bradshaw et al.,
2012, p. 1).
The findings of the study demonstrated and highlighted that PBIS hold a promising
future, especially in students referred to the school principal’s office to serve discipline, students
perhaps diagnosed with ADHD or ADD because they have trouble concentrating due to
multifaceted factors in their lives, students who displayed aggressive or disruptive behaviors as
deemed by their teachers, as well as students who did not possess a component of emotional
intelligence called self-regulation or mood regulation since those students were unable to
regulate their emotions and behaviors, also known as prosocial behavior. The findings also
47
indicated that PBIS are most effective during early-onset behaviors (Bradshaw et al., 2012).
Moreover, the authors stated that a number of students are not responding well to the universal
model of PBIS, and therefore, this warrants further research to prevent and rectify their
challenges to promote the well-being of the students and the school communities therein. As
such, it can be concluded that PBIS are most effective with early-onset behaviors for students.
K-12: Which Types of Schools are Adopting PBIS More?
Several studies have been conducted in the K-12 setting to assess, evaluate, and address
behavioral needs of school children in elementary schools and young adults in high schools to
achieve better well-being for school communities. Pas et al. (2015) conducted a study of 58 high
schools, of which they examined 31, and concluded that schools were more likely to adopt,
adapt, and utilize PBIS only if the bullying rates of these schools were an indicator of addressing
behavioral challenges for students. This study was conducted over the course of two years and
used a quantitative, randomized, controlled design. The summarized results from the study by
Pas et al. (2015) were that suspension rates fell to about 9% with the implementation of PBIS to
support the well-being of students and the school communities.
Horner and Macaya (2018) conducted a qualitative study where they examined 26,000
schools over 2 decades across the U.S., all of which supported the idea that the feasibility and
effectiveness of PBIS are associated with the following: social behavior, cultural adaption,
formal classroom management styles, the leadership team (administrators) coordinating
professional development for their teachers, family engagement and interest in their children
who attend schools, and bullying prevention strategies and their outcomes. In this study, the
authors concluded that the types of schools that are adopting PBIS more are the ones that
understand “the political, fiscal, and organizational variables that affect the adoption of effective
48
practices with high fidelity, sustainability, and scalability” (Horner & Macaya, 2018, p. 681)
produces effective learning environments and supports the well-being of students and the
communities.
Another idea that supports the efficient adoption and adaption of PBIS is stakeholder
“buy-in,” which signifies that these are the types of schools adopting PBIS more. Martin (2018)
discussed this phenomenon and concluded that even with teacher “buy-in” and their perception
of how well they are implementing PBIS, they are unsatisfied with the results that show that their
students’ behavior remains unchanged; therefore, it can be concluded that the types of schools
that must continue to work on the effectiveness of the adoption of PBIS should be the ones that
continually provide professional development for their teachers to support the well-being of the
school communities completely.
Another study that discussed the successful adoption and adaption of PBIS was McDaniel
et al. (2018), which discussed schools as stakeholders and attempted to answer the following:
1) What are the contextual perceptions of stakeholders implementing PBIS in low-
income and non-low-income schools? 2) Are there contextual differences in stakeholders’
perceptions of implementing PBIS in elementary, middle, or high school settings? 3) Are
there contextual differences in stakeholders’ perceptions of implementing PBIS between
rural and urban settings? (p. 3)
The authors did the research with a quantitative survey and concluded that the types of
schools that are most effective in adopting PBIS are the schools whose teachers and
administrators were on par with their communication and understanding of what PBIS are and
how they can successfully support their students and their communities with the utmost devotion
and sustainability.
49
Sorlie and Ogden (2015) conducted research using a quantitative method with a
nonrandomized design and data collected from more than 1,200 teachers and 7,640 students over
4 years in 28 schools (p. 202). The goal of their study was to assess the school climate and sense
of belonging to find a link between students’ behavioral challenges that ensued in the 28 schools
that were a part of the study. In this study, the researchers concluded that the types of schools
that adopt PBIS more, and the ones that are implementing it successfully, are the ones that
promote a sense of belonging for their students, thereby reducing the level of student behavioral
challenges and promoting better well-being for their students and their communities (Sorlie &
Ogden, 2015).
Communities and Their Role (e.g., Parents, Organizations)
What Schools are Doing to Maintain Well-being
Molloy et al. (2013) discussed the need for more research to “examine how
implementation quality relates to program outcomes in the real world” (p. 2). They determined
that “real-world” implementation is very different from how a program may have been designed
“on paper” and how one needs to alter the status quo of a program’s goals and unified objectives
for the effectiveness to come to fruition. Furthermore, at present, positive behavioral intervention
strategy practices are addressing “school environments by establishing clear school rules through
improved systems (e.g., rewards, discipline) and procedures (e.g., continual use of data for
decision-making) that promote positive change in staff and student behaviors” (Molloy et al.,
2013, p. 3). However, Molloy et al. (2013) suggested that schools must approach PBIS from a
holistic way and employ a systems approach by having a “schoolwide prevention strategy that
establishes a positive school climate and the behavioral supports needed to reduce behavior
problems and enhance academic performance” (p. 3). As such, they are suggesting that not only
50
is there a call to action to address the need for improvement of academic outcomes, but also to
look ahead toward a long-term goal that also addresses behaviors causing the deficits in students’
academic outcomes by addressing their mental health to improve the well-being of school
communities.
In terms of what schools are doing to contribute toward better well-being for parents,
caregivers, and students’ families in general, a gamut of resources involve program initiatives
that fall under the parent, family, and community engagement model, with supports such as the
Investing with Families Initiative, support around children and families experiencing
homelessness, support systems to prevent and respond to intimate partner violence (domestic
violence), addressing child abuse to prevent it, asset building strategies for families, food
security and stability, access to care for mental health as well as physical health well-being, and
others (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2021).
Challenges in Optimal Well-being
Achilles et al. (2007) discussed the challenges in achieving well-being in school
communities and highlighted that students who suffer from disabilities suffer a higher likelihood
of exclusion from the school community as well as have a higher percentage of a lack of sense of
belonging in terms of the school climate. Specifically, Achilles et al. (2007) highlighted that
students who suffer from emotional/behavioral disorders paired with a diagnosis of ADHD have
a higher likelihood of suspension from school due to their behavior being misdiagnosed because
PBIS is not being practiced effectively or holistically. The authors narrowed the topic even more
and discussed that a higher likelihood of exclusion from the school community was greater with
“the African American community, who were older, identifying as male in gender, they hailed
from a lower socioeconomic status, had multiple school changes within urban schooling, and had
51
parents who expressed low school satisfaction” (Achilles et al., 2007, p. 33). Therefore, they
posed several ways to improve the well-being within school communities and beyond, to be
discussed in the next section of this theme.
Cardona and Neas (2021) echoed some of the aforesaid points and discussed several
challenges in achieving “optimal” well-being and stated that “rising mental health needs and
disparities among children and student groups are largely unmet due to insufficient capacity
pertaining to several factors amidst the pandemic” (p. 7). These factors can include a variety of
factors that continue to marginalize disenfranchised populations (students of color), which
include religious identity, LGBTQI+ status, immigration status, national origin, and even
housing status, among other major determinants such as homelessness.
Furthermore, the aforementioned authors discussed that this was not a revelation; this has
been an issue since before the pandemic. With that, they stated, “Even before the pandemic, as
students entered their K-12 school experience, schools were reporting earlier onset, increased
prevalence, and greater intensity and complexity of student mental health needs” (Cardona &
Neas, 2021, p. 8). To expand further on this, it is important to discuss that the lack of school
supports, such as counselor staffing and peer mediators, as well as the lack of PBIS from
teachers and the community in general, are contributing to the lack of well-being for school
communities. The services discussed above are vital to the well-being of school communities
because Vestal (2021) discussed the disproportionality of students in K-12, which can be
synthesized as students having a difficult time transitioning into the new normal amid the
pandemic and the disparity in access to care for mental health services for students has been 34%
lower than pre-pandemic. To support this, Williams (2021) discussed that the enrollment in
healthcare services for students in K-12 has increased due to the pandemic, and it can be inferred
that children and their families became ill more than usual amid the rising COVID-19 cases; an
52
average of “216 students were hospitalized during the week of July 31-August 6, 2021”
(Williams, 2021, p. 9).
How to Improve Well-being
Considering several of the above disparities, including socioeconomic hardships for
families that impacted the overarching well-being of the school communities, Williams (2021)
discussed several policies that provided relief such as financial relief, including stimulus
payments as well as the child tax credit, all of which gave families an average boost of “$4,470
to their yearly income, which then contributed to the well-being in the form of healthier
birthweights, lower maternal stress, better nutrition, and lower usage of drugs and alcohol”
(Williams, 2021, p. 9).
Vestal (2021) investigated the phenomenon of improving mental health to contribute to
the overall well-being of the school communities and discussed how the stigma around mental
health reduced significantly, and the communities were more open to seeking mental health
services. She also stated that it is recommended by the National Association of School
Psychologists (in an analysis conducted by the U.S. Department of Education in 2020) that the
recommended ratio for one professional psychologist should be 1 to 500 students, with 1
psychologist serving 500 students. However, she stated that there is a shortage of school
psychologists nationwide with Maine as the only state that meets the national standard, and at
present, “the U.S. average students per school psychologist is 1,211 students” (Vestal, 2021, p.
3). Having said that, there is light at the end of the never-ending pandemic tunnel, in the sense
that the American Rescue Plan Act along with the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency
Relief Fund, combined with other pandemic-related funds, which contribute to the well-being of
53
school communities, have amounted to $190 billion in education and health grants, to be spent
over the next 4 years, “some of which can be spent on mental health” (Vestal, 2021, p. 4).
Furthermore, Achilles et al. (2007) suggested that a lower suspension and expulsion rate within
school communities can greatly improve the well-being of school communities, specifically
students who suffer from emotional/behavioral disorders, which are one of the leading causes of
their behavioral challenges in academic settings. Moreover, suggestions on how to improve the
well-being within school communities includes addressing the overarching structural disparities
such as, “families living under high-stress and low-resource conditions that lack the capacity to
help their children without broader supports from prevention and intervention programs”
(Achilles et al., 2007, p. 43) such as PBIS that need to be implemented responsibly.
For PBIS-related supports to come to fruition, school leaders must collaborate not only with
autonomous stakeholders like teachers, counselors, social workers, and school psychologists but
also with external stakeholders like the families of the students to achieve a better outcome that
would contribute to the success and well-being of the overall school communities. With this,
Jordan et al. (2001) highlighted the concept of collaboration, which revolves around partnership
and boundary-setting. This process includes three main components: “transacting—definition of
a shared problem, representing—direction setting/planning, and protecting—implementation
and/or restructuring” (p. 51).
Raulerson and Fintel (2020) discussed further how to improve the well-being of the
school communities and the benefits of a trauma-informed approach, and how it should be
delivered within the school systems. They further stated that one of the main ways to do this is
with a “multi-tiered system such as PBIS because it provides a strong foundation to integrate
prevention practices through established school leadership and professional development
practices” (p. 1). While PBIS is being practiced at several schools and school districts, Raulerson
54
and Fintel’s (2020) PBIS with a trauma-informed approach includes the following:
“realization—the understanding for recovery, recognition—recognizing the signs and symptoms
of trauma, responding—respond by fully integrating knowledge of trauma and resisting—
resisting the urge to re-traumatize the school communities” (p. 1).
Successfully Implemented Well-being Programs
Positive Behavior Intervention Strategies and Supports
As of 2018, over 25,000 schools nationwide across the U.S. have implemented PBIS, and
at present, each state, including Washington DC, has a state schoolwide PBIS coordinator
(Country Health Rankings, 2016). Irvine High School, a high school located in Irvine, California,
is one of the thousands of schools that have implemented PBIS. However, it is one of the few
that has succeeded in improving the well-being of their school communities. They also received
the California PBIS platinum level of recognition. In addition, Irvine High School (2019) defined
PBIS as:
At Irvine High, positive behavior interventions and support is a framework or approach
comprised of intervention practices and organizational systems for establishing the social
culture, learning and teaching environment, and individual behavior supports needed to
achieve academic and social success for all students. (p. 1)
The article written by the correspondent at Irvine High School (2019) highlighted that
they were able to improve their truancy, discipline, chronic absenteeism, and tardiness rates from
“43% to 8% between 2002 and 2008” (p. 1). Furthermore, they received several recognitions as
well as awards, which included a Cal Grant, year after year, for their success regarding the
55
implementation of PBIS. Moreover, they were able to narrow student absenteeism for a single
class period to 3% per month in 2011 to improve the well-being of their school community.
Overall, it appears that Irvine High School has not only successfully implemented PBIS, but they
have made it a part of their culture to support the well-being of their school community, which
includes their school, teachers, students (student leadership), parents, counselors, wellness
coordinators, and the school psychologists. In summarizing how Irvine High School (2019) is
succeeding in accomplishing their achievements pertaining to PBIS via a multitiered intervention
support system, one can state that they have included several partnerships within the school. For
example, they have partnered with teachers and students to establish “what appropriate behaviors
look like both in and out of the classroom” (Irvine High School, 2019, p. 3).
The parent community has also been involved, especially at new first-year student
orientation, where they are educated on the behavioral matrix that the Link Crew Freshman
Leaders provide the parents with. The school has also come up with various ways to honor
students who display positive behaviors and attitudes through the integrity, honoring oneself, and
social responsibility values and achieve a multitude of positive acknowledgments, including
good grades and modeling optimal behavior. These students are honored at award ceremonies as
well as through random drawings where the students are provided with gift cards for the
aforementioned and more. The teacher advisement groups continue to engage in discussions
around PBIS through student forums, which allows a true partnership among the teachers,
students, and the school community as a whole.
Irvine High-School-wide PBIS “A Team Approach” (2019) highlights ways a systems-
based team approach is taken to accomplish the goals of PBIS. In summarizing how incidents are
handled, first and foremost, the school team looks at whether the incidents are minor or major.
For example, if an incident is minor, step one is to give a verbal warning, review expectations,
56
and use a behavior matrix to resolve the issue; should the behavior stop, no further action is
taken. Step two involves re-teaching the expectations, using a behavior matrix once again, and
applying interventions (e.g., changing the seating arrangement, student conference, contacting
parents, and making a student contract so there is more accountability on the student’s part and it
can be reviewed should the behavior reoccur, redirection and reframing the behavior, reviewing
verbal and non-verbal cues). Again, if the behavior stops, no further action is taken or needed at
the time. Step three involves a joint intervention with the teacher and the parent (caregiver), and
once again, if the behavior does not escalate, no further action is needed. Step four then involves
the teacher making a referral. For example, counseling (i.e., academic, personal, or career) or an
administrative referral for things such as attendance, disruption, or defiance. There is also
continual monitoring to ensure the referral is coming to fruition.
Alternatively, if the incident is deemed major, for instance, bullying, danger to self or
others (such as administrators, counselors, and others within the school community or beyond),
substance abuse, theft, abuse (involving mandatory reporting), and/or fighting in school, then the
following steps are taken. The first step is to connect the student to administrative staff who can
link the student in question to a school counselor who would also contact the respective student’s
parent(s)/caregiver(s). In the meantime, the counselor, along with the leadership personnel,
determines the “consequences/intervention.” Examples of the interventions would be one-on-one
counseling, using other school-based interventional methods, or getting child protective services
involved, if appropriate. Examples of consequences include suspension, detention, alternative
suspension or perhaps even arrest in some cases, should the situation warrant such a drastic step
(Irvine High-School-wide PBIS—A Team Approach, 2019).
Cave (2020) discussed PBIS strategies that are administered and adhered to from a
unique perspective, making the school communities digital nomads in the new era of life and
57
living amid the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic. Cave (2020) discussed the practices at a
local school district and discussed the four steps on how to reimagine and restructure PBIS
digitally. Step one is to take a breather and reevaluate how and why one is responding and/or
reacting to a student’s “misbehavior.” For example, before one responds or reacts, one wants to
ask oneself whether the behavior warrants an intervention because the student misbehaved or it is
one’s own personal frustration manifesting itself during one’s digital workday. Step two is to
reteach expectations, for example, setting expectations for one’s students around what is
accepted decorum during the digital classroom day and what will not be tolerated. Step three is
to approach each situation with curiosity and not with judgment. For example, it is not
compulsory that a student’s behavior warrants a counseling referral because the student’s
behavior could be stemming from circumstances beyond their control, such as food insecurities,
noise levels and distractions at home, lack of optimal internet access, and others. As such, it is
important for a teacher to get curious first about what is happening from a holistic approach to
contribute to the well-being of the school communities. The fourth and final step involves
documenting a student’s behavior. For example, as an educator, one wants to differentiate
between what a minor or major behavioral incident or instant is, which would then guide one’s
positive behavior intervention strategy.
Leverson et al. (2021) placed special emphasis on embedding cultural responsiveness
when implementing PBIS effectively. They discussed aspects of culturally responsive
appropriateness and stated that teachers:
should not assume that all students understand classroom expectations and routines
without instruction. Teachers should not punish students for behavioral errors due to
cultural differences (e.g., shouting out/overlap). Classroom instruction is not primarily
lecture-based and requires extended periods of seated, silent attention. Classroom images,
58
academic content, and social emotional learning strategies should reflect the range of
diversity in the school and community. (Leverson et al., 2021, p. 20)
This helps to ensure that educators are contributing toward the wellness and well-being of school
communities.
Taylor (2020) discussed the implementation of PBIS through the lens of a digital
platform and stated that to support the well-being of school communities, teachers must “meet
virtually with student and parents, reflect on activities, e.g., writing essays about misbehavior,
focus on mediation and counseling” (p. 1). Furthermore, educators must enroll students in
restorative practices versus engaging in punitive measures, collaborate with counselors to
implement anger management focus groups, place appropriate mental health counseling referrals,
implement more “social-emotional cognitive skill building in their curriculum, have conferences
with student’s parents, study teams, and other behavioral supports such as student-peer
mediators, and make referrals to a psychologist as appropriate” (Taylor, 2020, p. 1).
The School District of South Florida (2021) is another district implementing PBIS
effectively. Their philosophy revolves around the following aspects to support the optimal well-
being of their school communities: “being proactive and finding ways to prevent or reduce the
likelihood of problem behavior and ensure that the variables that make problems more or less
likely to occur are proactively addressed” (School District of South Florida, 2021, p. 6). They
also highlighted:
school leadership personnel should focus on ways to teach and reward behavior, the data
that is aggregated should provide insight into the problem-solving process, and the
interventions are used to identify the level of support necessary for the student to meet
expectations. (School District of South Florida, 2021, p. 6)
This way, it can be ensured that the school communities are supported best.
59
Silverado High School (2021) in the Mission Viejo School District, located in Orange
County, California, is another example of a school that is passionate about the well-being of their
school communities. Their philosophy surrounding PBIS is embedded in their community and
campus-based initiative called Successful, Optimistic, Accountable and Respectful, which also
includes a collaborative team-based process such as “a broad range of systemic and
individualized strategies for achieving important social and learning outcomes” (p. 4), which
they deemed as a “proactive approach to teach, monitor, and support appropriate school behavior
for all students” (p. 4). They further stated, “the fundamental purpose of PBIS is to make schools
more effective, efficient, and equitable learning environments and that their focus is on
preventing problem behavior of all students at the school-wide, classroom, community and
individual levels” (Silverado High School, 2021, p. 4).
Kern High School District (2017), located in Bakersfield, California, is also a school
district striving hard to achieve successful well-being for its school communities, so much so that
they received multiple awards for effectively implementing PBIS in 2017, which involved state
honors in the gold, silver, and bronze categories for multiple high schools within the district,
which included schools like Central Valley Continuation High School, East Bakersfield High
School, Golden Valley High School, Kern Valley High School, Nueva Continuation High
School, Shafter High School, Stockdale High School, and West High School. This school
district’s philosophy concerning PBIS includes:
Defining expectations and explicit instruction of behavior/social expectations.
Acknowledging positive behavior amongst students, emphasis on ongoing collection and
use of data for decision-making and continuous improvement of administrative leadership
structures to coordinate services and ensure alignment of their systems. (p. 1)
60
Chapter Three: Methodology
Introduction
This chapter discusses the purpose of the study and the research design. It identifies the
target and accessible population, discusses sampling and the sampling methodology, steps for
recruitment and data collection, limitations, reliability and validity, and credibility and
trustworthiness. The purpose of the study was to research the well-being of students and the
teachers pertaining to how effective schoolwide PBIS are in terms of how they are implemented.
According to Samkian (2022a), “A research problem is an issue, topic, or question that leads to
or motivates a study” (p. 1). The issue that motivated this study was implementing PBIS
appropriately and equitably.
Research Design
The study was an exploratory qualitative research design with semi-structured interviews,
which included 12 questions that helped answer the larger research questions. Furthermore, this
was an exploratory study because it laid the groundwork for future work and identified key
aspects to study in the future. To support this, Hostetler (2005) discussed qualitative research in
his article, stating:
Our ultimate aim as researchers and practitioners is to serve people’s well-being—the
well-being of students, teachers, communities, etc, and qualitative research has been
valuable for helping us to think about the nature and aims of education research with the
human beings we study and work with. (p. 17)
Furthermore, the research design was an exploratory study because this study was defined as
“broad, and it lays the groundwork for future studies by identifying key aspects about a
phenomenon” (Riggio, 2022, p. 2).
61
Research Questions
The following were the three research questions for this study:
RQ1: What is the well-being of school communities?
RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in school communities?
RQ3: How can the well-being of school communities be improved?
Participants and Setting
Setting
The interviews took place in a virtual setting via Zoom. The researcher ensured that the
space was free of distractions where the noise level was minimal to none without any foot traffic,
and that the place was well-lit with a proper working sound and video on the computer device
that was utilized. The researcher also encouraged and requested the participants to find a space
that is free of distractions, has good lighting per their comfort level, and that it is private enough
for them in order to ensure confidentiality.
Target and Accessible Population and Sample
The target population was educators in the U.S. who taught in schools where PBIS was
practiced In particular, the participants were teachers who had been teaching for at least six
months in the field of education and taught in a district where PBIS was practiced. The
accessible population was educators in California who taught in schools where PBIS was
practiced.
The sample was five educators in one school district in Southern California, U.S., who
taught where PBIS was practiced. To support the highlighted points above, Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) stated that there was no specific number that was needed for the sampling and further
62
stated, “What is needed is an adequate number of participants and sites to answer the question
posed at the beginning of the study” (p. 101). They also stated, “if the purpose is to maximize
information, the sampling is terminated when no new information is forthcoming from the
sampling units; thus, redundancy is the primary criterion” (p. 101).
Sampling Method
The researcher chose the state of California and chose a purposeful and convenience
sampling method as the researcher resides in California and this is where the well-being of the
school communities is valued as evidenced by the fact that PBIS is practiced in the California
schooling system. The reason for choosing the particular school district is because PBIS is
practiced intentionally at said school district and this is where the participants were interviewed
as they reside in California. The methodology for choosing the sample of five was based on
Nielsen and Landauer’s mathematical model that highlights that by doing a qualitive study with
five participants, you can identify 85% of the issues and that a “good investment is to start with 5
people in order to fix issues” (Budiu, 2021). This was based on the sampling criterion which
was, years of teaching, age, and highest education completed by the participants. All of which
elicited information-rich content in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the well-being of
school communities.
The researcher stopped at a sample of five as it provided the rich information that was
needed in order to answer the research questions posed and proposed in the study. To support the
aforementioned and discuss what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) described about qualitative
sampling, one can synthesize and state that non-probability sampling is most commonly utilized
when it comes to qualitative research sampling because the researcher wants to determine what is
occurring, what the implications are of said occurrence, as well as the relationship between said
63
occurrences. This must be done in a purposeful manner because the researcher wants to gain
insight, and they must select a sample to understand the question being asked. Furthermore, it
has to be information-rich and criterion-based because there has to be an in-depth understanding
and deciding what criteria are important about a study and then finding participants who meet
said criteria (pp. 98-99).
Recruitment
For my research questions, typical and snowball sampling techniques are applicable and
appropriate because a typical sampling technique reflects what is not overtly deviant and
highlights something average and expected, and snowball sampling, which is the most common
form of sampling for purposeful sampling involves “locating a few key participants who easily
meet the criteria you have established” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, pp. 97-98). I recruited
individuals using an email where I explained to them what the study was and whom I was
seeking to interview and included the Recruitment Letter (see Appendix A) which I also sent the
participants later on.
Furthermore, to recruit the participants, I provided the participants with Informed
Consent (see Appendix B). This included an overview and purpose of the study, informed them
that participation was voluntary and that they could choose to leave the study at any given time,
obtained informed consent and provided them with a copy of it, as well as discussed with them
how many questions were anticipated roughly, how much time they would be requested to
invest, asked them if they would allow for their interview to be recorded (audio or video), asked
them if they would allow me to take notes during their interview, and informed them that the
questions would be in a semi-structured style with some being open-ended and some being
64
closed-ended, with an opportunity to ask follow-up questions when deemed necessary
(Lochmiller & Lester, 2017, p. 150).
Data Collection
Two data collection methods were used to help answer my research questions. I utilized a
Demographic Survey (see Appendix E), and an Interview Protocol (see Appendix F). The
Demographic Survey was in the form of questions embedded into the Interview Protocol. The
survey allowed me to better understand the demographics of my sample. The interview questions
were designed to understand the perceptions of the teachers in order to understand how well they
know what the well-being of school communities is, how they can best contribute toward it, and
what they feel can be done to improve it. Moreover, I wanted to gauge the teachers’ perception
of their school leader, and how said leader supports the well-being of the school communities, as
well as the teachers’ professional development toward supporting the school communities, thus
contributing to the overall well-being of the school communities.
Demographic Survey
In summarizing the Demographic Survey (see Appendix E), I included questions
surrounding the teacher’s age, years of experience in education as well as the highest degree
they’ve completed thus far. The data collection issue I anticipated would make the respondent
uncomfortable is one of the demographic questions on my survey instrument, which asks the
respondent for their age. My ideology behind needing the survey was to gauge which age group
of teachers were more forthcoming and open to practicing PBIS versus which group was
resistant and guarded toward implementing culturally relevant pedagogies, as I anticipated that
teachers who were more open-minded were open to change such as implementing PBIS
65
appropriately. Moreover, it was so help understand if their formal education played a role in the
amount of experience they had and whether if there were any commonalities or differences that
would correlate to the answers that were provided.
Interview Protocol
I drafted an entire interview protocol (see Appendix F), with purposeful interview
questions that elicited rich and useful information/answers. I used semi-structured questions to
reflect each person’s involvement and position within the school or district. I also allowed
follow-up questions for a richer experience. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed this
phenomenon and stated, “residual ethical effects—painful memories may surface in an interview
even if the topic seems routine or benign” (p. 262). In terms of cultural humility, it was my goal
to ensure that the participants understood that they each had their own identity and that I tried my
hardest to honor that and their respective experiences.
What I obtain in the qualitative interview might cause the participants and respondents
potential embarrassment, loss of friendship, or possible loss of employment might be the data
gathered about leadership personnel and their support or lack thereof, or also about the teachers’
knowledge on how confident they feel utilizing PBIS, or what they might have to think about
when asked to consider what the first day of PBIS implementation would look like for students,
especially if at the time, they did not feel confident implementing the strategies due to lack of
understanding during the multiple trainings provided.
In summarizing the interview questions/protocol (see Appendix F), I included questions
surrounding the teacher’s educational background, how long they’ve been a teacher, what
positions they’ve held in the field of education, the subject(s) they teach, their knowledge about
PBIS, their formal and informal trainings that help support the well-being of school
66
communities, what role their principal plays in supporting them and what an ideal principal
might be, as well as asking a closing question about whether if they’d like to share anything else
about the well-being of school communities. The data collection issue I anticipated would make
the respondent uncomfortable is one of the questions in the interview, which asks the respondent
about the perception of their principal. The data collection issue I anticipated would make the
respondent uncomfortable is a question which asks the participant to discuss how their leader
supports them and helps contribute toward the well-being of the school communities. My
ideology behind needing the interview questions was to gauge a teacher’s understanding of what
PBIS is, how well they practice it in order to support the well-being of the school communities,
as well as to understand the teachers’ perception of their school leader, and how said leader
supports the well-being of the school communities. Furthermore, it was to understand the
teachers’ professional development toward supporting the school communities, thus contributing
to the overall well-being of the school communities. In mapping the findings from the interviews
discussed in chapters 4 and 5, below is a table which explains which interview questions as well
as survey items (questions) helped answer the particular research questions or gave insight about
the sample’s intersection.
Table 1a
Data Sources
Research Questions Interviews Demographic
RQ1: What is the well-being of school
communities?
Q 1, 2, 3 and 4
RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in
school communities?
Q 5, 5a, 6, and 6a Q 1 and 2
67
RQ3: How can the well-being of school
communities be improved?
Q 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 Q 3

Procedures
The researcher first obtained IRB permission by submitting the application into the iStar
system (see Appendix A), then solicited school principal for permission via email (see Appendix
B), then solicited teachers via email and scheduling interviews (see Appendix C), followed by
distributing informed consent via email (see Appendix D), as well as sending the consent form
via email (see Appendix E). There were two sections to the data collection instrument: a
demographic survey (see Appendix F), followed by semi-structured interviews that were
conducted (see Appendix G). The participants engaged in open-ended, semi-structured
interviews via Zoom. The researcher honored the ethics of a “good researcher” and told the
participants they could refuse to answer should they feel uncomfortable with a question.
Confidentiality Parameters
The potential privacy risks of information participants shared were minimal to none
because the researcher honored confidentiality by utilizing pseudonyms. The options for
participants to disclose their identity were minimal to none because, to honor confidentiality, the
researcher removed the participants’ identifying information and assigned aliases consisting of
random initials. The steps taken to ensure access to the minimum amount of information
necessary to complete the study were that the researcher asked semi-structured questions
pertaining to the study only. No information was obtained about individuals other than the
desired sampling information. No personal or identifiable information was obtained to facilitate
the research and as part of data collection.
68
Data Management
The researcher remained current with cybersecurity practices by practicing safe computer
practices, staying current by reading technological articles, installing anti-virus software,
installing a firewall, and enabling automatic updates. Research data were classified to identify
access control by laptop password-protected data encryption (Norton McAfee) and backup
requirements by iCloud. Regarding system authentication and security, the researcher ensured
that access to all confidential and sensitive data was managed appropriately by using strong
passwords, restricting user permission to the files being used, and locking the workstation when
the researcher was away from the workstation.
Encryption
Data encryption was used to further protect confidential and sensitive research data. The
encryption stayed with the data as the sensitive information traveled through networks, internet
servers, application servers, and database servers. Confidential and sensitive email
communications were encrypted by OneDrive.
Dissemination of Findings
The objective of the dissemination of findings is to raise awareness and understanding of
PBIS and/or change the way PBIS practices are implemented appropriately. The audience that
will have the dissemination of findings will be the participants, the principal, and school district
leadership personnel so they can gain insight into what is needed to contribute to the well-being
of the school communities in a meaningful manner.
Data Analysis
69
There were two types of data analysis: descriptive and thematic. This study used
descriptive to analyze the demographic data and thematic content analysis to analyze the semi-
structured interview data which both helped answer the following research questions:
RQ1: What is the well-being of school communities?
RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in school communities?
RQ3: How can the well-being of school communities be improved?
Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics analyze data to identify the current status of identified variables or
characteristics of participants (Salkind, 2017). Descriptive statistics can be used to characterize
data based on the properties of each demographic data point. In particular, frequency measures
were used to show how often a response was given. Frequency measures were shown as an
average percentage from the total sum of participants responding to a particular survey item. To
find the frequency measure, the researcher looked for frequently selected answers that
participants used in their responses in the demographic survey item.
Demographic data
Demographic information was collected from the five participants and all five
participants answered 100% of the demographic survey questions before engaging in the semi-
structured interview. The demographic survey responses ensured that participants met all the
criteria to participate in the study. All five participants self-reported that they were over 18,
identified as being a frontline teacher, and had attended a higher education institution in the US.
During the interview, all participants reported having some sort of formal or informal training
around PBIS, and all eight participants reported having knowledge of what PBIS is. The
70
demographic information was collected and exported to Excel (Microsoft Corporation, 2023) for
analysis.
Thematic analysis
Thematic Content Analysis (TCA) was used in this study. TCA is a descriptive
presentation of qualitative data that was taken from the researcher’s semi-structured interview
transcripts with the research sample (Braun and Clarke, 2006). The researcher used NVivo
(QSR, 2020) and HappyScribe (HappyScribe 2023) transcription tools to support the
transcription and analysis process. In the analysis, the researcher closely examined the data to
identify common themes – topics, ideas, and patterns of meaning that came up repeatedly. While
there are various approaches to conducting TCA, the researcher followed six-step process
developed by Braun and Clarke (2006) in order to conduct the TCA. The six-step process
included familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming
pieces, and writing up. The research findings from the TCA were organized per each of the three
research questions. The researcher selected quotes that were most representative of the results
related to the questions.
Reliability
Reliability is defined as “measuring consistently” (Samkian, 2022c, p. 1). A survey item
is defined as “a question or prompt to obtain information from respondents” (p. 2). The specific
target population I utilized consisted of teachers who had undergone PBIS training and were
embedding that, along with culturally relevant and anti-racist pedagogical methods in their
professional sphere to support the well-being of the school communities. I needed to design my
interview questions to maximize reliability and validity by doing the following: making them
purposeful, intentional, and meaningful and making sure the questions were standardized so
71
results were as accurate as possible. Furthermore, I needed to ensure that the validity was
acceptable, so I consulted with experts about the content. Robinson and Firth (2019) discussed
quality interview questions and stated that one must:
empathize: get to know as much as you can about the respondent; understand/define:
bring clarity and focus to the design of the survey; brainstorm: start drafting questions
based on what you know about the respondents; prototype: take a draft of the survey to
potential users for feedback; and test: pretest the final draft before administering the
survey to the final respondents. (pp. 13-19)
Dependability
The researcher demonstrated that this study is dependable by ensuring that the findings
are consistent with the presented data. Dependable and consistent results that make sense based
on the data that was collected are a substantial-quality measure of any qualitative study (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The researcher methodically documented the procedures used throughout the
inquiry and kept a journal of self-reflection, questions, decisions, issues, or ideas as they ensued
during data collection to construct what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) describe as an audit trail.
This audit trail supports the dependability of this study and will help future researchers to repeat
this study (Moon et al., 2016).
Confirmability
Much like an audit trail ensures dependability, it helped to confirm that the
findings were clearly congruent to the conclusions and that they can be followed. More
importantly, confirmation of the results was substantiated as that of the
participant’s responses and the line of inquiry that was used. Moreover, this ensured that the
researcher kept a detailed report to denote potential biases, assumptions, how categories were
72
made, and how data was collected as it added a layer of transparency that could be quickly
followed (Moon et al., 2016).
Validity
Validity was defined as “measuring what it intends to measure” (Samkian, 2022a, p. 2).
The limitations I faced in testing the reliability and validity of my instrument were not being able
to find engaging potential respondents or informants about the study itself. Furthermore, I
guarded against inadvertently adding closed-ended or double-barreled questions without
meaning to do so and against accidentally utilizing jargon or vague quantifiers. Moreover,
respondents might have been subject to what Robinson and Firth (2019) referred to as “interview
fatigue or non-response.” Interview fatigue occurs when respondents leave the interview in the
middle as they become “tired of the task and/or the quality of the data they provide begins to
deteriorate” (p. 4).
I used the following strategies to improve my interview: I ensured that my open-ended
questions would elicit rich and purposeful answers that contributed to answering the research
questions. I also ensured that I was not utilizing any double-barreled questions, which could
overwhelm the respondent causing interview fatigue, where the quality of their answers starts to
weaken or they become a non-responder by leaving the interview in the middle of the instrument.
Credibility and Transferability
Maxwell (2013) used the word “validity” for credibility and defined it as “as the final
component of the design that is not guaranteed by following a standard procedure. It depends on
the conclusions to reality” (p. 1). Maxwell (2013) also made note that in the past, researchers
viewed validity (credibility) as “irrefutable data” (p. 1), which is now archaic and no longer
holds validity. Samkian (2022b) defined credibility as “the researcher presents data and findings
73
that are plausible. Is it believable and accurate?” (p. 2) My biases about the topics stem from my
profession as a mental health clinician passionate about what is known as a strengths-based
perspective approach that clinical social workers doing micro, mezzo, and macro work utilize in
various realms of their practice. For example, micro and mezzo practitioners might use strengths-
based strategies to help clients see what they excel in, redirecting them from their chronic
negative-themed thought process, which perseverates around a particular stressor.
Macro-level clinical mental health managers or supervisors might use a strengths-based
approach to identify the high-functioning areas of their employees before discussing areas of
opportunities (weaknesses) where they have room to grow. Hence, this type of ideology and
predispositions that are ingrained in my professional mind may assume that frontline educators
are doing the same for their students when implementing anti-racist and culturally relevant
pedagogical methods and using their students’ strengths first and implementing PBIS instead of
utilizing punitive methods that do not decenter the authority in the classroom. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) discussed biases during an interview, and their work can be synthesized as both
the interviewer and the respondent are likely to bring characteristics that could impact the
interview, and ideally, verbatim transcription of recorded interviews provides the best quality of
the study and its findings (p. 131).
My design choice limited my ability to have an authentic finding in the following way:
there was no triangulation, meaning I was the only researcher in this respective study. There
were no multiple researchers and member cross-checks. Furthermore, this means that there was
no cross-referencing between the findings of myself and another researcher, which left a small
margin for human error to occur. This was because “multiple researchers record accurately and
report fully” (Samkian, 2022c, p. 1). Moreover, I was transparent about the factors mentioned
above by pointing out that this study was not conducted over an extended length of time, the
74
number of interviews were two, and there was little continual face-to-face in-person observation
due to the ongoing global pandemic, COVID-19. Due to the aforementioned limitations, there
was little constant and ongoing comparison, which would have provided “a good database to
allow others to make informed decisions” (Samkian, 2022a).
In the future, I could discipline my subjectivity by doing the following to improve the
credibility and trustworthiness for the study: (a) utilize triangulation, which means, “using
multiple investigators, sources of data or data collection methods to confirm emerging findings”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 259); (b) apply peer review and examination strategies including,
“discussions with colleagues regarding the process of study, the congruency of emerging
findings with the raw data, and tentative interpretations” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 259); (c)
employ an audit trail incorporating, “a detailed account of the methods, procedures, and decision
points in carrying out the study” in addition to what has already been done (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016, p. 259).
Conclusion
To summarize, this qualitative study pertaining to the utilization of PBIS utilized a
demographic survey, and a semi-structured interview methodology with teachers to answer the
research questions surrounding the support of well-being within school communities. The
researcher elected to use the semi-structured interview method to collect relevant, significant,
and potentially sensitive data. This method allowed the researcher to gain trust, build rapport,
provide clarification when necessary, and probe further to understand better how teachers at the
selected school are contributing to the well-being of the school communities therein.

75
Chapter Four: Findings
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to use a theoretical lens of Structural Framework and
Social Cognitive Theory and investigate the impact PBIS has had on the well-being of school
communities (students and their families), teachers, and school leaders (principals). Furthermore,
look at what is being done to examine how effective PBIS has been thus far, what the challenges
are, and what can be done better by providing recommendations from a preventive angle and to
see what the well-being of school communities looks like, what challenges are posed in looking
at the well-being of school communities and how the well-being of school communities can be
improved. Finally, the purpose was to research the well-being of students and the communities
served based on how effective PBIS are in terms of how they are implemented.
The methodology with which this was evaluated was by having five frontline teachers
(participants) discuss their experiences with implementing PBIS and how it impacted the well-
being of their school communities. They were asked twelve questions surrounding PBIS,
culturally relevant practices, as well as how much support, if any, they have received from their
leader (e.g., principal, district) to effectively serve their school communities.
The problem of practice was that students might be meeting their academic needs, but
they lack social, emotional, and behavioral competency, they are continuing to have behavior
challenges, their families remain unsupported, and the students are being pushed into the school-
to-prison pipeline because educators are not developing positive and safe environments that
promote robust interpersonal relationships for students through teaching, modeling, and
encouragement, all of which are important to ensure the well-being of school communities.
76
This led me to ask the following research questions: RQ1: What is the well-being of
school communities? RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in school communities? RQ3:
How can the well-being of school communities be improved?
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the findings of the three research questions
through data received via a demographic survey and semi-structured interviews from five
frontline teachers who were the participants of this study.
In mapping the findings from the interviews discussed in chapters 4 and 5, below is a
table which explains which interview questions as well as survey items (questions) helped
answer the particular research questions or gave insight about the sample’s intersection.
Table 1b
Data Sources
Research Questions Interviews Demographic
RQ1: What is the well-being of school
communities?
Q 1, 2, 3 and 4
RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in
school communities?
Q 5, 5a, 6, and 6a Q 1 and 2
RQ3: How can the well-being of school
communities be improved?
Q 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 Q 3

In mapping this chapter’s findings, Table 2 shows the pseudonym of each participant
(frontline teacher), the school in which they teach, whether the school is private or public, the
participant’s role, and how long they have been teaching at the respective school which was
gathered from the demographic survey.
Table 2
77
Participant Teaching Information
Pseudonym School Type Grade Taught Duration in Teaching Profession
LK LVES Public Fifth 15 years overall; 10 years at current
school
CJ LVES Public Fourth 15 years overall; 9 years at current school
KL LVES Public Third 12 years overall; 6 years at current school
KM LVES Public First 2.5 years, all at current school
CD LVES Public Third 6 months, all at current school

In mapping the findings of the themes for each RQ as well as some quotes to support the
findings, below is a table which explains which interview questions as well as survey items
(questions) helped answer the particular research questions or gave insight about the sample’s
intersection.
Table 3
List of Themes for each RQ and Quotes
Research Questions Themes Quotes

RQ1: What is the well-being of school
communities?
Students: diversity,
equity, belonging,
access to clean water,
quality healthcare,
elimination of food
insecurities, and
reduction of housing
insecurities,
emphasizing the
importance of physical
activities, and creating
CD: “it was
solely the
teacher’s
responsibility to
promote the well-
being of a
school’s
community.”

LK, CJ, KL, and
KM: “it is not
only the teacher’s
78
a culture of
collaboration.
responsibility to
promote the well-
being of school
communities but
also the principal
the caregivers of
the students, and
the students
themselves.”

Teachers: teachers
must give themselves
grace; supportive
principal in terms of
teacher endeavors,
regarding their
professional goals, and
promotion of teacher
well-being.

Schools: schools must.
work hard on
intentionally
decentering the
authority in classroom
and implement
structure.

Communities: belief
in engaging the school
communities when it

CD: “school
should allow
students to
engage in student
self-governance.”

LK, CJ, KL, and
KM: “students
should not be
allowed to engage
in student self-
governance
because it is not
age-appropriate
for K-12
students.”

CD, LK, CJ,
KL, and KM:
“we greet our
classes on the
first day and
every day by
using praise to
reward positive
behavior from
PBIS and engage
students in brave-
space
conversations.”

CD and KM:
“this will create
fa feedback loops
to help us deliver
79

RQ2: What are the challenges of well-being in
school communities?
comes to the caregivers
of their students.

Students: lack of
appropriate mental
health services
available to students.

Teachers: not enough
opportunities for
teachers to engage in
professional
development.

Schools: not enough
schools are
implementing
schoolwide PBIS.

to our students
and their families
in a more
conducive
manner.”

LK, CJ, and KL:
“when there are
challenges toward
achieving a
healthy sense of
being, it impacts
the way students
perform
successfully in
their academic
endeavors.”

CD: “PBIS is not
being
implemented fast
enough.”

CD, LK, CJ, and
KL: “the new
principal is really
supportive, and
she is changing
that [allowing for
more professional
development
opportunities]”

LK, CJ and KL:
“I’ve worked at
other schools.
There isn’t
enough buy-in for
holistic care
[PBIS].”
CD and KM:
“PBIS shouldn’t
only be
implemented
when students are
80

Communities: not
enough efforts are
being made to involve
the entire school
community.

called into the
principal’s office.
There needs to be
a more proactive
approach.”

CD: “People of
Color have had
trust issues with
schools and
district leadership
personnel
because they
don’t make
efforts to build
trust with the
community which
leaves gaps.”

RQ3: How can the well-being of school
communities be improved?
Students: not enough
student voices that are
included when it comes
to decision-making
processes, and not
enough leadership
personnel were visible
to the students.

Teachers: invest in
supports that address
teacher burnout.

Schools: address social
isolation and bring
community back
CJ and KL:
“surveys are not
enough to gain
especially for
those students
who don’t want
to take them
because they
don’t think it will
be helpful.”

KL: “we need
better recruiting
and retention
efforts from the
district.”

KM and CD:
“teach more life
skills, and
81
together in post-
pandemic era.

Communities: promote
engagement and
togetherness.
encourage
students to build
more identity-
based
organizations.”

CJ: “we should
do more field
trips to mingle
people who live
in the community
like older adults.”

The sections that follow discuss the findings as they pertain to the three research
questions, with sub-sections within each section for the five themes that emerged from the
findings of the interviews in Chapters 4 and 5 which discussed the commonalities that emerged,
differentiation of the findings from participant to participant, what additional information would
be needed in the future, as well as an introductory sentence in each section.
Research Question One: What is the Well-Being of School Communities?
In this section, the reader can expect to learn about the participants’ collective responses
regarding what they feel contributes to the well-being of a school’s community, how those
findings may differ from what was expected, as well as what informational findings would
necessitate more details in the future for each of the four themes in the sub-sections below.
Students
One of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with all
five participants was the substantial well-being of school communities. The following should be
at the forefront for students: diversity, equity, belonging, access to clean water, quality
healthcare, elimination of food insecurities, and reduction of housing insecurities with the goal to
82
eliminate said insecurities altogether in the future, emphasizing the importance of physical
activities to improve the mood and produce more endorphins, thus improving the mood of
students, as well as creating a culture of collaboration.
In terms of how the findings differed, participant CD, 1 of the 5 participants (20%),
thought that it was solely the teacher’s responsibility to promote the well-being of a school’s
community. CD stated, “the teachers should promote the well-being of a school’s community.”
In contrast, the other 80% of the participants (participants LK, CJ, KL, and KM) thought it is
“not only the teacher’s responsibility” to promote the well-being of school communities but also
their “leadership personnel, the caregivers of the students, and the students themselves.” This
relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms of researching whether there was a
correlation between the years of service between the two different ideologies and whether there
was a newly adapted curriculum promoting a different type of thinking for teachers who have
been teaching for longer than six months versus those like participant CD.
Teachers
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with all
five participants were that teachers must give themselves grace, especially due to the ongoing
pandemic and the “new normal” that has been adopted with the way things are taught and
learned.
In particular, some participants attested that:
The mindset has completely changed. It’s not the same as before where you could go on
about your day and not question the boss. We all need to accept that it has been a tough
few years, and that everyone is a lot more sensitive and attuned to how it’s okay not to be
okay, and give ourselves a break.
83
Another commonality that emerged was that all five participants thought that their
principal was extremely supportive of their endeavors, professional goals, and encouraged not
only promoting the well-being of the school communities, but also their own well-being. The
participants’ collective voice stated that, “she [the new principal] is very supportive and wants us
to grow.” This way, they can contribute well to the unified mission goals and objectives of their
school and create shared goals for and with their students to satisfy the overarching goals of the
school. This relates to another common theme that emerged from the participants, the idea of
creating a culture of collaboration among teachers, staff, and students and with the families and
the communities of the students.
In particular, some participants stated that:
We must get used to the idea of co-working, shared spaces, and cross-departmental
collaboration. That will give us a shared sense of accomplishment, promote togetherness,
self-reflection, self-determination, and will teach us to regulate our thoughts and
behaviors once more after so much isolation [during the pandemic].
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participant CD thought their school
“should be allowed to have the students engage in student self-governance like some university
campuses,” whereas the other 80% of participants (LK, CJ, KL, and KM) thought that students
“should not be allowed to engage in student self-governance” because it may not be age-
appropriate for all students. This relates to what findings necessitated more details in terms of
gaining more context and research into what the participants thought about gaining a level of
trust with students and promoting a level of ownership that would lead to broader and in-depth
connections and conversations among students, teachers, and school leaders.
Schools
84
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with all
five participants were that schools as a whole “must work hard on intentionally decentering the
authority” and outlining as well as implementing structure. Participants CD, LK, CJ, KL, and
KM discussed this and mentioned that they “greeted their classes on the first day and every day.”
In addition, they used “praise” to reward positive behavior from PBIS.
CD, LK, CJ, KL mentioned that:
We engaged our students in brave-space conversations as well as addressed behaviors by
asking the student why they were behaving a certain way when it came to disruptions in
schools and the respective classes the students were in.
This relates to the problem of practice and the statement of the problem, which discussed
reducing risky behavior to secure a brighter future toward the well-being of school communities
for schools and the students attending said schools. In contrast, in terms of how the findings
differed, participants LK, CJ, and KL (60%) stated that “more emphasis” should be placed on the
schools addressing classroom-specific behaviors when it came to well-being when compared to
participants KM and CD (40%), who stated that “it is not only enough to pay attention to one-to-
one classroom-specific behaviors” and interventions, but also to “engage the students in after-
school clubs, sports, and other extracurricular activities to observe their interactions to determine
how they are functioning there as well as in to the classroom.” This relates to what findings
necessitate more details in terms of, once again, whether there is a correlation between the years
of service between the two different ideologies and whether there is a newly adapted curriculum
that promotes a different type of thinking for teachers now versus those who have been teaching
for longer than 2.5 years or 6 months, participants KM and CD, respectively.
Communities
85
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with the
five participants were that they all believed in engaging the school communities, especially when
it came to the caregivers of their students. They thought that this would be vital toward
contributing to the well-being of their school communities, in particular, the students and their
families that they serve.
All (100%) of the participants believed that:
Using aggregated school data for assessment and setting goals was vital. Moreover, they
stated that, I think sharing data with the school communities to get buy-in from
stakeholders is imperative to set collective goals and have shared accountability toward
continuous improvement for their students. Furthermore, all participants, particularly
participants CD and KM, thought that this would “create fruitful feedback loops” to help
them deliver to their students and their families in a more conducive manner.
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed from expectations, participants LK and
CJ thought, through their 15 years of experience each, they had “not seen intentional leadership
initiatives” to connect the student experience to the learning experience and focus on the
intersectionality between how they functioned in the community and the “emphasis was only
placed on academic instruction” and a holistic, wrap-around service piece “had been missing”
until their new and current principal now striving hard to address the community holistically to
support the school community’s well-being. This relates to what findings necessitate more
details in terms of determining what ideologies previous leaders had versus the new leader who
appeared to be taking the new school on a reformed path toward optimal and effective
organizational change.
86
Research Question Two: What are the Challenges of Well-Being in School
Communities?
In this section, the reader can expect to learn about the participants’ collective responses
regarding what they believed were the challenges toward the well-being of a school’s community,
and how those findings may differ from what was expected, as well as what informational findings
would necessitate more details in the future for each of the four themes in the sub-sections below.
Students
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with the
five participants surrounded mental health and the lack of services available for the students, lack
of inclusion, especially for students who are black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC), as
well as, social challenges that lead to struggles that continue to present themselves in the form of
leaving the students with questions around belonging and equity-minded practices that
perpetuate marginalization, all of which encompass some of the mental well-being challenges
that students face. Furthermore, according to participants LK, CJ, and KL (60%), when there are
challenges toward achieving a healthy sense of being and well-being holistically, “this impacts
the way students perform” successfully in their academic endeavors. This is on par and builds on
studies conducted with students that have supported the hypothesis that, to have higher academic
performance, successful learning and development, adaptive motivation and emotion, and overall
effectiveness of student success, it is important for students to feel a sense of belonging and
appreciation, and have a connection to their teachers and the campus climate (Lewis et al., 2019;
Lundberg, 2014; Shelton, 2019).
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participant CD (20%) thought that the
challenges toward well-being for students were solely related to the fact that interventions,
87
strategies, and supports such as PBIS are not being implemented fast enough, even though PBIS
is being implemented at his school site.
CD believed that:
It [PBIS] is not happening fast enough. For me personally, I’ve always been the mindset
of and have wanted to make an impact as I’m passionate about what I do and where I
want the students to go.
This aforesaid builds on the work by Freeman et al. (2017), who stated that despite PBIS
being in place in many schools, it is being implemented slowly, impacting the well-being of the
school communities, especially the students. Alternatively, 80% of participants believed that
multiple factors are leading to the challenges being faced by students toward well-being, some of
which include not having enough multicultural student unions and clubs in schools across the
board. This relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms of, once again, whether
there is a correlation between the years of service between the different ideologies and whether
there is a newly adapted curriculum that promotes a different type of thinking for teachers now
versus those who have been teaching for longer than six months.
Teachers
One main common theme that the researcher deduced from the participants’ semi-
structured interview responses was that there were not enough opportunities for them to engage
in consistent professional development to learn new modalities and ways to serve their students.
This “poses a challenge” not only to the students’ well-being but also impacts frontline teachers’
well-being and hinders their ability to be well-rounded teachers who can teach beyond textbooks.
A study conducted by Gay (2016) supported this, as they stated that there is a scarcity of
88
effective professional development for teachers to support the well-being of their students and
the school communities.
Having said that, in contrast, participants CD, LK, CJ, and KL (80%) believed that “with
the new administration in the office” at their school district, they were hoping this would change,
and there was “a glimmer of hope” that it was changing because of their new and supportive
principal. This relates to what findings necessitate more research and details in terms of
conducting a study to fully understand what challenges teachers face when implementing PBIS
and how that relates to the other challenges they are facing, as well as conducting a study with
principals and district personnel to determine what challenges they face in allowing teachers
more time for professional development opportunities.
Schools
One common theme that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with the 5
participants (100%) was that they believed that not enough schools were implementing
schoolwide PBIS. In particular, participants LK, CJ and KL, all three of whom have taught at
other schools, thought that it was vital for there to “be an emphasis on schoolwide PBIS” and not
just in individual classrooms from a select number of teachers who “buy into” the ideology of
holistic care.
The participants stated that:
While our current school administration is striving to achieve schoolwide PBIS, a lot of
work still needs to be done with other schools in their district, their region, and perhaps
even across the states, so that it becomes second nature. However, until then,
intentionality will continue to lack when it comes to implementing schoolwide PBIS.
89
This relates to the study conducted by Bradshaw et al. (2012), where they stated that only
16,000 schools in the U.S. had implemented schoolwide PBIS. This constitutes just 8% of the
total number of pre-K-12 schools in the country (National Center for Education Statistics, n.d.).
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participants CD and KM (40%),
believed that a “more proactive approach” needed to be taken when it came to implementing
schoolwide PBIS. They discussed that schoolwide PBIS should not only be implemented when
students are “called in to the principal’s office” and that a more “proactive approach” needed to
be taken to teach students about emotional intelligence and how to “self-regulate their mood”
and behavior to prevent mood dysregulation. They mentioned that, thus far, what they had seen
in the school was more of a reactionary practice where PBIS was only practiced when “students
were called in to serve discipline.” They then added that, again, this was “changing slowly” with
their newly assigned principal. This relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms of
research and how further research should be conducted on the benefits of moving toward a more
holistic multidisciplinary care model where emphasis is placed on intentional alignment of
holistic care and coordination and that is at the core of the delivery of specific services that
produce a desirable outcome for those being served (Hughes, 2008).
Communities
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with the
five participants were that “not enough effort” was being made to involve the school community,
specifically for the caregivers of the students, and second, even if the schools had wanted to do
so, the “COVID-19 pandemic made it difficult” to build community where intentional and
intense outreach was done to bring the community together as a whole, thus practicing holistic
care.
90
Furthermore, participant CD, in particular, alluded to the fact that:
In the community where their own children attend school, subpar outreach efforts from
the district continue to marginalize the school communities, especially communities that
have been historically underserved, especially for Hispanic and African American
communities, because there have been trust issues with schools and district leadership
personnel because, they [district leaders] do not make intentional efforts to build trust
with the community and the people therein, leaving a huge gap in the relationship, which
continues to be a missed opportunity.
Cardona and Neas (2021) echoed some of the points made by CD and discussed several
challenges toward achieving a healthy sense of well-being for school communities and stated
that a variety of factors that continue to marginalize disenfranchised BIPOC populations
included religious identity, LGBTQI+ status, immigration status, national origin, and even
housing status among other major determinants such as homelessness.
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participant LK, who had 15 years of
teaching experience, had seen “a variety of leadership administrators,” interventionists, and
consultants make a “range of outreach efforts” to build community; however, it can all be
subjective from year to year in terms of what the community needs and what their needs are, and
it can feel frustrating building the school from day one again each school year. This related to
what findings necessitate more details in terms of research on teacher satisfaction and what
programs can be utilized from year to year, so an entire system does not need to be reimagined
but rather restructured, all the while catering to the needs of the everchanging school
communities.
91
Research Question Three: How Can the Well-Being of School Communities Be
Improved?
Students
Some of the common themes that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with the
five participants were that there were “not enough student voices” that were included when it
came to decision-making processes, and “not enough leadership personnel were visible” to the
students and how even though it might not be a leader’s intention, they appeared to be in their
own silos and not accessible to students. To expand, participants CJ and KL stated that surveys
are not enough to gain knowledge of what changes the students want, particularly those who may
not feel inclined to take a survey or those who might feel that the answers from the survey may
not be included in future decision-making processes. This ideology builds on work from
Flannery et al. (2018), who stated that the goal for leaders should be to gain student voice:
with the development and implements of a PBIS process, and at present, student voices
are being included via surveys and focus groups. However, these methods are proven as
ineffective, and one of the main reasoning behind this is the adult interpretation of the
children’s voice. (p. 71)
Furthermore, participants KM and CD stated that:
School leaders should build collaborative relationships with the student body and make
intentional efforts to regularly share their vision and goals for where the school is
heading. I want to see more efforts where I can get involved in the community. We
should invite students and their families to come to the decision-making table.
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participant LK said that more “one-on-
one attention” must be given to “improve” the well-being of the students. For example, LK
suggested conducting mindfulness lessons and how a short mindfulness exercise should be
92
highly encouraged in the morning at the beginning of each day or perhaps at the start of each
academic period led by a teacher. This relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms
of whether a collective effort is more effective versus an individualized one, vice versa, or a
more mezzo-level effort must be made where there is a combination of both efforts to contribute
to the well-being of the students.
Teachers
One commonality that emerged and presented itself as a common theme from the semi-
structured interviews with the five participants was that they all discussed the importance of
“investing” in supports that would help “avoid” teacher burnout. Moreover, 100% of the
participants discussed that effective recruiting and retention efforts from the district would
improve teacher retention, thus circling back to how it would contribute toward significantly
reducing teacher burnout as there would be less emphasis on using what they referred to as the
lean model where more and more responsibilities are placed on each teacher due to a staff
shortage. Furthermore, there used to be an idea perpetuated by previous leadership personnel that
if the teachers took on more responsibilities, the preference for the likelihood of promotions and
special project positions being assigned would be greater for teachers who conformed to the lean
model, especially now amid the global pandemic and how due to the height of the pandemic
during 2020 and most of 2021, the schools have been left understaffed and under-resourced in
terms of retention.
KL mentioned that:
We have to get better at recruiting strategies, offering incentives, bonuses, taking time
off, offering a generous leave package, and also normalize taking time off. We should
93
also eliminate incentives for being on time all year long because it sets a precedence of
being perfect all the time, which is unrealistic.
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participants LK and CJ thought that
they did not mind taking on more responsibilities as they were “old-school” and from the thought
process that one comes to work and does what the supervisor says each day for the entire school
year “without much questioning.” This relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms
of research and whether there is a correlation between the duration of teaching for a frontline
teacher and if their ideologies constitute how they think versus the teachers who have graduated
in the last five years and what their thought process was toward accepting directives from
leadership personnel without buy in on why a change was being made.
Schools
A common theme that emerged from the semi-structured interviews with all five
participants was that there should be more emphasis placed on bringing the “community
together” once again now that things were improving in terms of the pandemic. Collectively
speaking, in their individual responses, each participant stated that social isolation had
“significantly impacted” the school’s enrollment and that, in turn, had impacted how the schools
were funded, which had led to “under-resourced” schools. As such, to improve the well-being of
the school, the first step was to recognize that students and teachers had been studying and
“working remotely” for a significant time and to bring them together completely was very
jarring. Therefore, leaders must develop an innovative strategy to bring them back to a
customized “hybrid environment,” as all participants agreed that things could not go back to the
way they were pre-pandemic, no matter what. As such, incremental structural changes contribute
to a school’s well-being.
94
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, participants KM and CD (40%) stated
that in addition to placing emphasis on the schools making intentional efforts to bring the
communities together, schools “must place emphasis” on encouraging the students to build more
“identity-based organizations so they feel more connected to the school” in lieu of a place that
feels like an academic burden. This speaks to research stating BIPOC students who experience
marginalization, create a social support system among themselves in the form of identity-based
student organizations, to address the discriminatory experiences; said experiences fuel a lack of
sense of belonging for vulnerable students, do not foster positive relationships between teachers
and students, and do not promote the significance of social-emotional learning (APA, 2015;
Lewis et al., 2019; Lundberg, 2014; Shelton, 2019). Furthermore, there was an emphasis on how
there were no “life skills” taught to students and how they could benefit from these skills in the
long-term. This relates to what findings necessitate more details in terms of the overall collective
responses in this theme, and it is evident that research must be conducted to gain perspective into
specific and intentional steps concerning how to improve the well-being of schools in general in
this new era that the world has entered beyond the height of the pandemic.
Communities
A main commonality that presented itself as a theme that emerged from the semi-
structured interviews with all five participants can be summarized as “engagement” and
togetherness. Some ways in which the participants stated that they would like to see their school
engage with the neighboring community where the school was situated included reaching out
and creating partnerships with a senior living community who, in turn, could also send healthy
“volunteers to school events” to help “organize and assist” with school events as well as mingle
95
with the children, especially if some of the older adults at the senior living community did not
have a lot of external socialization available to them.
The participants as a whole echoed that:
We could collaborate with local farmer’s markets to promote leading a healthy lifestyle
and make it educational for the children by organizing field trips to farmer’s markets
where they could learn about agriculture and the importance of consuming leafy green
vegetables as well as fruits that are rich in antioxidants. During this field trip, the school
could involve the caregivers of students who could chaperone these visits to build
relationships and create bonds outside of the school environment. In addition, they
[teachers] could involve the students and their caregivers in making packages, including
clothing and food items that could be sent to shelters. This would teach and “promote
philanthropy” among the youth who represent the country’s future.
In contrast, in terms of how the findings differed, one participant thought that while it
was important to involve the neighboring community, that went beyond involving caregivers of
parents. There were other vulnerabilities that presented themselves in terms of “liabilities for
minors” being around those who should not be around children or those who are not allowed to
be around children due to legal orders that stem from adjudicated legal cases. This related to
what findings necessitate more details in terms of conducting responsible research on how to
create programs that ensure the safety and well-being of all minor students when organizing
events to involve community members.
Conclusion
In sum, gauging the commonalities, some of the common themes that all 5 participants
(100%) mentioned were as follows: the tremendous amount of support and understanding they
96
all had from their new principal, who was passionate about advocating for the well-being of
school communities with embedding more PBIS across the board, helping students and staff
adjust to the new normal in this “post-pandemic” era, and helping create brave spaces for
students to have tough conversations, especially BIPOC students. Moreover, there was a
collective emphasis that the participants placed on involving student caregivers and building
community for the students to have a more cohesive, holistic, and well-balanced school-home
life and that it was vital to achieving subjective success for students. The participants also stated
that they wanted there to be intentional efforts from district personnel to be more visible to the
students and their families to strengthen relationships, and there was a collective advocacy for
more professional development opportunities for frontline staff. Furthermore, all participants
believed that the following should be at the forefront: diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging,
access to clean water, quality healthcare, elimination of food insecurities, reduction of housing
insecurities with the goal to eliminate said insecurities altogether in the future. Also, emphasis
should be placed on the importance of physical activities to increase interest and motivation
within the student population, thus improving the moods of students, as well as creating a culture
of collaboration among the staff and leadership personnel were all common among participants’
ideologies and echoed voices during the semi-structured interviews in this qualitative study to
gauge the well-being of school communities.
Some key differences occurred with reports from teachers who had been teaching for 10
years versus those who had been teaching fewer than 5 years. Those differences included
assigning who was solely and wholly responsible for the well-being of their school communities.
For example, the teachers who had been teaching less than one year thought it was solely the
teacher’s responsibility to contribute toward the well-being of the school community, whereas
the seasoned participants thought it was important for there to be collective efforts from multiple
97
stakeholders and there must be a strong emphasis on collegiality and cross-collaboration across
departments and the external community. Other differences arose around individual debates
between student self-governance to promote individual ownership of decision-making versus a
conduct team of hired professionals who address conduct-related concerns for students with
behavioral challenges. To highlight some other differences, there was a 40 to 60 ratio split
between those participants who believed it was not only enough to pay attention to 1:1
classroom-specific behaviors and interventions but also to engage the students in after-school
clubs, sporting, and other extracurricular activities to observe their interactions to determine how
they were functioning there compared to only in a classroom, with the latter ratio wanting more
of a community.
To sum up, overall, the participants appeared to be in a healthy space to serve their
students and their families and appeared to be able to contribute meaningfully toward the well-
being of the school communities they were serving. Collectively, there was an advocacy to have
the following at their school in terms of future recommendations and/or ensure that it continued
if it was already present and in practice at their school. They reported they would like to continue
celebrating successes, being a change agent, and being situationally aware. They reported the
following that they want more of or have set in place now that they have a new leader:
institutionalizing cultural knowledge as the leader was getting their “sea-legs” per se and getting
situated in their new role, and they would like to see the leader managing the dynamics of
differences within the school and the district.

98
Chapter Five: Conclusions
Introduction
The previous chapter presented the findings of participant interviews and documented the
analysis to address this qualitative study’s research questions about the well-being of school
communities and organizational influences at the participants’ respective schools. Chapter Five
includes a summary of the findings and how they link to the conceptual and/or theoretical
framework, brief conclusions based on each of the three research questions, proposes
recommended practices based on the study’s findings, and provides suggestions and
recommendations for future research. The recommendations are organized by the five themes
that have been presented throughout the study: students, teacher-educators, schools, and
communities. The intent of this chapter is to provide recommendations and an implementation
and evaluation plan that the school where the participants teach can apply on their school site to
increase the well-being of the school communities by engaging in more community-building
activities to meet the social-emotional needs of their students.
Summary of Findings
Findings are discussed and highlighted in answering the three research questions with a
discussion around what themes emerged from the participants, how the findings differed from
the researcher’s expectations, and what findings necessitate more detail. In addition, my findings
connect back and/or are aligned to the literature that was reviewed as well as my theoretical
and/or conceptual framework as follows, but first, a quick summary of the theoretical and
conceptual framework that was utilized is provided. The theoretical frame utilized was Bolman
and Deal’s (2017) structural framework, which is about solving a problem, restructuring the
system, and/or reimaging it and developing a new status quo with which to practice. In relation
99
to the qualitative study discussed in this dissertation, here is an example of how my findings
connect back to the literature that I reviewed alongside the theoretical framework. The findings
from the study revealed that the students continued to experience suspensions and/or expulsions
though not at the rate that they experienced them under their previous leader. This was due to the
new principal reevaluating their status quo of how PBIS are being implemented at their
respective school sites to effectively support the well-being of the school communities therein.
How the conceptual framework findings connect back and/or align to the literature that
was reviewed follows. However, first, it is vital to review the elements of the concepts to bridge
the connection between the findings and the concepts that were discussed in Chapter 2.
Socioemotional learning and social cognitive theory formed the foundation of how the
conceptual framework was grounded in theory, with the following components that connected it
back to the research questions and the study itself: self- and social awareness in leadership for
the principal to focus on, responsible decision-making and self-management with mindfulness
for the teachers and school staff to practice and be cognizant of on a daily basis, and creating a
better atmosphere for student development and well-being for all school personnel in tandem
with the external stakeholders of the school community, including the caregivers of students to
contribute holistically to the well-being of the school communities. The findings from the study
revealed the aforementioned were all important and equal parts needed to close the gap and
bridge the disparities that school communities continued to face in terms of the lack of holistic
well-being, which was exacerbated by the pandemic. For example, the study revealed that self
and social awareness in leadership for the principal was a vital continued focus because if one is
not solely aware of one’s own awareness and the social aspects of the community, one cannot
serve the community equitably. The study also revealed that the leader of the school is a servant
leader who is supportive and works hard to ensure that the structural procedures that are in place
100
are working well and do not present themselves as hindrances to even the most qualified of
teachers. This reveals that the new principal is focused on being socially aware, partly because
the new principal is very self-aware. The study also revealed that responsible decision-making
and self-management alongside mindfulness for the teachers and school staff to practice and be
aware of daily were important because, to intentionally and effectively implement culturally
relevant, anti-racist PBIS pedagogies that include PBIS and practice mindfulness to its fullest
potential, it is important to practice this component so they can fully benefit the students they are
there to serve. Finally, the study revealed that creating a better atmosphere for student
development and well-being was of great importance because, first and foremost, being present
at the moment without judgment of oneself and/or the situation is important. Moreover, it is
crucial for students to be in an environment that fosters healthy emotional well-being to support
their social development, interpersonal relationships, and overall mental health (Amanvermez et
al., 2020; APA, 2015; Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2016). This would create a better learning
atmosphere for students because it promotes fruitful learning and development, addresses
maladaptive behaviors, and supports the overall effectiveness of student success, all of which
contribute to the holistic well-being of the school communities.
Conclusions of Research Questions Organized by Research Question or Hypothesis
Research Question One: What is the Well-Being of School Communities?
In sum, the collective conclusion for the first research question across the different
themes is as follows: The study revealed that all participants thought that diversity, equity, and
belonging as well as access to clean water, quality healthcare, elimination of food insecurities,
reduction of housing insecurities with the goal to eliminate said insecurities all-together in the
future should be the core focus of all educators, leadership personnel, and policymakers.
101
Furthermore, there was an emphasis placed on the importance of engaging students in physical
activities at school as well as connecting them to weekend wellness programs to improve the
likelihood of better engagement from students due to the endorphins that physical activity
produces within individuals accompanied with a better mood. Other commonalities from the
findings included concurring that their new principal was very supportive toward promoting
initiatives that included contributing to the well-being of school communities such as creating
shared goals and creating a culture of collaboration among teachers, staff, and students and with
the families and the communities of the students. Moreover, the conclusion entailed highlighting
that there was an emphasis placed on ensuring the reduction of risky behaviors, which included
using praise to reward positive behavior from PBIS and engaging their pupils in brave-space
conversations in the safe wellness spaces within the school. There was also a collective voice
within the participants in terms of placing emphasis on utilizing aggregated data after assessment
and to utilize that with setting goals year after year that would contribute to the well-being of the
school communities. Collectively, there were some differences in the conclusive findings, which
mainly included differences in ideologies that correlated with years of service, although that may
require more research. Some differences surrounded participant thinking around addressing
classroom-specific behaviors versus engaging students outside of the classroom to intervene
during extracurricular activities to engage students in evidence-based practices such as play
therapy.
Research Question Two: What are the Challenges of Well-Being in School
Communities?
In summarizing the conclusion of the second research question, the following collective
findings can be stated: There was a common report across all participants who discussed the
102
importance of mental health and the lack of services available for their students, lack of inclusion
in terms of school culture, especially for BIPOC students, as well as social challenges that lead to
struggles that continue to present themselves in the form of leaving the students with questions
around belonging and equity-minded practices that perpetuate marginalization. There was also
common discussion around lack of opportunities to engage in professional development and the
scarcity of effective professional development to contribute toward the well-being of the students
and the communities therein. In summarizing the findings further, there was a collective voice
from the participants echoing that there needs to be buy-in created from leadership personnel in
terms of practicing schoolwide PBIS, something that is changing slowly with the new principal
taking office. Another common factor that presented itself as a collective voice was that there
must be intentional efforts made to include all students as part of the school culture and the
following considerations should be made, religious identity, LGBTQI+ status, immigration
status, national origin, and even housing status among other major determinants such as,
homelessness. Collectively, there was one major difference among participants in the conclusive
findings, which highlighted that schoolwide PBIS were not being implemented quick enough and
this may need further research in terms of why this was happening and whether the major reason
was that funds were not being made available quickly enough or whether some schools or school
districts simply did not have the funds to implement what they might deem as a special program
beyond the subpar academic services they provide.
Research Question Three: How Can the Well-Being of School Communities be
Improved?
The third research question drew the following conclusion: Some unified voices that were
echoed through were that there were not enough student voices that were included when it came
103
to decision-making processes, and not enough leadership personnel and teachers were visible to
the students beyond the one-on-one classroom interaction. There was also discussion about how
surveys were not enough to gain knowledge of what changes the students wanted, particularly
those who may not feel inclined to take a survey or those who might believe that the answers
from the survey might not be included in future decision-making processes. Another conundrum
discussed that was a shared concern across the field of education was retention, particularly, for
frontline teachers. This was in part due to ineffective recruiting strategies, school culture that did
not make it feasible for teachers to remain, salary concerns amid the rising cost of living, and
how it is considered an honor to be able to wear several hats amid staff shortage, and how
wearing said multiple hats is a considerable factor when it comes to promotion. All of which
creates animosity among teachers at times and does not contribute to the well-being of the school
communities.
Furthermore, there was a commonality in the conclusive findings around creating
collaborations with external stakeholders such as the neighboring businesses and communities to
promote engagement and togetherness, something the students have not had a chance to properly
engage in for the last two and one-half years amid the pandemic. Cumulatively, there were two
major differences in the conclusive findings, which highlighted that while it was important to
involve the neighboring community that goes beyond involving caregivers of parents, other
vulnerabilities presented themselves in terms of liabilities for minors being around those who
should not be around children or those who were not allowed to be around children due to legal
orders that stemmed from adjudicated legal cases. Another difference was that while emphasis
on academic success was important for growth and development toward worldly affairs, there
should also be a significant focus placed on learning life skills.
104
Discussion
To review what was discovered in this study, in sum, there was a call to action to engage
in restorative practices, extend an invitation to frontline teachers and student organization leaders
to come to the decision-making table along with local government officials and school leadership
personnel, invest in intentional teacher recruiting and retention strategies that promote equity,
place heavy emphasis on social-emotional learning both in and out of the classroom, and teach
students life skills and survival techniques that help ensure their success beyond academic
endeavors, all of which is lacking, as revealed in this study, as evidenced by the information
gathered from the participants.
These conclusive findings build on existing evidence of what research has already been
conducted, such as behavioral challenges that promote and fuel detrimental futures for school-
aged children in terms of long-term success but can be addressed by effective intervention
strategies to reduce risky behaviors to secure a brighter future for the well-being of school
communities, lack of teacher fidelity, and challenges toward teacher retention, and how
preliminary results from several studies indicate that 80% of schools across the U.S. have a
success rate within the first year of the implementation of PBIS (Frank et al., 2009). However,
PBIS is not being implemented widely or fast enough.
These findings suggest the need for more funding to be allocated to hiring more mental
health providers, and efforts must be made to create more buy-in from various stakeholders that
PBIS is an effective and impactful intervention tool that all schools can benefit from. These
results should be considered when conducting future research on what is vital and needed to
contribute to the well-being of school communities.
Suggestions for Future Research
105
Some future research that may help further address the research problem of practice
includes: how teachers and leaders can celebrate the successes of their fellow frontline staff and
students, how to become better agents of change for the students to contribute to their well-
being, how principals can advocate for more professional development opportunities for their
teachers, how principals can challenge archaic status quos, how teachers and principals can be
situationally aware at all times, how principals can understand the concept of what it means to
institutionalize cultural knowledge by learning about cultural groups and honoring the trauma of
the students and their families, and how principals can do a better job of managing the different
dynamics within their schools by modeling and normalizing problem-solving strategies.
In terms of future research that addresses the limitations and delimitations that were
discussed in the previous sections and chapters, it is noteworthy that conducting a longer
longitudinal study with various stakeholders at a school, such as the principal, assistant principal,
administrative staff, school counselor, school psychologist, school social worker, school nurse,
classroom aides, as well as the frontline teachers might produce more holistic results and would
help researchers and readers gain a better understanding and provide greater in-depth insight into
the well-being of the school communities. This would provide a more systemic result in terms of
understanding an entire organization versus the point of view of only one stakeholder at a school,
as was done in this study. To support this, Terrell et al. (2018) stated, “proficient leaders focus
on equitable access and outcomes as they build a systemic culture that takes into account all
aspects of the educational process” (p. 137).
Recommendation One: Engaging in Affirmations
Engaging in affirmations means recognizing and celebrating successes. The
recommendation for teachers and administrators (principals and other leadership personnel
106
within the school and district) would be to engage in verbal and written praise by giving specific
and intentional feedback that sets an example for future expectations as well. Furthermore, if
giving praise to a student, consider writing a note to the student’s caregiver as well, which would
also build community with the parent or guardian of said student and facilitate discussion as well
as bridge ongoing connections. Moreover, there can be an incentive program set up for anyone
who models themselves to be a good citizen as per the school’s guidelines; for teachers, it would
be around teaching expectations. These incentives can be things such as entering someone’s
name into a drawing or filling a jar with a marble each time there is something praiseworthy and
then handing out a prize once the jar is filled. For under-resourced schools that may have
budgetary constraints, utilize what is known as a celebration tunnel where all the students stand
in two lines and face each other, then raise their hands as if to create a canopy or tunnel and the
person who is being praised runs under the hand canopy and everyone cheers or sings an
appropriate song that the student being praised has chosen. Another recommendation for teachers
to engage in affirmations can be to write out Goleman’s emotional intelligence skills on
flashcards or small posters and hang them on a classroom wall. Then, anytime a student practices
at least three of those in a week, write their name down under those skills and at the end of each
month, reward three students who practiced most of the skills. Those skills would read as “self-
awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill” (Goleman, 2011, p. 7). The
same can be done by a principal for their teachers when they are met with difficult situations and
how they dealt with the situation.
Recommendation Two: Being a Change Agent and Being Situationally Aware
Be a change agent willing to be an active participant in challenging an archaic status quo
that brings about transformational change that happens both at the teacher and student level with
107
the content that is being taught and learned and certainly around how a leader (principal), who is
a pedagogical gatekeeper of a school, sets the conditions and the tone around the aspirational
equitable changes set forth. This would also build connections between the student body
population and facilitators, which would help dismantle the practice and belief that leadership
and teachers are in their own silos beyond the school assembly or function-related interaction or
the one-on-one classroom interactions when it comes to teachers—something that the study
participants brought to light during the interviews for this qualitative study. The recommendation
for teachers and administrators (principals and other leadership personnel within the
school/school district) would be to start by having these five skills: flexibility, well-rounded
knowledge, prioritization of pertinent goals, engaging in being accountable and responsible, and
practicing active listening (Michigan State University, 2022). Flexibility must be practiced when
getting situated into a new role and expanding beyond the internal stakeholder realm, and
making connections with stakeholders externally to build community. Develop a curiosity to
learn about the student population’s background and their lived experiences to have well-
rounded knowledge so that impactful decisions can be made in favor of the students. Prioritize
certain imminent goals pertinent to making change that will come to fruition in a given school
year. Engage in being accountable and responsible by earning the trust of the teachers, students,
parents/guardians, and the school communities to bring about holistic change by sharing the
vision and goals with everyone on a regular basis and sharing the results once they are achieved.
Finally, practice active listening when it comes to any and all stakeholders, especially the
students when it comes to the decisions that impact students the most, thus, contributing to the
well-being of the school communities.
Be situationally aware by using undercurrents to handle potential and current problems
and in unison; put a collaborative and inclusive culture at the forefront by fostering shared
108
beliefs with a sense of community and cooperation. The recommendation for teachers and
administrators (principals and other leadership personnel within the school/school district) would
be to do the following: For teachers, if there is a student who enters the classroom and appears to
be agitated, annoyed or frustrated, and the student’s presentation is usually not as such, the
teacher should practice situational awareness and gauge to see if the teacher needs to reevaluate
the lesson plan for that student for half the day or the entire day or if the situation escalates, then
the teacher has the autonomy to escalate the situation/subject (student) to a threat assessment
team that the principal has helped create in collaboration with the teachers where they have
appointed qualified mental health professionals including one school security team member to
deescalate students with the care and support model in mind and not have it be conduct-focused.
Furthermore, in alignment with the study and what the participants mentioned, the principal and
teachers might consider appointing student self-governance to where some situations can be
referred to a student judicial committee where senior students review and adjudicate cases that
are sent to them. Therefore, there is inclusion of student voice in leadership decision-making in
an appropriate manner.
Recommendation Three: Adapting to Diversity, Valuing Diversity and Managing the
Dynamics of Differences Within the School
Teachers and principals should value diversity and adapt to diversity by giving voice to
those whose opinions differ from theirs and other dominant groups in schools in the form of
decision-making groups, as well as acknowledge other cultural experiences and backgrounds and
be the lead learner in this (Terrell et al., 2018, p. 113). This speaks to the study findings where
participants advocated for identity-based clubs and organizations where factors such as religious
identity, LGBTQI+ status, immigration status, national origin, and even housing status, among
109
other major determinants, such as homelessness, would be considered. The recommendation for
teachers and administrators (principals and other leadership personnel within the school and
district) would be to do the following: Teachers can create brave and safe spaces where students
can freely engage in discussions that amplify BIPOC voices, disrupt stereotypical narratives that
make BIPOC students feel unvalued or underqualified and suffer from the imposter syndrome.
Here, the teachers can appoint a peer mediator who can hold a talking cushion (or any other soft
material that is non-threatening) and pass it around as each student discusses their experiences
within a circular setting. This can also be a space for teachers and principals to engage in among
themselves without students in terms of discussing the experiences they are going through within
the school dynamics or at a district level, especially if those experiences minimize their voices.
Teachers and principals should model and normalize problem-solving strategies and
institutionalize their cultural knowledge by making learning about cultural groups and their
trauma an integral part of staff development so they can understand and serve the school
community appropriately (Terrell et al., 2018, p. 113). The recommendation for teachers and
administrators (principals and other leadership personnel within the school and district) would be
to do the following: Principals should ensure that the walls in the hallways and corridors of the
school speak to the hardships that historical figures have gone through and how they utilized
problem-solving strategies to overcome those hardships. Furthermore, to address the historical
trauma that the BIPOC students and their families have gone through, for example, principals
can ensure that the artwork displayed in the halls of the school honors those experiences.
Moreover, teachers can normalize problem-solving strategies by sharing how they overcame
some of their hurdles, as well as encourage students to engage in discussions about how they
solved a problem over the course of the week or over the weekend. This way, each student in the
classroom knows it is acceptable to have these conversations and that there is a capacity for such
110
discussions, which are actually encouraged. Another example would be for teachers and
principals to place significance on making sense of a challenge and persevere through solving it
versus getting what may be perceived as a correct answer.
Recommendations
The following general recommendations for practice are outlined in the sections below in
tandem with the findings during the semi-structured interviews with the participants in this
qualitative study to gauge the well-being of the school communities. Celebrating successes of
their frontline staff and students, being a change agent for the students to contribute to their well-
being as well as the teachers, which involves advocating for more professional development
opportunities and willingness to challenge archaic status quos, being situationally aware and
using undercurrents to handle potential and current problems within the school, adapting to
diversity and valuing diversity by giving voice to those whose opinions differ from one’s own
and other dominant groups in schools in the form of decision-making groups, acknowledging
other cultural experiences and backgrounds, and being the lead learner in this, as well as,
managing the dynamics of differences within the school and the district by modeling and
normalizing problem-solving strategies (Marzano et al., 2005; Terrell et al., 2018).
Conclusion
This study investigated the impact of schoolwide PBIS on the well-being of school
communities (students and their families), their teachers, and school leaders (principals).
Furthermore, it examined what was being done to examine how effective PBIS has been thus far,
what the challenges are, and what can be done better by providing recommendations from a
preventive angle. Moreover, the study examined what the well-being of school communities
looks like, what challenges are posed in examining the well-being of school communities, and
111
how the well-being of school communities can be improved by the teachers, principal, and the
overall school community through a lens where the frontline teacher as well as student voice is
recognized and heard. An interconnectedness was revealed in the findings between the
influences and stakeholders such as leadership personnel, teachers, and the student and
community voice. Having knowledge of efficient, culturally proficient leadership is vital now
more than ever, and the findings revealed that the new leader at the school was heading in that
direction, having taken office recently.
This school, like many other educational institutions across the U.S., is undergoing a
transformational shift to afford teachers to practice more schoolwide PBIS and the leadership
personnel recognize that social-emotional learning is a substantial piece of the success puzzle
that is significant and much needed. The findings also revealed that the teachers of this school
are advocating for additional support systems to be set in place to appropriately implement
schoolwide PBIS in their classrooms, especially when it comes to professional development. As
such, teachers must be given the necessary avenues to help their students excel, but the avenues
and tools will be ineffective should the teachers not be afforded opportunities to engage in
continual professional development. Hence, the advocacy for professional development, which is
something that the new principal has started to advocate for at the district level.
Why should all of this matter? The journey toward culturally proficient and culturally
relevant leadership and pedagogical approaches with social-emotional learning embedded in
daily practices has barely begun. As such, it is vital for school leaders (principals) and district
personnel to embrace the idea that along with being a lead learner, they understand that they are
also learners along with the teachers and their students. Hence, it is time that the disparities
between the lack of student voices at the decision-making tables, the absence of frontline
teachers during policymaking and the urgent call to action for schools to provide a safe and brave
112
space with social-emotional support be recognized and honored and that holistic approaches be
taken that go far beyond just the academic gains. This is because when a holistic wellness
approach is taken, the likelihood of a student meeting their academic expectations is far greater
and fruitful in the long term.

113
References
Accelerating System Change Network. (n.d.). Four frames. Change theories collection.
https://ascnhighered.org/ASCN/change_theories/collection/four_frames.html#:~:text=Th
e%20four%20frames%20%2D%2D%20structures,Reinholz%20%26%20Apkarian%2C
%202018).
Achilles, G. M., Mclaughlin, M. J., & Croninger, R. G. (2007). Sociocultural Correlates of
Disciplinary Exclusion Among Students With Emotional, Behavioral, and Learning
Disabilities in the SEELS National Dataset. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 15(1), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266070150010401
Amanvermez, R., Rahmadiana, M., Karyotaki, E., de Wi., L., Ebert D. D., Kessler, R. C., &
Cuijpers, P. (2020). Stress management interventions for college students: A systematic
review and meta‐analysis. Clinical Psychology (New York, N.Y.).
https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12342
American Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education.
(2015). Top 20 Principles from Psychology for PreK–12 Teaching and Learning.
Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/top-twenty-principles.pdf
American University, School of Education. (2022). Teacher Retention: Preventing Teacher
Turnover. School of Education Online. https://soeonline.american.edu/blog/teacher-
retention/#:~:text=Poor%20teacher%20retention%20has%20been,particularly%20in%20
reading%20and%20math.
ASCN (n.d.). Four Frames. Change Theories Collection.
https://ascnhighered.org/ASCN/change_theories/collection/four_frames.html#:~:text=Th
114
e%20four%20frames%20%2D%2D%20structures,Reinholz%20%26%20Apkarian%2C
%202018).
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, L. G. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership
(6th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., & Leaf, P. J. (2012). Effects of School-Wide Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Child Behavior Problems. Pediatrics, 130(5),
e1136–e1145. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0243
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in
psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Budiu, R. (2021). Why 5 Participants Are Okay in a Qualitative Study, but Not in a Quantitative
One. Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/5-test-users-qual-
quant/#:~:text=That%20the%20probability%20of%20someone,the%20issues%20in%20a
n%20interface.
Cambridge. (2023). https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/
Cardona, M. A., & Neas, K. (2021). Supporting Child and Student Social Emotional, Behavioral,
and Mental Health Needs. U.S. Department of Education Supporting Child and Student
Social, Emotional, Behavioral, and Mental Health Needs, 1(1), 1–103.
https://www2.ed.gov/documents/students/supporting-child-student-social-emotional-
behavioral-mental-health.pdf
Cave, M. (2020). PBISApps | Teach By Design—A 4-Step Plan for Handling Problem Behavior
Remotely. https://www.pbisapps.org/articles/a-4-step-plan-for-handling-problem-
behavior-remotely
115
Chitiyo, M., & Wheeler, J. J. (2008). Challenges Faced by School Teachers in Implementing
Positive Behavior Support in Their School Systems. Remedial and Special Education,
30(1), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508315049
Clark, A. (2021). SEL and PBIS: How do they work together? - Classcraft Blog. Resource Hub
for Schools and Districts. https://www.classcraft.com/blog/difference-sel-pbis/
Colorado Department of Education. [CDE]. (n.d.). Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (PBIS) Strategy Guide - Archived. Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (PBIS) Strategy Guide - Archived.
https://www.cde.state.co.us/uip/strategyguide-
pbis#:~:text=Positive%20behavioral%20interventions%20and%20supports%20(PBIS)%
20is%20a%20schoolwide%20systems,Sugai%20%26%20Horner%2C%202009
County Health Rankings Key Findings Report. (2016). County Health Rankings and Roadmaps.
https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/resources/2016-county-health-rankings-key-
findings-report
Flannery, K. B., Hershfeldt, P., & Freeman J. (2018). Lessons Learned on Implementation of
PBIS in High Schools: Current Trends and Future Directions.
https://pbismissouri.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Monograph-PBIS-in-High-
Schools.pdf
Frank, J. L., Horner, R. H., & Anderson, C. M. (2009). Influence of school level socioeconomic
status and racial diversity on schoolwide positive behavior support implementation.
Evaluation brief. Educational and Community Supports, University of Oregon, Eugene,
Oregon. https://assets-global.website-
116
files.com/5d3725188825e071f1670246/5d8a934caad923cf7d50165f_evaluation_brief_se
s_diversity.pdf
Freeman, J., Wilkinson, S., & Vanlone, J. (2017). Status of High School PBIS Implementation in
the U.S. Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports. https://assets-global.website-
files.com/5d3725188825e071f1670246/5d82b2c1be860b83d41d6f7b_Status%20of%20H
igh%20School%20PBIS%20Implementation%20in%20the%20U.S.-2.pdf
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Garces, L. M., & Cogburn, C. D. (2015). Beyond declines in student body diversity: How
campus-level administrators understand a prohibition on race-conscious postsecondary
admissions policies. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 828-860.
Gay, R. L. (2016). Exploring Barriers to Implementing a School-Wide Positive Behavioral
Intervention and Support Program. Walden University.
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=31
72&context=dissertations
Goleman, D. (2011). What makes a leader? Harvard Business School On Leadership. Boston:
Harvard Business Review Press, 1-21.
HappyScribe. (2023). Happy Scribe: Audio Transcription & Video Subtitles. Happy Scribe.
https://www.happyscribe.com/
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), 663–685. https://doi.org/10.5817/pedor2018-4-663
Hostetler, K. (2005). What Is “good” education research? Educational Researcher, 34(6), 16–21.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006016.
117
Hughes, R.G. (2008). Patient safety and quality: an evidence-based handbook for nurses.
Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Irvine High School. (2019). PBIS. https://irvinehigh.iusd.org/about/guidelinesprocedures/pbis
Irvine High School Wide PBIS A Team Approach. (2019). PBIS.
https://irvinehigh.iusd.org/sites/irvinehigh/files/files/Schools/IHS/1GeneralDocuments/pb
is_discipline_flow_chart.pdf
Jordan, C., Orozco, E., & Amy, A. (2001). Emerging Issues in School, Family, & Community
Connections. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 1(1), 1–76.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED536949.pdf
Kern High School District. (2017). KHSD Schools Receive State PBIS Honor. PBIS - Kern High.
https://www.kernhigh.org/apps/news/article/730059
Kishimoto, K. (2018). Anti-racist pedagogy: from faculty’s self-reflection to organizing within
and beyond the classroom, Race Ethnicity and Education, 21:4, 540-554,
DOI:10.1080/13613324.2016.1248824
Lee, M., Northouse, P.G. (2019). Team Leadership. In P. G. Northouse (Ed.), Leadership Case
Studies in Education (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 136–145). SAGE Publications.
https://www.mendeley.com/reference-manager/reader/a006ca60-bdff-3974-97ef-
8737c503b3f5/25c45f7d-49e9-8d0b-2b0c-d353b5d4767a
Leverson, M., Smith, K., Rose, J., McIntosh, K., & Pinkleman, S. (2021). PBIS Cultural
Responsiveness Field Guide: Resources for Trainers and Coaches. Center on PBIS, 1(2),
1–64. https://assets-global.website-
files.com/5d3725188825e071f1670246/6062383b3f8932b212e9c98b_PBIS%20Cultural
%20Responsiveness%20Field%20Guide%20v2.pdf
118
Lewis, J. A., Mendenhall, R., Ojiemwen, A., Thomas, M., Riopelle, C., Harwood, S. A., &
Browne Huntt, M. (2019). Racial microaggressions and sense of belonging at a
historically white university. American Behavioral Scientist, 1-23.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219859613
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Pekrun, R. (2016). Adaptive motivation and emotion in
education: Research and principles for instructional design. Policy Insights from the
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2) 228–236. doi: 10.1177/2372732216644450
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lundberg, C. A. (2014). Peers and faculty as predictors of learning for community college
students. Community College Review, 42(2), 79-98. doi: 10.1177/0091552113517931
Martin, D. C. (2018). Teachers' Perceptions and Satisfaction With PBIS in a Southeast Georgia
School District: Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 874.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/874
Marzano, R.J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B.A. (2005). School leadership that works. Aurora:
McRel
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3
rd
ed.). SAGE
McDaniel, S., Kim, S., Kwon, D., & Choi, Y. J. (2018). Stakeholder perceptions of contextual
factors related to PBIS implementation in high need schools. Journal of Children and
Poverty, 24(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10796126.2018.1518777
Michigan State University. (2022). Qualities of Effective Change Agents.
https://www.michiganstateuniversityonline.com/resources/leadership/qualities-of-
effective-change-agents/
119
Microsoft Corporation. (2023). Microsoft Excel. https://office.microsoft.com/excel
Milner, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen,
unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher 36(7), 388-400.
Molloy, L. E., Moore, J. E., Trail, J., van Epps, J. J., & Hopfer, S. (2013). Understanding Real-
World Implementation Quality and “Active Ingredients” of PBIS. Prevention Science,
14(6), 593–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0343-9
Moon, K., T. D. Brewer, S. R. Januchowski-Hartley, V. M. Adams, and D. A. Blackman. (2016).
A guideline to improve qualitativesocial science publishing in ecology and conservation
journals.Ecology and Society21(3):17. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-08663-210317
NAE (n.d.) What Are Community Schools? https://www.nea.org/student-success/great-public-
schools/community-schools/what-are-they
National Institute for Healthcare Research [NIHR]. (2019). How to disseminate your research.
https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/how-to-disseminate-your-research/19951
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks; Sage.
Noguera, P (2019). Equity isn’t just a slogan. It should transform the way we educate kids. The
Holdsworth Center. https://holdsworthcenter.org/blog/equity-isnt-just-a-
slogan/?gclid=CjwKCAjw586hBhBrEiwAQYEnHdJ39OjH6RzbjhlbMkuDNS6pg42QbF
7j6sY5CsQR8z82FXGD7N2DCBoCKzUQAvD_BwE
OECD (2017). “Students' well-being: What it is and how it can be measured”, in PISA 2015
Results (Volume III): Students' Well-Being, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Pas, E. T., Bradshaw, C. P., Debnam, K. J., & Johnson, S. L. (2015). A Focus on Implementation
of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in High Schools: Associations
120
With Bullying and Other Indicators of School Disorder. School Psychology Review,
44(4), 480–498. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1141556.pdf
PBIS (2023). Center on PBIS | What is PBIS? https://www.pbis.org/pbis/what-is-pbis
Raulerson, C. & Fintel, N. (2020). Integrating Trauma-Informed Practices within Your School
Wide PBIS Framework. Florida’s Positive Behavior Support Project, University of South
Florida: http://flpbis.cbcs.usf.edu/other/mental_health.html.
QSR International Pty Ltd. (2023) NVivo
https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home
Riggio, M. (2022). Theory and Research: relationship between research purpose, theory, and
research design. DropBox.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/y63rd74ahzvj0qa/AAB5A5_eCfOXOwhKil1JJ-
hba/Theory%20and%20Research.docx?dl=0
Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. Using Microsoft
Excel. (4th ed.). Sage.
Samkian, A. (2022a). Unit 2: Focus Our Inquiry: Research Problems and Purpose Statements
[PowerPoint Slides/Lecture]. Rossier School of Education, University of Southern
California.
https://blackboard.usc.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2913
42_1&content_id=_8200621_1
Samkian, A (2022b). Unit 5 [PowerPoint Slides]. Rossier School of Education, University of
Southern California
121
https://blackboard.usc.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2913
42_1&content_id=_8200638_1
Samkian, A (2022c). Unit 11 [PowerPoint Slides]. Rossier School of Education, University of
Southern California
https://blackboard.usc.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2913
42_1&content_id=_8200679_1
School District of South Florida. (2021). Florida PBIS Project. PBIS - South Florida.
https://flpbis.cbcs.usf.edu/foundations/PBIS.html
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson Education.
Shelton, L. (2019). Undocumented Latinx College Students’ Perceptions of Campus Climate.
Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 56(1), 92–104.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19496591.2018.1519438
Silverado High School. (2021). PBIS | Silverado High School. Mission Viejo School District.
https://www.svusd.org/schools/alternative-schools/silverado/academics/pbis
Slayton, J. (2022). Unit 4: Conceptual Framework Applied [PowerPoint Slides/Lecture]. Rossier
School of Education, University of Southern California.
https://blackboard.usc.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2913
42_1&content_id=_8200633_1
Sorlie, M. A., & Ogden, T. (2015). School-Wide Positive Behavior Support–Norway: Impacts on
Problem Behavior and Classroom Climate. International Journal of School &
Educational Psychology, 3(3), 202–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2015.1060912
122
Stanford Social (2023). What Is Community Anyway? (SSIR).
https://ssir.org/articles/entry/what_is_community_anyway#
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Strategy
Guide - Archived | CDE. (2009). https://www.cde.state.co.us/uip/strategyguide-
pbis#:~:text=Positive%20behavioral%20interventions%20and%20supports%20(PBIS)%
20is%20a%20schoolwide%20systems,Sugai%20%26%20Horner%2C%202009).
Taylor, S. (2020). PBIS Expectations about positive digital citizenship and online reputation.
LiveBinders. https://www.livebinders.com/media/get/MjAyOTk4MzQ=
Terrell, R.D., Terrell, E.K., Lindsay R. B., Lindsay, E.B. (2018). Culturally proficient leadership.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2021). Understanding Family Engagement
Outcomes: Research to Practice Series. Headstart ECLKC.
https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/rtp-family-well-being.pdf
Vestal, C. (2021). COVID Harmed Kids’ Mental Health And Schools Are Feeling It. The Pew
Charitable Trusts. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-
analysis/blogs/stateline/2021/11/08/covid-harmed-kids-mental-health-and-schools-are-
feeling-it
Williams, E. (2021). Back to School amidst the New Normal: Ongoing Effects of the
Coronavirus Pandemic on Children’s Health and Well-Being. Kaiser Family Foundation.
https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/back-to-school-amidst-the-new-
normal-ongoing-effects-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic-on-childrens-health-and-well-being

123
Appendices

124
Appendix A

IRB Approval
Action Taken: Approved
Principal Investigator: Umair Vaid, MSW
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Faculty Advisor: Marsha Riggio
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Co-Investigator(s):
Project Title: Well-Being of School Communities
Study ID: UP-22-00658

The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) designee reviewed
your iStar application and attachments on 09/01/2022. Based on the information submitted for
review, this study is determined to be exempt from 45 CFR 46 according to §46.104(d) as
category (2).

As research which is considered exempt according to §46.104(d), this project is not subject to
requirements for continuing review. You are authorized to conduct this research as approved.

If there are significant changes that increase the risk to subjects or if the funding has changed,
you must submit an amendment to the IRB for review and approval. For other revisions to the
application, use the “Send Message to IRB” link.

The materials submitted and considered for review of this project included:
1. iStar application UP-22-00658, dated 8/31/22
2. Interview Protocol (0.01), dated 8/18/22
3. Soc Beh Protocol(0.01), dated 8/29/22
4. Interview Protocol (0.01), dated 8/15/22
5. UPDATED interview protocol(0.01), dated 8/29/22
6. Study Protocol 8-31-22, dated 9/1/22

NOTE: The IRBA made minor revisions to the iStar application section 5.2, 6.2, 19.1, 26.3, and
26.5 to be consistent with the procedures described in the application.

125
Appendix B
Email/Letter Sent to Principal

Dear Principal,

Hope my email finds you well.

I am a USC doctoral student. Would you be open to a phone call to discuss a study I am
conducting where I will need 5 teachers.

Here is my phone number: 323-999-8265

Thank you.

-Umair Vaid

126
Appendix C
Recruitment Letter & Scheduling Interviews
Hi [Name of recruiting participant],

Hope my email finds you well.

I was wondering if you could please spare about 45 mins to be interviewed about your
experience as a teacher? (It’s for my dissertation).

It’ll be confidential and you’ll get a $20 Amazon gift card in exchange for your time.

If you’re able to or even if you aren’t able to, could you please let me know? (If you’re able to,
can you please send some available days and times and then I’ll send you the consent form)

Thank you again.

Best,

-Umair

127
Appendix D
Informed Consent
I. Introduction

Hello, and thank you so much for consenting to participate in my study. I sincerely appreciate
the time that you have committed in order to answer the questions. As I mentioned in my email,
the interview should take about 45-60 minutes.

A. Information about the study:
I am a doctoral student at University of Southern California where I am enrolled at
Rossier School of Education in the Educational Leadership program where my concentration is
on K-12 leadership. At present, I am conducting a study on educators taking a stance to practice
with an anti-racist, culturally relevant pedagogical approach and/or implementing Positive
Behavioral Intervention Strategies (PBIS) in their educational institutions.
I am specifically interested in understanding about the types of culturally relevant
teaching strategies you may be using pertaining to your knowledge about PBIS/culturally
relevant pedagogies.

I am talking to multiple teachers to learn more about this. However, I want to assure you
that I will strictly be there as a researcher with a goal to understand your perspective and
experiences. What this means is that the nature of my questions is not evaluative. I will not be
making any judgments on how you are performing as a teacher.

B. Why they were chosen to participate: you were chosen today because of your
emphasis on implementing culturally relevant and anti-racist pedagogical strategies
learned through trainings.

C. What other data will be collected: none other than the semi-structured interview
itself.

D. Issues related to ethics such as recording, confidentiality: the information we
discuss is confidential between us and will be utilized to submit in a paper to my
professors/dissertation committee chairs at my university. As such, I will not share your
name with anyone outside. Furthermore, I will not be sharing your name with other
teachers, principals, or the district office personnel, including superintendents, etc. The
information from our interview will be gathered and written in a report and while I may
use direct quotes or paraphrase that you’ve mentioned to summarize the essence of what
you’re saying, none of the gathered data will be linked back to you. I will use a
pseudonym to honor your confidentiality and will de-identify any information that I
128
gather from you. Also, I am more than happy to share a copy of my final paper with you
in case you are interested. I will keep the data in a password-protected laptop, and I will
delete the data after three years, per protocol. Moreover, limits of confidentiality also include
my role as a mandated reporter should you disclose that you want to hurt yourself,
anyone else, or that a child or older adult was abused in any way. In these cases, I’d be
compelled to report this to personnel per protocol.

Also, I will be using a recording device in order to capture the information precisely to
honor your unique perspective, and it will only be for my ears to use in my paper. May I please
have your permission to record our conversation? (if at any point, you’d like to share something
that you don’t want recorded, please signal by raising your hand and I will pause the recording;
this also includes if you’d like to take a break to use the facilities or otherwise).

129
Appendix E

Consent Form

Consent Form Utilized:
Please sign the consent form no later than date of interview so that you may participate in this
study.
I _______________________________ give my consent to participate in the qualitative study
(semi-
structured interview) and for the interview information/answers to be recorded/documented and
utilized in the dissertation anonymously without any specific identifiers to myself.

________________________________
Signature

________________________________
Name (printed)

________________________________
Date

130
Appendix F
Demographic Survey

Survey Items
3 Survey Items Response Choices
Response Set:

1. What is the highest level of education you have
completed?
a. a. Some College or Vocational
School
b. Bachelor’s degree
c. Master’s degree
d. Doctoral degree
e. Other (please specify: )
Response Set:

2. What is your age?
a. 18-24
b. 24-35
c. 35-45
d. 45-55
e. 55-65
f. Other (please specify: )
New Response Set:

3. How many years have you worked in the field of
education?
a. 0-6 months
b. 6 months-1 year
c. 1-3 years
d. 3-5 years
e. 5-7 years
f. Other (please specify: )

131
Appendix G
Protocols
Interview Protocol—Teacher
I. Introduction
Hello [interviewee name], how are you today? Thank you so much for consenting to participate
in my study today. I sincerely appreciate the time that you have committed to answer the
questions. As I mentioned when we last spoke, the interview should take about 30 minutes, is
that still fine for you?
A. Information about the study: prior to us getting started, I’d like to recap the
overarching information that we discussed regarding my study as well as answer any
preliminary questions you may have about your participation before we begin the actual
interview itself.
I am a doctoral student at University of Southern California where I am enrolled at Rossier
School of Education in the Educational Leadership program where my concentration is on K-12
leadership. At present, I am conducting a study on educators taking a stance to practice with an
anti-racist, culturally relevant pedagogical approach and implementing PBIS in their educational
institutions.
I am specifically interested in understanding about the types of culturally relevant teaching
strategies teachers at your school describe using after participating in PBIS training. I am also
curious to learn about teachers’ opinions/perceptions of an anti-racist pedagogical method after
receiving PBIS training during my interviews.
I am talking to several teachers to learn more about this. However, I want to assure you that I am
strictly here as a researcher today with a goal to understand your perspective and experiences.
132
What this means is that the nature of my questions is not evaluative. I will not be making any
judgments on how you are performing as a teacher.
B. Why they were chosen to participate: you were chosen today because you have
participated in PBIS training where there was an emphasis on implementing culturally
relevant and anti-racist pedagogical strategies learned from the PBIS training.
C. What other data will be collected: none other than the semi-structured interview
itself.
D. Issues related to ethics such as recording, confidentiality: I’d also like to discuss a
gentle reminder that the information we discuss is confidential between us and will be
utilized to submit in a paper to my professor at my university. As such, I will not share
your name with anyone outside. Furthermore, I will not be sharing your name with other
teachers, principals, or the district office personnel, including superintendents, etc. The
information from our interview will be gathered and written in a report and while I may
use direct quotes or paraphrase what you’ve mentioned to summarize the essence of what
you’re saying, none of the gathered data will be linked back to you. I will use a
pseudonym to honor your confidentiality and will try my hardest to de-identify any
information that I gather from you. Also, I am more than happy to share a copy of my
final paper with you in case you are interested. As highlighted in the consent form(s), I
will keep the data in a password-protected laptop and I will delete the data after 3 years.
Moreover, limits of confidentiality also include my role as a mandated reporter should
you disclose that you want to hurt yourself, anyone else, or that a child or older adult
were abused in any way. In these cases, I’d be compelled to report this to personnel per
protocol. (I know you have already received all of this information in the consent forms
that were shared, but I wanted to rehash this as a quick and friendly reminder).
133
Before we begin, do you have any questions about the study? Also, I have brought my mobile
phone with me and will use it as a recording device to capture the information precisely to honor
your unique perspective, and it will only be for my ears to use in my paper. May I please have
your permission to record our conversation? (if at any point, you’d like to share something that
you don’t want recorded, please signal toward the mobile phone and I will pause the recording;
this also includes if you’d like to take a break to use the facilities or otherwise).

II. Questions (with transitions)
A. Setting the Platform
To start, I’d like to ask you 2 questions about your background within your profession.
1. Please tell me about your background in education. (Demographic)
a. How did you become interested in the field of education? (Demographic)
2. How long have you worked in the field of education? (Demographic)
3. What positions or roles have you held in the field? (Demographic)
4. Please share the subject/subjects you teach? (Demographic)
Please share information about your role in the current school you’re employed at.
(Demographic)
B. Soul of the Interview
For the next section of our interview, I’d like to ask you some questions about PBIS and anti-
racist pedagogies and practices.
3. If a person were to ask you about your knowledge of PBIS supports, what would
you say to them? (RQ 1)
134
4. If a person were to ask you about your comprehension of culturally relevant
strategies/anti-racist pedagogies, what would you say to them? (RQ 1)
Next, I’d like to ask you a question about any additional training, if any, you’ve received to
ensure the promotion of how PBIS and anti-racist pedagogies are implemented at your school.
5. Please describe any additional/informal support, if any, you have received in the
last year pertaining to PBIS. (RQ 2)
a. Please try to think about a recent time, if at all, when you applied and
practiced PBIS in your classroom. If an instance comes to mind, please share with
me what it was like. (RQ 2)
6. Please describe any additional/informal support, if any, you’ve received in the last
year pertaining to culturally relevant strategies/anti-racist pedagogies. (RQ 2)
a. Please try to think about a recent time, if at all, when you applied and
practiced culturally relevant strategies/anti-racist pedagogies in your classroom. If
an instance comes to mind, please share with me what it was like. (RQ 2)
7. Suppose it was my first day as a student in your classroom after your PBIS
training. What would that day look like? (RQ 3)
8. Some people would say that it is solely the teacher’s job to promote and practice
culturally relevant strategies/anti-racist pedagogies daily. What would you tell them? (RQ
3)
Progressing further in our interview I’d like to ask you 3 questions about your principal.
9. What kind of role does your principal play in the school in general? (RQ 3)
10. I understand you to be saying “XYZ.” Are you finding that the role of a principal is
“ABC” in general? (based on the response above) (RQ 3)
135
11. What/how would you describe what an ideal leader (principal) would be like? (based
on the response above) (RQ 3)
III. Closing
12. Closing Question: What other insight, if any, would you like to share about our
conversation about teachers promoting PBIS, culturally relevant strategies/anti-racist
pedagogical methods that I might not have covered today? (RQ 3)
A. Closing Comments:
Thank you so much for sharing your honest feelings with me today. I genuinely appreciate
your time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is vital and helpful for
my research. Should I have a follow-up question, may I contact you, and if so, is emailing
like before, the best way to reach you? Once again, thank you for participating in my study.
As a thank you, please accept this small token of my appreciation; I hope you enjoy shopping
with Amazon Prime.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Building community among college undergraduates

PDF

Teacher well-being matters: an explorative study of early childhood teacher well-being, their experiences, and perspectives

PDF

Improving audience development for small town arts non-profits

PDF

Perceptions of early childhood educators on how reflective supervision influences instructional effectiveness and teacher wellbeing

PDF

The importance of Black and Latino teachers in BIPOC student achievement and the importance of continuous teacher professional development for BIPOC student achievement

PDF

High school counselors’ support of first-generation students’ postsecondary planning: an evaluative study

PDF

Neurodivergent-affirming care within applied behavior analysis

PDF

Lived experiences of athletic administrators advancing athletic programming

PDF

Power-sharing in co-constructed community-school partnerships: examining values, opportunities, and barriers around community engagement in New York City school leadership teams

PDF

Workplace neurodiverse equity

PDF

Leveraging relationships with Black male students to increase academic success

PDF

Leave no leader behind (LNLB): leadership development for K-12 operations leaders

PDF

Frontline workers serving students: a study on the well-being of student affairs professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

Big dreams lost: the influence of mentoring to reduce PhD attrition

PDF

Healthcare leaders developing highly reliable organizations

Pdf

Trauma and low-income elementary students of color

PDF

Stories of persistence: illuminating the experiences of California Latina K–12 leaders: a retention and career development model

PDF

An evaluation of the effective engagement of English-language students’ parents in UTK-8th grade schools

PDF

New school counselor's perception of preparedness

PDF

African American officer's experiences as leaders navigating the United States Armed Service

Asset Metadata

Creator Vaid, Umair Ilyas (author)

Core Title Well-being of school communities

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 06/07/2023

Defense Date 03/22/2023

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

Tag K-12,OAI-PMH Harvest,schoolwide,Students,wellbeing,well-being

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Riggio, Marsha (committee chair), Kellar, Frances (committee member), Trahan, Don (committee member)

Creator Email uvaid@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113169242

Unique identifier UC113169242

Identifier etd-VaidUmairI-11934.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-VaidUmairI-11934

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Vaid, Umair Ilyas

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230609-usctheses-batch-1053 (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